RFP 26_2065 - Award Recommendation and Evaluation Synopsis FINAL.docx
DOCX document 90 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- NIA1 171 260000000742 1
- Issued by
- Michigan
About this file
This is an Award Recommendation and Evaluation Synopsis document issued by the Michigan Department of Technology, Management, & Budget's Procurement office for RFP 260000002065, Inspecting & Sampling Lead, Molds, Asbestos, and Air Contaminants. The RFP was posted on SIGMA VSS on May 29, 2026, for four weeks and one day, with proposals due on June 29, 2026. The State sought a contractor to provide comprehensive inspection, sampling, and consulting services related to lead, molds, asbestos, and air contaminants. The contract term is three years with up to two one-year renewal options. Five vendors submitted responsive proposals: ATC Group Services LLC dba Atlas Technical, Environmental Testing and Consulting, Inc., Hamp, Mathews & Associates, Inc., Testing Engineers & Consultants, Inc., and TriMedia Holdings, LLC dba TriMedia Environmental & Engineering Services, LLC. The evaluation was conducted by a Joint Evaluation Committee consisting of representatives from DTMB, MDOC, SESC, and DMVA.
The State recommended an award to ATC Group Services LLC dba Atlas Technical in the amount of $1,500,000.00, pending State Administrative Board approval. ATC Group Services achieved a perfect technical evaluation score of 100/100, with satisfactory responses across all evaluation criteria including Statement of Work sections and the Vendor Questions Worksheet. Testing Engineers & Consultants, Inc. also received a perfect technical score of 100/100 and was included in second-round pricing negotiations. The evaluation committee determined that ATC Group Services offered the best value based on its experience with State contracts, industry knowledge, and lowest overall pricing. The pricing submitted reflects various service rates for lead paint, mold, and asbestos analysis, including sample analysis, management planning, inspections, and instructional services, with both standard and expedited rate options available. No set-asides or incumbent designations are noted in this award recommendation.
View the file
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
AWARD RECOMMENDATION
| Notice of Intent to Award Number: 260000000742 |
| Notice of Intent to Award Date: 8/13/2026 |
The Department of Technology, Management, & Budget’s Procurement office has completed the evaluation of RFP 260000002065 Inspecting & Sampling Lead, Molds, Asbestos, and Air Contaminants and has recommended an award to ATC Group Services LLC dba Atlas Technical in the amount of $1,500,000.00, pending State Administrative Board approval, if applicable. More information on the State Administrative Board can be found at: State Administrative Board.
Bidders who were not recommended for the award are encouraged to schedule a debriefing session with the Solicitation Manager. The debriefing session will provide the bidder with the State’s rationale on why the bidder was not recommended for the award. The Solicitation Manager may be contacted as follows:
Kyle London, Solicitation Manager.
LondonK1@michigan.gov
(517) 614-3616 Public copies of all bidder proposals can be found here: DTMB - Bid Proposals (michigan.gov) Background Information:
This Request for Proposal (RFP) was to solicit responses for selection of a Contractor to provide Inspecting & Sampling Lead, Molds, Asbestos, and Air Contaminants services. The term of this contract is three (3) years, with up to two (2) – one (1) year renewal options.
Bidders:
The RFP was posted on SIGMA VSS on May 29, 2026, for four weeks and one day. The following bidders submitted proposals by the published due date of June 29, 2026.
| Bidder |
| Address, City, State, Zip Code |
| SDVOB* |
| GDBE** |
| ATC Group Services LLC dba Atlas Technical |
| 46555 Humboldt Drive, Suite 100 |
Novi, Michigan, 48377
| No |
| No |
| Environmental Testing and Consulting, Inc. |
| 38900 W Huron River Drive |
Romulus, MI 48174
| No |
| No |
| Hamp, Mathews & Associates, Inc. |
| 15266 Ann Drive |
Bath, MI 48808
| No |
| No |
| Testing Engineers & Consultants, Inc. |
| 1343 Rochester Road |
Troy, MI 48083
| No |
| No |
| TriMedia Holdings, LLC dba TriMedia Environmental & Engineering Services, LLC |
| 830 W. Washington Street |
Marquette, MI 49855
| No |
| No |
*SDVOB: Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Business **GDBE: Geographically Disadvantaged Business Enterprise
EVALUATION SYNOPSIS
I. Evaluation Process A Responsible Vendor is a vendor that demonstrates it has the ability to successfully perform the duties identified by the solicitation. A Responsive proposal is one that is submitted in accordance with the solicitation instructions and meets all mandatory requirements identified in the solicitation.
