RFP_Primary_10209186.pdf

STATE OF CALIFORNIA – CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES

715 P STREET, 7th FLOOR P.O. BOX 942836

SACRAMENTO, CA 94236-0001

Rev. 04-18-2025

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

PRIMARY

Notice to Prospective Firms

June 9, 2025

You are invited to review and respond to this Request for Proposal (RFP) number 10209186 for Exhibit Design and Fabrication Services. The anticipated term of this agreement is three (3) years. In submitting your proposal, you must comply with these instructions.

Note that all agreements entered into with the Department of Water Resources, hereinafter referred to as the “State”, incorporates, by reference, the State’s General Terms and Conditions (GTC) and Contractor Certification Clauses (CCC) that may be viewed and downloaded at the Department of General Services (DGS) website:

https://www.dgs.ca.gov/OLS/Resources/Page-Content/Office-of-Legal-Services-Resources-List- Folder/Standard-Contract-Language

If you do not have Internet access, a hard copy can be provided by contacting the person listed below.

The CCC package contains clauses and conditions that may apply to your Agreement and to anyone doing business with the State of California. The Certification will be kept on file in a central location.

Inquiries regarding the processing of this proposal should be referred to Christina Pal at (916) 902- 8095. Please note that no verbal information given will be binding upon the State unless such information is issued in writing as an official addendum to this solicitation.

Sincerely, Renato Consolini, Exhibit Designer/Coordinator

Attachment(s) https://www.dgs.ca.gov/OLS/Resources/Page-Content/Office-of-Legal-Services-Resources-List-Folder/Standard-Contract-Language https://www.dgs.ca.gov/OLS/Resources/Page-Content/Office-of-Legal-Services-Resources-List-Folder/Standard-Contract-Language

RFP. No. 10209186

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page Purpose of Description of Services 4 Proposing Firm Minimum Qualifications 4 Proposal Requirements and Information 5

Proposal Key Action Dates 5

Questions and Answers 6

Work Plan and Work Schedule/Technical Proposal Requirements 6

Cost Proposal Format and Requirements 6

Submission of Proposal 6

Proposal Evaluation and Selection Process 9

Tax Delinquent Status Verification Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) Disclosure

Notice of Intent to Award and Protest 27

Disposition of Proposals 28

Standard Conditions of Service 28

Payee Data Record (Std. 204) 28 Key Employee Policies and Guidelines Notice Acknowledgment (Consultants and Contractors) (DWR 9524a)

Economic Incentive Programs 29

Small Business Preference Programs 29

Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise Program 32 Pending Small Business or Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise Certification Application

Proposal Checklist 35

Attachment I – Cost Proposal Worksheet 37

Attachment II - Proposal/Proposing firm Certification Sheet 40

Completion Instructions for Proposal/Proposing Firm Certification Sheet 41

Attachment III – Proposing Firm References 42 Attachment IV - Darfur Contracting Act Certification Attachment V – Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) Disclosure (DWR 9834)

Attachment VI – Bidder Certification of DVBE Participation (DWR 9526) 45

Attachment VII- DVBE Declaration (Std. 843) 46 Attachment VIII – Bidder Declaration (GSPD 05-105)

Attachment IX – California Civil Rights Laws Attachment

Sample Contract – Standard Agreement (Std. 213) 49

Exhibit A – Scope of Work 50

Attachment 1 – Resumes Placeholder 58

Attachment 2 – Project Quote Request 59

Attachment 3 – Project Estimate Form 60

Attachment 4 – Sample Invoice 61

Exhibit B – Budget Detail and Payment Provisions 62

Exhibit C – General Terms and Conditions 63 Exhibit D – Special Terms and Conditions for Department of Water Resources – Over

$10,000 Standard Payable (DWR 9544)

Attachment 1 – Recycled Content Certification Form (DWR 9557) 67

Exhibit E – Additional Provisions 69

Attachment 1 – Travel and Per Diem (DWR 9580) 74 Attachment 2 – Small Business Subcontractor Payment Certification

(DWR 9683) 76

A. Purpose and Description of Services

The Department of Water Resources (DWR) is soliciting bids from qualified and reliable firms to provide professional Exhibit Design and Fabrication Services on an “as-needed” basis. DWR operates three (3) visitor centers: Lake Oroville Visitor Center, Oroville, California; Romero Overlook Visitor Center at San Luis Reservoir, Los Banos, California; and Vista del Lago at Pyramid Lake, Gorman, California. A fourth site, located in Byron, receives visitors for tours by appointment only. The exhibit floor space of the four locations ranges from 1,700 to 10,000 square feet. DWR also maintains remote site signage at select roadside locations in the Oroville region. These services are necessary to create visual interactive exhibits and displays that increase the effectiveness of DWR’s water education goals.

