REVISED Attachment D - Evaluation Criteria.pdf

4050 Esplanade Way

Tallahassee, FL 32399-0950

Ron DeSantis, Governor Pedro Allende, Secretary

REVISED ATTACHMENT D – EVALUATION CRITERIA AND SCORING

OF PROPOSALS

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

FOR

ADVISORY SERVICES

BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS AND POLICY INITIATIVES

RFP NO. DMS-22/23-106

THE STATE OF FLORIDA

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES

RFP No. DMS-22/23-106 Advisory Services: Business Transactions and Policy Initiatives Page 2 of 5

OVERVIEW

For the purposes of evaluation and scoring, Proposals are divided into two (2) categories, Technical Proposal and Cost Proposal. Evaluators will be appointed in accordance with section 287.057, Florida Statutes, to independently review and evaluate Technical Proposals received in response to this solicitation. The Procurement Officer will review and calculate the score for Cost Proposals received in response to this solicitation. The following shows the maximum number of points that may be awarded by category:

Technical Proposal 70 Points

Cost Proposal 30 Points

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, Administrative Support services will not be evaluated or scored as part of the Project Team and need not be included in the Respondent’s Technical Proposal, nor will they be scored as part of Respondent’s Cost Proposal.

CATEGORY 1. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (MAXIMUM 70 POINTS)

A Technical Proposal will be evaluated utilizing the following sections and may be assessed a maximum number of points as set forth below:

Technical Proposal Sections Available Points

A. Experience of Respondent’s Project Team and Primary Business Function 35

B. Approach to Scope of Work 35

Total Available Points for Technical Proposal 70

Technical Proposal Respondents shall provide a response for each section below regarding, A) Experience of Respondent’s Project Team and Primary Business Function, and B) Approach to the Scope of Work. Each evaluator will independently review each Responsive Respondent’s Technical Proposal. Each evaluator will independently award points in accordance with the outlined Evaluation Criteria, below.

A. Experience of Respondent’s Project Team and Primary Business Function (0 – 35

Points) The Respondent should provide a narrative describing the relevant experience of Respondent’s Project Team, identified by Respondent as those individuals who are currently employed by Respondent and are anticipated to work directly on this Contract. Respondent should provide the experience of each Project Team member, including resumes and a narrative describing each Project Team member’s relevant experience. Respondent should not include subcontractors within its Project Team. Subcontractors will not be considered by the Evaluators.

Respondent should identify each Project Team member who will work on the Contract and identify whether the Project Team member will serve as a Senior Advisor, Advisor, or Junior Advisor. Respondent should emphasize each Project Team member’s experience performing Advisory Services (as provided in Section 2 of Attachment B – Scope of Work), including Advisory Services as related to business transactions, technology contracts, and foreign relationships, as well as relevant work performed while employed in the private and/or public

Advisory Services: Business Transactions and Policy Initiatives Page 3 of 5 sector. Project Teams with more recent, relevant experience are anticipated to be rated higher than Project Teams with less recent, relevant experience.

Respondent should also provide an overview of its company’s experience, including its company’s specific primary business functions that substantially account for the company’s total workload.

The Evaluators will evaluate the quality, depth, timeliness, and relevance of the experience (preferably with demonstrated experience in providing services relevant to, or on behalf of, governmental entities) that Respondent’s Project Team has in providing the solicited Advisory Services. The Evaluators will further evaluate Respondent’s primary business function and overview, as related to the provision of Advisory Services.

Assessment of

Technical Proposal

Assessment Criteria Evaluator Score

Inadequate The response does not address the request or does not demonstrate Respondent’s company and Project Team have the experience and/or ability to perform the required services.

Unsatisfactory

The response inadequately addresses the request or demonstrates Respondent’s company and Project Team has very limited experience and/or ability to perform the required Advisory Services or has a very limited focus on Advisory Services.

Poor

The response minimally addresses the request or demonstrates Respondent’s company and Project Team has limited experience and/or ability to perform the required services, or has a limited focus on Advisory Services.

Adequate

The response adequately addresses the question and demonstrates Respondent’s company and Project Team has sufficient experience and/or ability in performing the required services, or is sufficiently focused on Advisory Services.

Excellent

The response extensively addresses the request and demonstrates Respondent’s company and Project Team has exceptional experience and/or ability to perform the required services, or is exceptionally focused on Advisory Services.

The response indicates Respondent would provide enhanced value to the State.

Superior

The response exhaustively addresses the request and demonstrates Respondent’s company and Project Team has extraordinary experience and/or ability to perform the required services, or is extraordinarily focused on Advisory Services.

The response indicates Respondent would provide exceptionally enhanced value to the State.

B. Approach to the Scope of Work (0 – 35 Points) The Respondent shall provide a narrative describing its approach to providing Advisory Services in accordance with Attachment B – Scope of Work. The Respondent should fully

Advisory Services: Business Transactions and Policy Initiatives Page 4 of 5 demonstrate its ability to provide Advisory Services. The Respondent may demonstrate its proposal for providing Advisory Services by providing relevant information for consideration including, but not limited to, describing how Advisory Services will be provided, including any methodology and process, describing its approach to economically utilizing the Project Team, and its approach to timely providing written deliverables. Respondent’s proposal should address its ability to provide Advisory Services as they relate to business transactions and policy initiatives, including foreign policy and technology.

The Evaluator will evaluate the quality, depth, and relevance of the response in providing Advisory Services. Evaluators will consider the following to award points for the Approach to the Scope of Work:

Assessment of Technical Proposal

Assessment Criteria Evaluator Score

Inadequate The response does not address the request or does not demonstrate Respondent’s ability to provide Advisory Services.

Unsatisfactory The response inadequately addresses the request or inadequately demonstrates that Respondent’s approach to providing the Advisory Services.

Poor The response minimally addresses the request or demonstrates that Respondent’s approach to providing Advisory Services is poor.

Adequate The response adequately addresses the request and demonstrates that Respondent’s approach to providing the Advisory Services is adequate.

Excellent

The response extensively addresses the request and demonstrates that Respondent’s approach to providing the Advisory Services is excellent. The response indicates Respondent would provide enhanced value to the State.

Superior

The response exhaustively addresses the request and demonstrates that Respondent’s approach to providing the Advisory Services is superior. The response indicates Respondent would provide exceptionally enhanced value to the State.

Calculation of Total Final Technical Proposal Score For each Respondent, the Procurement Officer will calculate each evaluator’s total Technical Proposal score by adding all points awarded by the evaluator. The Procurement Officer will then add all evaluators’ total Technical Proposal scores together, and divide by the number of

Advisory Services: Business Transactions and Policy Initiatives Page 5 of 5 evaluators, to calculate each Respondent’s total final Technical Proposal score. The total final Technical Proposal score will be rounded to the nearest hundredth decimal point.

CATEGORY 2. COST PROPOSAL (MAXIMUM 30 POINTS)

Respondent shall complete and submit a Cost. Respondents shall submit pricing for the initial term and the renewal term. Respondent’s Financial Proposal shall consist solely of a completed Attachment C – Price Sheet.

The Procurement Officer will be responsible for reviewing the Respondent’s Financial Proposal and calculating and awarding points as follows:

Respondent’s Cost Proposal Score = W x 30

Where:

A = Lowest Average Hourly Pricing for Initial Term B = Respondent’s Average Hourly Pricing for Initial Term C = Lowest Average Hourly Pricing for Renewal Term D = Respondent’s Average Hourly Pricing for Renewal Term

W (Respondent’s Score for Combined Initial and Renewal Pricing) = [(A/B) x .70] + [C/D) x .30]

Average hourly pricing will be calculated separately for the initial and renewal term by adding the quoted hourly rate for Senior Advisor, Advisor, and Junior Advisor and dividing by three.

Only pricing included and as stated on Revised Attachment C – Price Sheet will be considered in these calculations.

The Procurement Officer will combine the Respondent’s total final Technical Proposal score with the Respondent’s applicable Cost Proposal score to obtain the Respondent’s final combined score.