IMRFR Evaluation Process memo_3-21-16_for COMMBUYS.docx

3/21/16 Evaluation Process Memo Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program

RFR#: BD-16-1030-0R100-0R001-00000006553

This document summarizes the process that the members of the Strategic Sourcing Team (SST) for the Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program (the Program) will utilize to evaluate Bidder proposals submitted in response to the Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program Request for Responses, BD-16-1030-0R100-0R001-00000006553 (RFR).

1. The Strategic Sourcing Team (SST) The SST will include both voting and non-voting members from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation/Registry of Motor Vehicles Division (MassDOT/RMV) and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (collectively, the Agencies). The purpose of the SST’s evaluation is to select an apparent successful Bidder who will provide best value to the Commonwealth, after completion of the review of all Bidders’ technical and cost responses.

In order to facilitate its review of the Bidders’ RFR responses, the SST reserves the right to seek technical and administrative assistance from the Agencies’ staff, and may also elect to utilize the Agencies’ contractors if appropriate and if the SST deems this support is necessary to facilitate its review of this procurement.

Non-voting Members To assist the SST in its evaluation of Bidders’ RFR responses, non-voting members of the SST or their designees will provide analysis to the voting members of the SST regarding the merits of certain aspects of the responses.

If necessary to facilitate the review of responses, the non-voting members of the SST will be supported with technical, business, financial, and cost analyses conducted by the Agencies’ staff and may also be supported by contractors working for the Agencies.

The voting members of the SST may call upon the non-voting members of the SST to answer questions and provide clarifications. The non-voting members of the SST may, at the request of voting members of the SST, provide written recommendations to the voting members of the SST regarding any aspect of the Bidders’ RFR responses.

2. The Evaluation Process This section describes the evaluation process from the SST’s receipt of the Bidders’ RFR responses through the selection of an apparent successful Bidder. The Agencies reserve the right to reject any or all responses if they determine that it is in the best interest of the Commonwealth to do so.

STEP 1. Initial Screening Selected SST members from the Agencies, which may include non-voting SST members, will screen all RFR Responses upon receipt, using the Bidders’ Response Checklist found in Attachment K, to determine if the Bidders’ RFR Responses are complete. The Response Checklist is the form that the SST will use to help determine whether Bidders’ RFR Responses provide the information requested in the RFR in the format prescribed.

The initial screening of the RFR Responses will consist of three parts: (1) an initial screening to determine whether the Response meets the packaging, format, and page limit requirements in the RFR; (2) a detailed screening to determine if the Response contains all of the RFR Response Elements required in the RFR; and (3) a review to determine whether minimum Specifications and Bidder qualifications set forth in the RFR have been met.

STEP 2. Clarifications/Corrections to Submitted Responses The voting members of the SST will review the results of the Initial Screening.

As stated in Section 4.2.2.1 of the RFR, the Agencies expect that Bidders will submit responses that are complete and in substantial conformance with the RFR. In its discretion, the voting members of the SST will determine whether to allow a correction of minor informalities in a response. Minor informalities are matters of form rather than substance and include clerical errors or minimal or insignificant mistakes that can be corrected without prejudice to other Bidders. The voting members of the SST may, upon request of a Bidder, allow a correction of a minor informality in a response, which is clearly evident, such as a typographical error, transposition error or arithmetical error where the correct answer is obvious. If the mistake is discovered by the SST, the SST may note the correction on the response.

If the SST requires a clarification of any particular section of a response, the SST will provide all Bidders with the same notice and opportunity for clarification of the identified section of the response. Clarifications are explanations of what is stated in a response and may not be used as an opportunity to submit supplemental information or a change in a response. No clarification of response prices, terms and conditions or the submission of supplemental information prejudicial to the interests of other Bidders or to fair competition shall be permitted.

If the voting members of the SST determine that the nature of a mistake, deficiency, or omission in a response is such that it cannot be corrected without prejudice to other Bidders, the voting members of the SST will determine whether to evaluate the response as originally submitted, or disqualify the response. A response may be disqualified if, in the judgment of the voting members of the SST, the response: (1) fails to meet any of the requirements of the RFR; (2) is incomplete, conditional or obscure; (3) contains deletions, erasures, alterations, or other irregularities; (4) contains errors; or (5) violates any of the provisions of 801 CMR 21.06(10).

The SST will document the basis for its decision to disqualify a response. The SST will notify the Bidder in writing of the decision to disqualify the response and the reasons therefore at the end of the evaluation process, after Contract award.

STEP 3. Preliminary Evaluation The SST will distribute the non-disqualified RFR Responses to the appropriate members of the SST, including as applicable, designated non-voting members, for preliminary evaluation. The purpose of the preliminary evaluation is for the SST to review the Bidders’ responses and rate the responses, on a preliminary basis, based upon the Bidder’s responsiveness to the evaluation criteria requirements as set forth in this Step 3. The SST will first review and score, on a preliminary basis, the Bidders’ technical responses, and then review and score, on a preliminary basis, the Bidders’ Cost responses.

As part of the preliminary evaluation process, the SST may verify information contained in a response, including but not limited to, each Bidder’s qualifications and stated experience. The SST may direct a member of the SST to consult with personnel from the Agencies, or other jurisdictions familiar with the work of any or all of the Bidders. After obtaining the pertinent information, the SST member will report the results to the voting members of the SST.

The voting members of the SST will evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of complete Bidder RFR Responses using the Evaluation Criteria from RFR Section 4, listed here in descending order of importance, with percentage values, and further elaborated upon below.

Evaluation Criteria:

Criteria 1: Overall Management Capability, Accountability, and Experience with similar Programs – 25% Criteria 2: Data Management – 25% Criteria 3: Provide Equipment, Equipment Maintenance, and Inspection Station Service – 15% Criteria 4: Program Support Elements (including Motorist Assistance Centers, Vehicle Maintenance Initiative, Communications, and Inspector Training) – 15% Criteria 5: Cost and Financial Plan – 10% Criteria 6: Supplier Diversity Plan – 10%

STEP 4. Project Proposal Presentations and Interviews After completion of the preliminary evaluation, the SST, in its sole discretion and at its option, may require any or none of the Bidders to conduct presentations of their proposal and interviews of key project personnel. The purpose of the presentation/interview is to enable the SST to better understand and evaluate the Bidder’s RFR Response, the Bidder’s proposed teams, and the Bidder’s ability to be successful.

The SST will determine the structure and content of the presentations/interviews and will contact the Bidder(s) individually, with at least 1 week’s notice, to schedule the session, which will take place during the timeframe specified in the procurement calendar. Bidders who are asked to participate in the presentations/interviews will be expected to prioritize this in their schedules. The SST will make every effort to find a mutually convenient time for the Bidder and the SST. However, failure to appear at the scheduled time of the presentation/interview may result in disqualification, lower evaluation, or other actions that the SST deems appropriate.

The Bidder’s key personnel identified in its RFR response are expected to attend the session. The SST will not inform a Bidder of its scores or ranking at the time of the session. This material and all written submissions become part of the Procurement File.

Presentations may be videotaped by the Agencies at their expense and thereby become public records and part of the Bidder’s RFR Response after the conclusion of the RFR process. All other expenses associated with the presentations and/or demonstrations will be borne by the Bidder.

STEP 5. Final Evaluation Once the project presentations and interviews have been conducted, the voting members of the SST will develop their final evaluation for each RFR Response.

The SST will fully evaluate the Technical and Cost Responses, determine and provide a final score for each Bidder’s RFR Response, and select an apparent successful Bidder.

At the option of the voting members of the SST, non-voting SST members may be requested to participate in the ratings discussions.

STEP 6. SST Selection of Apparent Successful Bidder After completion of the final evaluation and scoring for all Bidders, the SST will select the apparent successful Bidder for recommendation to the Agencies’ designated authorized contract representatives, and will write a memorandum summarizing the Bidder selection process and the reasons for selection of the apparent successful Bidder. After the Agencies have selected an apparent successful Bidder, the SST will post the name of the apparent successful Bidder on COMMBUYS, and will notify all Bidders in writing of the results of the RFR procurement process.

After announcement of the apparent successful Bidder, the Agencies and the apparent successful Bidder will enter into negotiations in order to finalize the scope of services, and enter into a Contract Award.