The exhibit message illustrates the engineering construction of the State Water Project Plan, climate change, drought and flood issues and water safety and science.

Contractor will furnish all labor, materials, tools and equipment, facilities, and expertise to provide professional exhibit design and fabrication services of long-term museum quality exhibits and temporary and/or event displays used at various locations throughout California. Services performed include concept design and development, fabrication, on-site maintenance and repair, renovation, and installation of final exhibits produced, as required in accordance with the specifications delineated in Exhibit A, Scope of Work and pursuant to work assignments by DWR.

DWR’s Graphic Services Branch cannot be certain as to which specific services our clients will be requesting throughout the term of the contract. Consequently, we cannot commit to our vendor how often an item is requested. DWR recognizes that Contractors may have other Exhibit Project commitments when services are needed.

For a complete outline of services to be provided, please refer to Exhibit A, Scope of Work.

B. Proposing Firm Minimum Qualifications

The Contractor must be an experienced firm providing professional Exhibit Design and Fabrication Services on a full-time commercial basis as its principal business for at least the past five (5) years.

At the time the bid is submitted, the Contractor must have experienced personnel on staff to provide services delineated in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. The Contractor must maintain capabilities throughout the term of the contract.

As part of their bid submittal, the Contractor must submit evidence of such operation in the form of the following documentation:

1. Copies of official documentation filed with appropriate city, county, and/or state government agencies. Documentation submitted will be used to substantiate the Contractor is a firm that provides Exhibit Design and Fabrication Services on a full-time commercial basis as its principal business segment as well as time in business and location of facilities.

2. Using the Proposing Firm References (Attachment III) form included in the RFP, the Contractor is required to provide client references for the three Quality Sample Assignments submitted in Phase 2 of the Proposal Evaluation. Quality samples and accompanying client reference must be for products produced within the last two (2) years.

3. A marketing/promotional brochure or website printout that provides an overview of the Contractor’s capabilities. The information must include:

a. Client list

b. List of available services

c. List of all fabrication facilities available

4. Resumes of Project Manager(s) and Shop/Fabrication Lead staff assigned to this contract.

Project Manager and lead staff must have a minimum of three (3) years’ experience in lead role.

Resumes submitted will be incorporated into the contract (Exhibit A, Attachment 1) upon award.

Program Manager and Fabrication Lead staff may be changed during the term of agreement only with written permission from DWR. Newly assigned staff must have the required minimum years’ experience. Permission is needed from DWR to replace or change any resumes during the length of this contract.

5. Narrative of Project Manager assigned to DWR, detailing his/her communication style with clients and competence in solving and/or recommending design solutions and cost savings.

6. A brief description of the construction differences between a temporary (4 month) display versus a 10-year exhibit.

C. Proposal Requirements and Information

1. PROPOSAL KEY ACTION DATES

All proposing firms must adhere to the following time schedule.

RFP available to prospective proposing firms on June 23, 2025 Technical questions must be submitted by July 1, 2025 at 9:00am Answers to technical questions will be disseminated by July 3, 2025 at 2:00pm Proposals and Quality Samples must be received by July 24, 2025 at 9:00am Anticipated date of cost proposal opening August 18, 2025 at 10:00am Anticipated start date of agreement is November 2025

Proposal Openings: Sealed proposals will be publicly opened and read via a TEAMS link. You may participate using the link provided below.

Topic: Public Proposal Cost Opening RFP # 10209186 Exhibit Design and Fabrication Services Time: August 18, 2025 at 10:00am

Join TEAMS Meeting https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_NjI5ZDA1NDYtNDY3ZS00YjQzLWE4ODgtODgwZTk0MDBhNzJm%40thread.

v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%22b71d5652-4b83-4257-afcd- 7fd177884564%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%2257001351-fc05-430d-a9c3-69f24629b329%22%7d

Or by Telephone (audio only):

Dial: +1 916-573-2034 Phone Conference ID: 147 220 048#

*Please note that the bid opening via TEAMS will be visual only with no opportunity for questions and answers.