Proposal Instructions: Evaluation Process The State will evaluate each proposal for each statement of work separately and based on the below factors.
| Technical Evaluation Criteria |
| Weight |
| Schedule A, Statement of Work, Section 3 |
| 20 |
| Schedule A, Statement of Work, Sections 4-19 |
| 30 |
| Schedule A, Statement of Work, Sections 20-28 |
| 30 |
| Vendor Questions Worksheet |
| 20 |
| Total: |
| 100 |
Proposals receiving 80 or more technical evaluation points will have pricing evaluated and considered for award.
The full evaluation process is stated in the RFP Proposal Instructions.
II. Evaluation Method Responses to this solicitation were reviewed by a Joint Evaluation Committee (JEC), which consisted of the following individuals:
| Voting |
| Advisory |
Kyle London, Category Analyst
DTMB - CPS
Gene Wood, Manager, Environmental Health, Fire Safety, & County Jail Services.
MDOC
Christopher McGarry, SESC Health & Safety Administrator
DTMB
Robert Cole, Facility Business Manager
MDOC
Lisa Crozier-Green, Buyer Specialist
DNR
Timothy Cole, Buyer
DMVA
III. Evaluation Results A. ATC Group Services LLC dba Atlas Technical The Evaluation Team determined that ATC Group Services LLC dba Atlas Technical based on a score of 100/100, did meet the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their responses to the Technical Evaluation Criteria.
1. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 3 (20/20) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
2. Schedule A Statement of Work, Sections 4-19 (30/30) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
3. Schedule A Statement of Work, Sections 20-28 (30/30) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
4. Vendor Questions Worksheet (20/20) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
Total Score: 100 /100 B. Environmental Testing and Consulting, Inc.
The Evaluation Team determined that Environmental Testing and Consulting, Inc based on a score of 99.5/100, did meet the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their responses to the Technical Evaluation Criteria.
1. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 3 (20/20) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
2. Schedule A Statement of Work, Sections 4-19 (29.75/30) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:
a. Section 16.1.2, MDOC Security Requirements: Bidder described how it would comply with the requirements, but it did not select a response.
3. Schedule A Statement of Work, Sections 20-28 (29.75/30) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:
a. Attachment 1 Key Personnel Section 1.6: Bidder completed a Key Personnel table, but did not select a response box.
4. Vendor Questions Worksheet (20/20) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
Total Score: 99.5 /100 C. Hamp, Mathews & Associates, Inc.
The Evaluation Team determined that Hamp, Mathews & Associates, Inc. based on a score of 91.5/100, did meet the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their responses to the Technical Evaluation Criteria.
1. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 3 (15/20) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:
a. Section 3.2.3, Management Planning: Bidders Management Plan relied on utilizing the State Project Manager and an Abatement Contractor to provide a Management Plan to the State.
b. Section 3.2.6, State of Michigan certified lead instruction training and associated materials: Bidder does not provide certified lead instruction.
c. Section 3.3, Maintain and provide the following memberships, accreditations, and licenses: Bidder stated accreditations are included in the compiled PDF file of the proposal, but did not provide a specific location of where to find the copies of the documents. The proposal did not provide a clear list of memberships, accreditations, and licenses for the bidder.
2. Schedule A Statement of Work, Sections 4-19 (30/30) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
3. Schedule A Statement of Work, Sections 20-28 (30/30) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
4. Vendor Questions Worksheet (16.5/20) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:
a. Section 5, Experience 1: The total dollar value of the project is not of similar size to this RFP.
b. Section 5, Experience 2: The total dollar value of the project is not of similar size to this RFP.
c. Section 5, Experience 3: The total dollar value of the project is not of similar size to this RFP.
d. Section 12, Clean Corporate Citizen: Bidder is not designated as a Clean Corporate Citizen.
Total Score: 91.5 /100 D. Testing Engineers & Consultants, Inc.
The Evaluation Team determined that Testing Engineers & Consultants, Inc. based on a score of 100/100, did meet the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their responses to the Technical Evaluation Criteria.
1. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 3 (20/20) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
2. Schedule A Statement of Work, Sections 4-19 (30/30) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
3. Schedule A Statement of Work, Sections 20-28 (30/30) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
4. Vendor Questions Worksheet (20/20) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
Total Score: 100/100 E. TriMedia Holdings, LLC dba TriMedia Environmental & Engineering Services, LLC The Evaluation Team determined that TriMedia Holdings, LLC dba TriMedia Environmental & Engineering Services, LLC based on a score of 97/100, did meet the requirements of this RFP. This determination was accomplished by evaluating their responses to the Technical Evaluation Criteria.
1. Schedule A Statement of Work, Section 3 (19/20) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:
a. Section 3.2.7, Other occupational safety and health related services, as requested: Bidder stated Certified Lead Instruction Program services will be provided through a subcontractor, but did not identify a subcontractor that could provide the service with their response.
b. Section 3.3, Maintain and provide the following memberships, accreditations, and licenses: Bidder does not maintain the requested memberships, accreditations, and licenses, but states subcontractors that the bidder will use will have the proper accreditations. However, subcontractors were not identified with the response.
2. Schedule A Statement of Work, Sections 4-19 (28/30) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were mostly satisfactory, but the following deficiencies were noted:
a. Section 7, Training: Bidder did not describe how they will comply with the Training requirements with their response.
b. Section 10, Contractor Program Manager: Bidder did not provide a Contractor Program Manager with chronological resume with their response.
3. Schedule A Statement of Work, Sections 20-28 (30/30) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
4. Vendor Questions Worksheet (20/20) The Evaluation Team determined that overall, the responses were satisfactory.
Michigan.gov/MiProcurement
Michigan.gov/MiProcurement Total Score: 97/100 Version 2024-2
IV. Technical Evaluation Summary
| Selection Criteria |
| ATC Group Services LLC dba Atlas Technical |
| Environmental Testing and Consulting, Inc. |
| Hamp, Mathews & Associates, Inc. |
| Testing Engineers & Consultants, Inc. |
| TriMedia Holdings, LLC dba TriMedia Environmental & Engineering Services, LLC |
| 1 |
| Schedule A, Statement of Work, Section 3 |
| 20 |
| 20 |
| 15 |
| 20 |
| 19 |
| 2 |
| Schedule A, Statement of Work, Sections 4-19 |
| 30 |
| 29.75 |
| 30 |
| 30 |
| 28 |
| 3 |
| Schedule A, Statement of Work, Sections 20-28 |
| 30 |
| 29.75 |
| 30 |
| 30 |
| 30 |
| 4 |
| Vendor Questions Worksheet |
| 20 |
| 20 |
| 16.5 |
| 20 |
| 20 |
| Total |
| 100 |
| 99.5 |
| 91.5 |
| 100 |
| 97 |
V. Pricing Summary Pricing was evaluated for the bidders who passed the technical evaluation. The following is a summary of the second round price proposals from the two bidders without technical evaluation deductions.
| Sample Analysis |
| ATC Standard Rate |
| ATC Expedited Rate |
| TEC Standard Rate |
| TEC Expedited Rate |
| Per |
| PLM 24-hours |
| $12.00 |
| N/A |
| $16.00 |
| $16.00 |
| Sample/Test |
| PLM 12-hours |
| $15.00 |
| N/A |
| $20.00 |
| $20.00 |
| Sample/Test |
| PLM 05-calendar days |
| $9.00 |
| N/A |
| $12.00 |
| $12.00 |
| Sample/Test |
| PCM 24-hours |
| $8.00 |
| N/A |
| $8.00 |
| $8.00 |
| Sample/Test |
| PCM 12-hours |
| $15.00 |
| N/A |
| $10.00 |
| $10.00 |
| Sample/Test |
| PCM 05-calendar days |
| $5.00 |
| N/A |
| $6.50 |
| $6.50 |
| Sample/Test |
| TEM 24-hours |
| $88.00 |
| N/A |
| $130.00 |
| $130.00 |
| Sample/Test |
| TEM 12-hours |
| $105.00 |
| N/A |
| $160.00 |
| $160.00 |
| Sample/Test |
