IQMS Addendum_final draft.pdf

Addendum No. 1

6/22/26 Page 1 of 4

OREGONBUYS BID NUMBER: S-DASOBO-00016125

IQMS HCI Scheduling Portal

ADDENDUM 1

JULY 28TH, 2026

SECTION 1: PURPOSE

The purpose of this addendum is to inform S-DASOBO-00016125 RFQ respondents of Round 1 evaluation results and the next steps in the evaluation process.

Round 1 Results:

The Evaluation Committee evaluated all responsive proposals in accordance with the RFQ. A total of 875 points were available (Note: The Price Proposal was not scored, thus the 225 points for submission, stated in the RFQ, were not included in the referenced total). The compiled proposal scores are listed below:

Table 1: Compiled Proposal Scores

Criterion Points Possible

Score 1 Score 2 Score 3

1. Detailed Approach & Schedule

250 225 222 150

2. Offeror Experience & References

125 90 75 75

3. Personnel Qualifications &

Experience

300 200 180 180

4. Work Examples / DEDs

200 100 120 120

Total 875 615 597 525 Average Score: 579

It has been determined that an additional round of evaluation is necessary. Public Knowledge will proceed to Round 2, which includes submission of additional work samples, an interview, and a Best-and-Final Offer (BAFO).

Round 2 Evaluation:

Round 2 will evaluate the proposer on a pass/fail basis through three required work samples, an interview, and submission of a BAFO Price proposal. The proposer must pass all

Proposer Average Score

Public Knowledge 579

6/22/26 Page 2 of 4 three evaluation criteria to pass round 2 evaluations. The Authorized Purchaser’s evaluation committee members will make a subjective decision whether each criteria passed or failed.

Evaluation Criterion Items to be reviewed Outcome

Work Samples 3.1 QC Report from Project Execution Phase

4.1 Quality Assurance Status

and Improvement Report from Project Execution Phase

3.1.4 QC Review of

Proposed Solution Contract

Follow-up interview

Pass / Fail

Interview Questions See four (4) questions under Table 2

Pass / Fail

Best-and-Final Offer Pass / Fail

Round 2 Outcome All three criteria must be met to pass the overall Round 2 evaluation.

Pass / Fail

Additional work examples:

For Round 2, the Evaluation Committee requests three additional work samples from past or current comparable projects where the proposer has provided quality management comparable to the Services described in the RFQ. The samples must demonstrate the proposer’s ability to deliver specific, actionable recommendations. “Actionable recommendations” means the project team can take clear, concrete steps based on the finding provided and the recommended actions are within project team’s control or are actional by leadership.

Work samples may be more than five (5) years old if necessary to fulfill this request.

Work Sample Requirements:

1. Deliverable 3.1 – QC Report from Project Execution Phase

Must include a review of deliverables such as Requirement Traceability Matrix, Implementation Plan, Technical Design Document, Test Plan, UAT Plan, Interface Control Document, etc. The QC review must identify gaps in deliverables and provide specific, actionable recommendations to address those gaps. This example must reflect QC work performed during the project’s execution phase (i.e., we would like to see a demonstration of QC activities, conducted post solution contractor onboarding).

6/22/26 Page 3 of 4

2. Deliverable 4.1 – Quality Assurance Status and Improvement Report

Must include actionable recommendations related to risks and issues identified during the execution phase. Recommendations that are within the project team’s or leadership control to implement.

3. Deliverable 3.1.4 – QC Report of Proposed Solution Contract

Must include a QC report that evaluates a project’s proposed vendor contract.

Interview:

The three work examples should be emailed to the Single Point-of-Contact (SPC) Elvis Howard one week prior to the scheduled interview. The Evaluation Committee will assess the three work examples on a Pass/Fail basis. Scores from Round 1 will not be used in the Round 2 evaluation.

During the interview, the Committee will ask follow-up questions about the work examples submitted, in addition, following questions will be asked during the interview:

Table 2: Interview Questions

Interview questions Outcome

1. In your experience, what common mistakes do project teams make when onboarding a solution implementation contractor, and what services can you provide to help project team avoid these mistakes?

Pass/Fail

2. What questions do you have about this project (e.g.

agency’s approach, stakeholders, project timeline) that you would ask at the start of IQMS engagement?

Pass/Fail

3. Based on what you already know about the project, where do you see potential gaps, and how can your services address them?

Not Scored

4. What is PK’s capacity to perform independent testing, including performance testing, UAT testing, regression testing, and security penetration testing? What level of support can you provide and what is the estimated cost of that add-on?

Pass/Fail

Round 2 Interview Outcome PASS/FAIL

Schedule Interview:

Following issuance of this Addendum, please contact the SPC to coordinate and schedule the interview. Rank the preferred interview time slots (first, second, and third choice) and notify the SPC, as soon as possible. If a Proposer’s first-choice time slot is no longer available, the SPC will assign the next available time slot based on the Proposer’s ranked preferences and will confirm the scheduled time by email.

6/22/26 Page 4 of 4

Interviews will be conducted virtually. The Proposer interview will be scheduled for 90 minutes.

Interview Time Slots to rank in Proposer’s email to SPC:

• Tuesday, August 4th, 2026, 10:30 - 12pm Pacific Time

• Tuesday, August 11th, 2026, between 2pm - 4pm Pacific Time

• Tuesday, August 18th, 2026, between 10:30am - 3pm Pacific Time

Best-and-Final Offer (BAFO):

Following the interview, the Proposer must submit a BAFO no later than five (5) business days after the interview concludes. The BAFO must be submitted by email to the SPC, with the subject line reading: Best and Final Offer, and document title: Revised Price Proposal Submission and indication of the BAFO (i.e., Revised Price Proposal – Best-and- Final Offer). At the conclusion of round 2, the committee may award a Work Order Contract (WOC) if Consultant successfully demonstrates the best work quality and value quote. The awarded WOC will be in a form substantially similar to the Sample Contract attached to the awarded Consultant’s IQMS Master Price and Services Agreement (“MPSA”) and the proposed Statement of Work (RFQ Exhibit 3). DAS may negotiate contract terms and conditions with the successful Consultant.

CONTRACT AWARD DETERMINATION IS FINAL BASED ON THE SCORES PROVIDED BY

THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE, SUBJECT TO A TIMELY, COMPLIANT AWARD PROTEST

FROM AN ADVERSELY AFFECTED OFFEROR.

The Single Point-of-Contact (SPC) for the procurement remains:

Elvis Howard Procurement and Contract Specialist Elvis.R.Howard@odhsoha.oregon.gov 503-798-2469

Prospective Proposers have until 3:00 PM Pacific Time on the Friday before the meeting to submit written concerns or questions via email only to the SPC regarding the content in Addendum 1 to the RFQ.

mailto:Elvis.R.Howard@odhsoha.oregon.gov