2. LOCATION WHERE WORK WILL BE PERFORMED:

A. The Contractor’s Production Facility https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_NjI5ZDA1NDYtNDY3ZS00YjQzLWE4ODgtODgwZTk0MDBhNzJm%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%22b71d5652-4b83-4257-afcd-7fd177884564%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%2257001351-fc05-430d-a9c3-69f24629b329%22%7d https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_NjI5ZDA1NDYtNDY3ZS00YjQzLWE4ODgtODgwZTk0MDBhNzJm%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%22b71d5652-4b83-4257-afcd-7fd177884564%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%2257001351-fc05-430d-a9c3-69f24629b329%22%7d https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_NjI5ZDA1NDYtNDY3ZS00YjQzLWE4ODgtODgwZTk0MDBhNzJm%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%22b71d5652-4b83-4257-afcd-7fd177884564%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%2257001351-fc05-430d-a9c3-69f24629b329%22%7d https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_NjI5ZDA1NDYtNDY3ZS00YjQzLWE4ODgtODgwZTk0MDBhNzJm%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%22b71d5652-4b83-4257-afcd-7fd177884564%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%2257001351-fc05-430d-a9c3-69f24629b329%22%7d

B. DWR Visitor Centers:

1. Lake Oroville Visitor Center – 917 Kelly Ridge Road, Oroville, California 95966

2. Romero Overlook Visitors Center – 31426 Gonzaga Road, Gustine, California 95322

3. Vista del Lago Visitors Center – 38500 Vista del Lago Road, Gorman, California 93243

4. Delta Administration Lobby – 5280 Bruns Road, Byron, California 94514

C. Various locations throughout the State of California

3. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Technical questions must be submitted in writing to christina.pal@water.ca.gov and received by DWR on or before July 1, 2025 at 9:00am. DWR will provide answers in writing to all potential proposing firms by July 3, 2025 at 2:00pm.

4. WORK PLAN AND WORK SCHEDULE/TECHNICAL PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

The proposing firm shall develop a work plan or schedule for task completion. If applicable, identify each major task, necessary subtask, and/or specifics by which progress can be measured and payments made. Proposing firms may need to include the following information:

a. Project Personnel: List all personnel who will be working on the project. Include resumes which explain their titles, roles, responsibilities, and qualifications.

b. Facilities and Resources: Explain where the services will be provided and what type of equipment and/or other resources are needed to perform the services.

5. COST PROPOSAL FORMAT AND REQUIREMENTS

The proposing firm shall use the attached Cost Proposal Worksheet (Attachment I) to provide their cost proposal. The Cost Proposal Worksheet shall be submitted in the same envelope as the proposal and as outlined in paragraph a of Submission of Proposal.

6. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL

a. Proposals must be submitted by United States Postal Service (USPS) mail, hand delivery, United Parcel Service (UPS), express mail, or Federal Express to:

i. Proposals submitted by USPS must be addressed to:

Department of Water Resources

Attn: Christina Pal P.O. Box 942836

715 P Street, 7th Fl. DBS #19 Sacramento, CA 94236-0001

ii. Proposals submitted by hand delivery, must be given to Contract Specialist Christina Pal on or before the bid due date and time. Please coordinate a day and time via phone

(916) 902-8095 or e-mail christina.pal@water.ca.gov.

iii. Proposals submitted by UPS, express mail, or Federal Express must be addressed to:

mailto:christina.pal@water.ca.gov

Contract Services Attn: Christina Pal

715 P Street, 7th Fl., DBS #19 Sacramento, CA 95814

b. All proposals must be submitted under sealed cover. The sealed cover must contain all documents listed in the Proposal Checklist. The outside of the sealed cover must be plainly marked with the RFP title and number, must show your firm’s name and address, and must be marked with “DO NOT OPEN.”

i. Package shall contain two separate sealed envelopes.

ii. The first envelope will contain all documents listed under Phase One in the Evaluation and Selection Process section. This envelope shall be marked, “DOCUMENTATION

AND TECHNICAL PROPOSAL.”

iii. The second envelope shall contain the Cost Proposal Worksheet (Attachment I). The envelope shall be marked “COST PROPOSAL”.

iv. Proposals not submitted under sealed cover will be rejected. A minimum of two signed proposals must be submitted. One proposal must be submitted in hard copy. One proposal must be submitted in an electronic format (Word and/or PDF File) on a USB Drive. USB Drives can be returned at the request of the proposing firm once the solicitation is concluded.

c. Proposals should provide straightforward and concise descriptions of the proposing firm’s ability to satisfy the requirements of this RFP.

d. If the proposal is made under a fictitious name or business title, the actual legal name of the proposing firm must be provided.

e. Due to limited storage space, the proposal package should be prepared using the least expensive method (i.e. cover page with staple in upper left-hand corner, no fancy bindings).

f. All proposals must include original signatures on the following documents: Proposal/Proposing firm Certification Sheet and any other documents specified in the Proposal Checklist.

g. Proposals not including the documents identified in the Proposal Checklist shall be deemed non-responsive and will be rejected.

h. All proposals are to be sent to DWR within the time frame indicated in the Time Schedule.

Proposals received after the due date and time will be returned unopened to the prospective proposing firm.

i. Proposals must be submitted for the entire service described within the Scope of Work.

Deviations from the specifications will not be considered and will be cause for rejection of the proposal.

j. The State does not accept alternate language from a proposing firm. A proposal with such language will be considered a counter proposal and will be rejected. The State’s General Terms and Conditions (GTC) are not negotiable.

k. A proposal may be rejected if conditional or incomplete, or if it contains any alterations of form or other irregularities of any kind. The State may waive any immaterial deviation in a proposal.

The State's waiver of immaterial defect shall in no way modify the RFP document or excuse the proposing firm from full compliance with the objectives if awarded the Agreement.

l. Costs for developing proposals and preparation of award of the Agreement are entirely the responsibility of the proposing firm and shall not be chargeable to the State of California.

m. This RFP must be signed by an individual who is authorized to bind the proposing firm contractually. The signature must indicate the title or position that the individual holds in the firm. An unsigned proposal will be rejected.

n. A proposing firm may modify a proposal after its submission by withdrawal and resubmission before the proposal due date. Modification of a proposal offered in any other manner, oral or written, will not be considered.

o. A proposing firm may withdraw their proposal by submitting a written request to the State for its withdrawal, signed by the proposing firm or an agent authorized in accordance with paragraph n above. A proposing firm may thereafter submit a new proposal before the proposal submission deadline. Proposals may not be withdrawn after the proposal due date. Proposals received after the due date and time will be returned unopened to the prospective proposing firm.

p. DWR may modify the RFP prior to the date fixed for submission of proposals by the issuance of an Addendum to all parties who received a proposal package. This Addendum will also be posted on the State’s eProcurement website found at www.Cal eProcure.com.

q. If all proposals are too high, DWR is not required to award an Agreement.

r. The State may reject all proposals if deemed necessary.

s. The proposals submitted, including costs, will become public when DWR has completed its evaluation and announces the responsible proposer who has been given the highest score.

t. Proposing firms are cautioned not to rely on the State during the evaluation to discover and report all defects and errors in the proposal documents. Proposing firms should carefully proof-read documents for errors and adherence to the RFP requirements prior to proposal submittal.

u. Where applicable, the proposing firm should carefully examine the worksite and specifications.

Proposing firm shall investigate the conditions, character, quality of surface, subsurface materials, or obstacles to be encountered. No additions to the Agreement amount will be made because of failure to thoroughly examine the worksite and specifications.

v. More than one proposal from an individual, firm, partnership, corporation or association under the same or different names, will not be considered. Reasonable grounds for believing that any proposing firm has submitted more than one proposal for the work contemplated herein will cause the rejection of all proposals submitted by that proposing firm. If there is reason for believing that collusion exists among the proposing firm, none of the participants in such collusion will be considered in this or future procurements.

w. Public Proposal Openings may be conducted in person or online. Bid openings conducted online will be done virtually using TEAMS. You may participate using the link provided in the solicitation under Section C Paragraph 1 above.

http://www.bidsync.com/

7. EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS

a. At the time of proposal opening, each proposal will be checked for the presence or absence of required information in conformance with the submission requirements of this RFP.

b. Proposals containing false or misleading statements or providing references that do not support an attribute or condition claimed by the proposing firm may be rejected. If, in the opinion of the State, information was intended to mislead the State in its evaluation of the proposal, and the attribute, condition, or capability is a requirement of this RFP, it will be the basis for rejection of the proposal.

c. Proposals that contain false or misleading statements, or which provide references, which do not support an attribute or condition claimed by the proposer, may be rejected.

d. The final selection will be made to the lowest monetary responsible proposer achieving a passing score, after application of preferences

e. If there are tied proposals, DWR will draw straws to pick the winning proposing firm. The drawing will be witnessed and documented by two or more DWR employees.

f. The evaluation process will consist of three phases.

i. In Phase One, proposals are reviewed to ensure that all documentation has been submitted in compliance with the requirements of this RFP. DWR will review all of the following documents to determine that each is enclosed and properly completed. Failure to meet these administrative requirements shall cause a proposal to be deemed non-responsive and therefore ineligible for the next step of the RFP evaluation process.

1. Proposal/Proposer Certification Sheet (Attachment II)

2. References (Attachment III) - Using the Proposing Firm References (Attachment

III) form included in the RFP, the Contractor is required to provide client references for the three Quality Sample Assignments submitted in Phase 2 of the Proposal Evaluation. Quality samples and accompanying client reference must be for products produced within the last two (2) years.