| TEM 05-calendar days |
| $70.00 |
| N/A |
| $95.00 |
| $95.00 |
| Sample/Test |
| Asbestos Management |
| ATC Standard Rate |
| ATC Expedited Rate |
| TEC Standard Rate |
| TEC Expedited Rate |
| Per |
| Inspection-Standard |
| $55.00 |
$57.00
Hour
| Inspection-Weekday Premium |
| $70.00 |
$63.00
Hour
| Inspection-Weekend / Holiday |
| $70.00 |
$72.00
Hour
| Management Planning-Standard |
| $55.00 |
$82.00
Hour
| Management Planning-Weekday Premium |
| $70.00 |
$92.00
Hour
| Management Planning-Weekend / Holiday |
| $70.00 |
$102.00
Hour
| Air Monitoring / Management-Standard |
| $55.00 |
$57.00
Hour
| Air Monitoring / Management-Weekday Premium |
| $70.00 |
$63.00
Hour
| Air Monitoring / Management-Weekend / Holiday |
| $70.00 |
$72.00
Hour
| Project Design-Standard |
| $55.00 |
$82.00
Hour
| Project Design-Weekday Premium |
| $70.00 |
$92.00
Hour
| Project Design-Weekend / Holiday |
| $70.00 |
$102.00
Hour
| Asbestos Instruction-Standard |
| $75.00 |
$82.00
Hour
| Asbestos Instruction-Weekday Premium |
| $85.00 |
$92.00
Hour
| Asbestos Instruction-Weekend / Holiday |
| $85.00 |
$102.00
Hour
| Environmental Services |
| ATC Standard Rate |
| ATC Expedited Rate |
| TEC Standard Rate |
| TEC Expedited Rate |
| Per |
| Indoor Air Quality Investigations |
| $75.00 |
$80.00
Hour
| Mold Investigations |
| $75.00 |
$80.00
Hour
| Mold Spore-Trap Sampling |
| $50.00 |
| $63.00 |
| $50.00 |
| $60.00 |
| Sample/Test |
| Viable Mold Sampling |
| $60.00 |
| $73.50 |
| $60.00 |
| $70.00 |
| Sample/Test |
| General Industrial Hygiene Investigations |
| $75.00 |
$85.00
Hour
| Lead Wipe Sampling |
| $12.00 |
| $15.00 |
| $15.00 |
| $22.50 |
| Sample/Test |
| Lead Inspection |
| $75.00 |
$72.00
Hour
| Lead Risk Assessment |
| $75.00 |
$72.00
Hour
| Lead Abatement Project |
| $75.00 |
$72.00
Hour
| State of Michigan Certified Lead Instruction* |
| $100.00 |
| N/A |
| $550.00 |
| $550.00 |
| Person/Class (or Session) |
| OSH related services |
| $75.00 |
$85.00
Hour
| Senior Analyst / Project Management |
| $125.00 |
$130.00
Hour
| Mobilization Fees |
| ATC Standard Rate |
| ATC Expedited Rate |
| TEC Standard Rate |
| TEC Expedited Rate |
| Per |
| Mobilization/ De-Mobilization fee (Lansing area projects) |
| $75.00 |
| N/A |
| $0.00 |
| $0.00 |
| Project |
| Mobilization/ De-Mobilization fee (Out state facilities) |
| $125.00 |
| N/A |
| $125.00 |
| $125.00 |
| Project |
ATC Additional Cost Considerations
| Cost Description |
| Rate |
| Expedited Rate (if applicable) |
| Per |
| Asbestos Point Count 400 |
| $26.00 |
| $48.00 |
| Sample/Test |
TEC Additional Cost Considerations
| Cost Description |
| Rate |
| Expedited Rate (if applicable) |
| Per |
N/A
VI. Negotiations The State of Michigan requested second round pricing from ATC Group Services LLC dba Atlas Technical and Testing Engineers & Consultants, Inc. as they were the two bidders without technical evaluation deductions; their pricing is reflected above.
VII. Award Recommendation Award recommendation is made to the responsive and responsible Bidder who offers the best value to the State of Michigan. Best value is based on the proposal meeting the minimum point threshold and offering the best combination of the factors stated in the Proposal Instructions Evaluation Process section, and price.
ATC Group Services LLC dba Atlas Technical provided the best value to the State. Best value factors for Award Recommendation include their experience with State contracts, knowledge of the Inspecting & Sampling Lead, Molds, Asbestos, and Air Contaminants industry and, and offering the lowest overall pricing.
As part of the best value determination, overall economic impact to the State of Michigan was considered and is not a determinative factor in making this award.
Award Recommendation is made to ATC Group Services LLC dba Atlas Technical in the amount of $1,500,000.00.
image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .