Evaluation_Factors-Storm_Water_Monitoring_Compliance_Services.pdf

26 April 2019

MEMORANDUM FOR 452 MSG/PK

FROM: 452 MSG/CEV

SUBJECT: Source Selection Plan Storm Water Sampling and Monitoring Support Service

1. Evaluation criteria

a. Technical Evaluation factors. For each of the below technical Sub-factors each contractor’s proposal will be reviewed to determine that it meets the minimal requirements as stated below in paragraph 1.b.

Once determined to be minimally qualified to perform the work, each proposal will be reviewed for weaknesses and strengths in the proposal for each factor below. These strengths and weaknesses in comparison to the requirements of the contract, and not to each other, will be used to determine a combined rating for the technical proposal as shown in paragraph 1c.

i. Sub-factor 1—Technical Scope

1. The Contractor must describe its understanding of the requirements of the performance work statement to show what will be required of the contractor during its field work, analysis of data, both while on site and after data collection is complete, preparing recommendations of best practices to be implemented and in preparing reports in compliance with the applicable laws and permits as outlined in the PWS. No more than 3 pages.

ii. Sub-factor 2—Sampling and Monitoring Experience

1. The Contractor shall submit documentation of its experience in on-site sampling and monitoring in dry and wet weather conditions and in preparing data files and using checklists adequate for reporting results to the State regulators for the project site.

2. Provide Sampling and Monitoring Experience and Past Performance Information for each project(s) submitted under this sub-factor. The information shall contain a narrative of each project(s) with project(s) name, location, scope, challenges and outcomes, and project owner, point of contact name, address, telephone number, and email address. Providers that submit project(s) for a predecessor company or sub-contractor must explain how this predecessor company or sub-contractor will participate in this contract. Limit responses to no more than five (5) project(s) that are no older than ten (10) years.

3. Implementation Plan. An Implementation Plan shall discuss the scheduling and phasing of the work to include planning, procurement of materials, calibration and maintenance of meters, analysis and report writing. Provided on any scheduling software to be used in the project and displayed as a pdf document.

iii. Sub-factor 3 – Management/Key Personnel

1. The Provider shall address the following areas of importance:

a. Identify key project(s) personnel that are permanently assigned to work this particular project(s). Key personnel shall include, but are not limited to Project(s) Manager, Safety Manager and on -site Project(s) Manager.

b. Provide resumes to include education, certifications and experience.

c. Discuss the Project(s) Manager(s’) authority, knowledge of, and experience with Sampling and monitoring of storm water runoff in California and in developing best practices to meet pollutant criteria limits. If more than one

Source Selection Plan Storm Water Sampling and Monitoring Support Service one person is proposed to be a Project(s) Manager, indicate how the work is to be divided between the different Project(s) Managers.

d. Discuss a contingency plan to ensure performance continues in the absence of key personnel.

e. Identify the laboratory to be used for analysis of water samples and their certifications to meet the PWS.

b. Minimal Capability Requirement. Technical Capability requirements will be evaluated utilizing the sub-factors described above: Technical Scope, Project(s) Experience, and Management/Key Personnel. The ratings will be rated together using the Combined Rating Table below using the following minimum requirements for each technical factor:

i. Sub-factor 1 – Technical Scope. A Contractor whose demonstrated approach and knowledge for implementation of PWS meets the minimum performance or capability requirements of the PWS would meet minimum requirements.

ii. Sub-factor 2 –Project(s) Experience. Contractors who demonstrate at least 3 years of experience that are similar in scope, size, type, and complexity to this project identified in the RFP Meet minimum requirements.

iii. Sub-factor 3 – Management/Key Personnel. Each Contractor will be evaluated as to whether the qualifications and experience of personnel considered integral to performance (prime and sub-contractor) to assure project(s) success, and the suitability of the contingency plan provided to ensure performance in the absence of primary personnel are minimally acceptable.

Proposals that fail to submit complete and required information may be rated not acceptable.

c. Technical Evaluation Rating. Based on the information presented and as compared to the requirements of the PWS, each contractor will be given a technical rating as described in the table below. This rating will be used in comparison to the cost proposal to determine the Best Buy proposal.

Table 1. Technical Rating Method

Color Rating Adjectival Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength.

Green Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is un-awardable.