3. Darfur Contracting Certification (Attachment IV)

4. California Civil Rights Laws (Attachment IX)

5. Small Business Certification (when applicable)

6. Completion of DVBE compliance documentation or Completion of DVBE

Incentive documentation DWR 9526 (Attachment VI)

a) Bidder Certification of DVBE Participation - DWR 9526 (Attachment VI)

b) DVBE Declaration – Std. 843 (Attachment VII)

c) Bidder Declaration – GSPD 05-105 (Attachment VIII)

d) DVBE Certification from DGS/OSDS

e) DWR SB/DVBE Program Manager’s Notification of Compliance (if obtained in advance)

7. Work Plan and Work Schedule/Technical Proposal

8. Official business license documentation filed with the appropriate city, county, and/or state government agencies confirming principle business and time in business

9. Marketing/promotional brochure or website printout of Contractor’s capabilities

10. Resumes of Project Manager(s) and Shop Fabrication Lead Staff assigned to

DWR contract

11. Narrative of Project Manager(s)

12. A brief description of the construction differences between a temporary 4-month display versus a 10-year exhibit

ii. Phase Two will consist of an evaluation of the Quality Sample Assignments. The samples submitted will represent the level of quality to be expected on a consistent basis for products and services throughout the term of the agreement. Those proposals which obtain a minimum score of 194 points (out of 228 points possible) on the evaluation of the technical requirements proceed to Phase Three.

Bidders are required to submit three (3) Quality Samples produced for clients within the last two (2) years from their list of Proposing Firm References (Attachment III). Each of the three (3) Quality Samples must represent work produced for different clients. The first Quality Sample submitted will be valued at a minimum of $75,000; the second Quality Sample will be a “short-burn” (quick) schedule valued at a minimum of $30,000;

and the third will be valued at a maximum of $20,000. Quality Samples must be submitted in print form not to exceed 20” x 30.” Each Quality Sample must include:

a) Photographs or representations which demonstrate/illustrate the bidder’s capabilities on the completed project.

b) A brief written project description addressing each of the parameters in the list below:

1. Initial project assignment

2. Objective of the proposed assignment

3. Design constraints imposed by client

4. Target audience

5. Anticipated life expectancy of the display/exhibit

6. Site and location

7. Key team members and responsibilities

8. Material selections including choice of protective surfaces for durability

9. Unique design considerations/challenges

10. Your contribution to the interactive media components (i.e., touch screen, application development, games or quizzes, audio or self-guided tours, and responsive lighting), and your involvement in the concept and/or production of the interactive components of the exhibit.

11. Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act

12. Production schedule

13. Project due date

14. Actual date project delivered/installed

15. A listing of major elements or components completed by subcontractors, including their company name, location, percentage of project subcontracted, and the monetary percentage of the total budget

16. Maintenance requirements or recommendations

17. Method of shipping or delivery

18. Estimated cost

19. Final cost

c) Final construction documents (for sample over $75,000 only)

d) Copy of final invoice

Contractor must provide sufficient documentation of the Contractor's abilities and experience to facilitate evaluation by DWR.

Quality Samples must score a minimum of 194 points (228 points possible) to move onto Phase Three. Each quality sample will be collectively reviewed and evaluated by DWR Exhibit staff.

The four categories are: Function, Aesthetics, Interactivity, and Value. Each category has multiple components that will be scored on a 1-4 scale. The components are combined for the category then multiplied by a weight factor.

Weight factor by category

• Function: Total score of the 4 components x 3 (weight factor)

• Aesthetics: Total score of the 1 component x 3 (weight factor)

• Interactivity: Total score of the 1 component x 2 (weight factor)

• Value: Total score of the 2 components x 1 (weight factor)

Example:

If the bidder receives the highest score of 4 on each of the components in each category (Function, Aesthetics, Interactivity, Value), the final score for a Quality Sample by category would be:

A. 1: 16 pts. X 3 (weight factor) = 48 B. 1: 4 pts. X 3 (weight factor) = 12 C. 1: 4 pts. X 2 (weight factor) = 8 D. 1: 8 pts. X 1 (weight factor) = 8

Total maximum points available for each Quality Sample = 76

3 Quality Samples will be scored. A maximum of 228 points can be earned.

Quality Sample Review Scoring

Table A – Quality Sample #1

FUNCTIONALITY

Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded

Comments

A.1.1 Design and/or construction meets the client’s goals and supports effective communication of the information and/or message to the intended audience.

Vendor exceeds in meeting client goals.

Vendor uses effective methods to clearly communicate to intended audience.

Vendor adequately meets client goals.

Vendor uses some methods to

Vendor meets some of the client goals.

Vendor uses ineffective methods to

Vendor fails to meet client goals.

Vendor uses ineffective methods to

A.1.2 The fabrication addresses longevity, practicality, and maintenance requirements including interactive or peripheral components of the exhibit.

Vendor uses logical solutions for longevity, practicality.

Vendor clearly addresses ease of maintenance.

Vendor makes attempt at solutions for longevity and practicality.

Vendor considers ease of maintenance.

Vendor lacks logical solutions for longevity and practicality.

Vendor uses partial or poor solutions for addressing ease of maintenance.

Vendor fails to address solutions for

Vendor clearly misses considerations for

A.1.3 The durability of the exhibit and components, including shipping and installation considerations.

Vendor uses effective solutions and material choices to resolve durability.

Vendor logistically addresses shipping and/or installation considerations.

Vendor appropriately addresses durability challenge.

Vendor recognizes shipping and/or

Vendor has limited understanding of material choices when addressing durability.

Vendor attempts to address shipping

Vendor lacks knowledge of components to address durability.

Vendor shows no understanding of shipping and/or installation considerations.

A.1.4 Compliance with American with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Vendor uses effective solutions in addressing ADA guidelines. 4

Vendor uses basic-level solutions in addressing ADA guidelines. 3

Vendor uses limited solutions in addressing ADA guidelines. 2

Vendor makes no attempt to address ADA guidelines. 1

Table A - TOTAL “Functionality” Points (A.1.1 + A.1.2 + A.1.3 + A.1.4) Max possible points = 16 pts. x 3 =

48 pts.

X 3 (weight factor) =

Table B – Quality Sample #1

AESTHETICS

AESTHETICS - Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded Comments

B.1.1 Attractiveness and professional appearance of the exhibit.

Vendor's knowledge in exhibit aesthetics is clearly evident. 4

Vendor demonstrates basic skills in exhibit aesthetics. 3

Vendor demonstrates limited skills in exhibit aesthetics. 2

Vendor demonstrates lack of understanding of exhibit aesthetics.

Table B - TOTAL “Aesthetics” Max possible Points = 4 pts. x 3 = 12 pts.

Table C – Quality Sample #1

INTERACTIVITY

INTERACTIVITY - Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded Comments

C.1.1 Interactive component enhances the learning experience.

Vendor successfully demonstrates the relationship between interactivity to learning.

Vendor uses methods to support the relationship between interactivity to learning.

Vendor is ineffective in connecting interactivity to learning.

Vendor fails to connect the interactivity to learning.

Table C - TOTAL “Interactivity” Max possible points = 4 pts. x 2 = 8 pts.

X 2 (weight factor) =

Table D – Quality Sample #1

VALUE

VALUE - Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded Comments

D.1.1 Adherence to allotted budget.

Vendor adheres to allotted budget 4

Vendor meets allotted budget, plus 10%

Vendor exceeds over 10% of budget 2

Vendor exceeds budget with multiple budget increase requests by vendor

D.1.2 The final product in relation to the cost, durability, life expectancy, and goals

Vendor understands project and delivers exceptional product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Vendor understands project and delivers expected product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Vendor has limited understanding of project and delivers inadequate product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Vendor lacks understanding of project and delivers unacceptable product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Table D - TOTAL “Value” Points (D.1.1 + D.1.2) Max possible points = 8 pts. X 1 = 8 pts.

X 1 (weight factor) =

QS #1

Total of Quality Sample #1 (Table A + B + C + D) =

Table A – Quality Sample #2

Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded

Comments

A.2.1 Design and/or construction meets the client’s goals and supports effective communication of the information and/or message to the intended audience.

Vendor has clear understanding of client goals. 4

Vendor uses effective methods to clearly communicate to intended audience.

Vendor understands client goals.

Vendor uses some methods to client goals.

Vendor uses ineffective methods to

Vendor lacks understanding of client goals.

Vendor uses ineffective methods to

A.2.2 The fabrication addresses longevity, requirements including interactive or peripheral components of the exhibit.

Vendor clearly addresses ease of

Vendor considers ease of

Vendor lacks logical solutions for

Vendor uses partial or poor solutions for addressing ease of maintenance.

Vendor clearly misses considerations for maintenance.

A.2.3 The durability of the exhibit and material choices to resolve durability. 4

Vendor logistically addresses shipping

Vendor appropriately addresses durability challenge.

Vendor recognizes shipping and/or durability.

Vendor attempts to address shipping

Vendor lacks knowledge of components to address durability.

Vendor shows no understanding of shipping and/or installation

A.2.4 Compliance with American with

Vendor uses effective solutions in addressing ADA guidelines. 4

Vendor uses basic-level solutions in addressing ADA guidelines. 3

Vendor uses limited solutions in addressing ADA guidelines. 2

Vendor makes no attempt to address ADA guidelines. 1

Table A - TOTAL “Functionality” Points (A.2.1 + A.2.2 + A.2.3 + A.2.4) Max possible points = 16 pts. X 3 = 48 pts.

X 3 (weight factor) =

Table B – Quality Sample #2

AESTHETICS

AESTHETICS - Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded Comments

B.2.1 Attractiveness and professional

Vendor’s knowledge in exhibit

Vendor has basic skills in exhibit aesthetics. 3

Vendor has limited skills in exhibit aesthetics. 2

Vendor lacks understanding of exhibit aesthetics. 1

Table B - TOTAL “Aesthetics” Points Max possible Points = 4 pts. x 3 = 12 pts.

Table C – Quality Sample #2

INTERACTIVITY

INTERACTIVITY - Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded Comments

C.2.1 Interactive component enhances the learning experience.

Vendor clearly understands the relationship between interactivity to learning.

Vendor shows thought in the relationship between interactivity to learning.

Vendor is ineffective in making interactivity to learning connection.

Vendor shows no effort at making the interactivity to learning connection.

Table C - TOTAL “Interactivity” Points Max possible points = 4 pts. x 2 = 8 pts.

X 2 (weight

Table D – Quality Sample #2

VALUE

VALUE - Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded Comments

D.2.1 Adherence to allotted budget.

Vendor adheres to allotted budget 4

Vendor meets allotted budget, plus 10% 3

Vendor exceeds over 10% of budget 2

Vendor exceeds budget with multiple budget increase requests by vendor

D.2.2 The final product in relation to the

Vendor understands project and delivers exceptional product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Vendor somewhat understands project and delivers expected product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Vendor has limited understanding of project and delivers inadequate product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Vendor lacks understanding of project and delivers unacceptable product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Table D - TOTAL “Value” Points (D.2.1 + D.2.2)

Max possible points = 8 pts. x 1 = 8 pts.

X 1 (weight

QS #2 Total of Quality Sample #2 (Table A + B + C + D) =

Table A – Quality Sample #3

Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded

Comments

A.3.1 Design and/or construction meets the client’s goals and supports effective communication of the information and/or message to the intended audience.

Vendor has clear understanding of

Vendor uses effective methods to clearly communicate to intended

Vendor understands client goals.

Vendor uses some methods to communicate with the intended

Vendor uses ineffective methods to communicate with the intended

Vendor lacks understanding of client goals.

Vendor uses ineffective methods to communicate with the intended

A.3.2 The fabrication addresses longevity, requirements, including interactive or peripheral components of the exhibit.

Vendor clearly addresses ease of

Vendor considers ease of

Vendor lacks logical solutions for

Vendor uses partial or poor solutions for addressing ease of maintenance.

Vendor clearly misses considerations for maintenance.

A.3.3 The durability of the exhibit and material choices to resolve durability.

Vendor logistically addresses shipping

Vendor appropriately addresses durability challenge.

Vendor recognizes shipping and/or durability.

Vendor attempts to address shipping

Vendor lacks knowledge of components to address durability.

Vendor shows no understanding of shipping and/or installation

A.3.4 Compliance with American with

Vendor uses effective solutions in addressing ADA guidelines. 4

Vendor uses basic-level solutions in addressing ADA guidelines. 3

Vendor uses limited solutions in addressing ADA guidelines. 2

Vendor makes no attempt to address ADA guidelines. 1

Table A - TOTAL “Functionality” Points (A.3.1 + A.3.2 + A.3.3 + A.3.4)

Max possible points = 16 pts. x 3 = 48 pts.

X 3 (weight factor)

Table B – Quality Sample #3

AESTHETICS

AESTHETICS - Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded Comments

B.3.1 Attractiveness and professional

Vendor’s knowledge in exhibit

Vendor has basic skills in exhibit aesthetics. 3

Vendor has limited skills in exhibit aesthetics. 2

Vendor lacks understanding of exhibit aesthetics. 1

Table B - TOTAL “Aesthetics” Points Max possible points = 4 pts. x 3 = 12 pts.

Table C – Quality Sample #3

INTERACTIVITY

INTERACTIVITY - Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded Comments

C.3.1 Interactive component enhances the learning experience.

Vendor clearly understands the relationship between interactivity to learning.

Vendor shows thought in the relationship between interactivity to learning.

Vendor is ineffective in making interactivity to learning connection.

Vendor shows no effort at making the interactivity to learning connection.

Table C - TOTAL “Interactivity” Points Max possible points = 4 pts. x 2 = 8 pts.

X 2 (weight factor) =

Table D – Quality Sample #3

VALUE

VALUE - Scoring Criteria Point Value

Point Awarded Comments

D.3.1 Adherence to allotted budget.

Vendor adheres to allotted budget 4

Vendor meets allotted, plus 10% 3

Vendor exceeds over 10% of budget 2

Vendor exceeds budget with multiple budget increase requests by vendor

D.3.2 The final product in relation to the

Vendor understands project and delivers exceptional product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Vendor understands project and delivers expected product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Vendor has limited understanding of project and delivers inadequate product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Vendor lacks understanding of project and delivers unacceptable product for cost, durability, life, and goals.

Evaluation Criteria Maximum Possible Points

Points Awarded

Quality Sample # 1 76 Quality Sample # 2 76 Quality Sample # 3 76

Total Possible Points 228

The DWR Evaluation Team will score the submittals based on percentages for levels of quality for each scoring criterion. The percentages will then be translated to points based upon the weight for each particular factor. For example, under “Effective Timeframes,” if a proposing firm’s response is considered “Excellent,” it will receive 9 points (0.9 x 10). The same approach will be used for all categories, except the evaluation Cost Proposal, which is not scored.

Percentage of maximum points Description

Non-Compliant 0%

Fails to address the component or the proposing firm does not describe any experience related to the component.

Poor 30%

Minimally addresses the section, but one or more major considerations of the component are not addressed, or so limited that it results in a low degree of confidence in the proposing firm’s response.

Fair 70%

The response addresses the section, but minor considerations may not be addressed. Acceptable degree of confidence in the proposing firm’s response.

Good 80%

The response fully addresses the section and provides a good quality solution. Good degree of confidence in the proposing firm’s response.

Excellent 90%

All considerations of the section are addressed with a high degree of confidence in the proposing firm’s response.

Outstanding 100%

All considerations of the section are addressed with the highest degree of confidence in the firm’s response or proposed solution. The response exceeds the requirements in providing a superior experience and creative approach.

iii. In Phase Three, for those firms receiving the minimum points, that firm’s sealed envelope marked Cost Envelope will be opened. At this time the Small Business (SB) Preferences and DVBE Incentive calculations will be applied as appropriate. The application of the SB Preference and DVBE Incentives may result in the displacement of a previously high scoring firm.

Table D - TOTAL “Value” Points (D.3.1 + D.3.2)

Max possible points = 8 pts. x 1 = 8 pts.

X 1 (weight factor)

QS #3 Total of Quality Sample #3 (Table A + B + C + D) =

FINAL TOTALS for Quality Sample (QS) …. QS #1 + QS #2 + QS #3 = (Passing score must be above 194 total points)

1. SB Preference Calculation

When a certified SB has submitted a qualified proposal and is not the lowest proposing firm, the Department will apply the SB Preference to determine solicitation outcome. Only businesses certified by DGS/OSDS receive five percent (5.0%) calculation preference. If a responsive, responsible firm submitting low cost is already a certified small business, the preference calculation will not be applied.

Small Business Preference Calculation Example

The SB Preference is calculated by factoring five percent (5.0%) of the lowest proposal of a Non-Small Business (NSB) and subtracting the result from that of the certified SB.

NSB Proposal: $114,000 SB Proposal: $117,000

$114,000 x .05 = $ 5,700

SB Proposal: $117,000 Calculation Preference: $ 5,700 SB Adjusted Proposal Cost $111,300

In the example above, the SB achieves low cost and is in line for award.

2. Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise Incentive Application

When appropriate, application of the DVBE Program Incentive will be applied after the SB Preference is applied and will be factored by the amount of DVBE participation identified by the proposing firm. The net cost proposed by the firm proposing DVBE participation will have their cost proposal reduced by the incentive amount calculated. This may result in the firm achieving low cost placing them in line for solicitation award.

It is possible for an SB firm that is not low cost to become the awarded firm after application of both the SB calculation preference and the DVBE Incentive calculation.

Application of the DVBE Incentive cannot displace the low-cost proposal of a certified SB.

Additional information regarding the DVBE Incentive may be found in Attachment VI, of this solicitation.

Allowable Incentive Amounts

When the DVBE program is a required component of the solicitation, the minimum acceptable commitment level is three percent (3.0%). Incentive amounts applied begin at three percent and will not exceed 5 percent.

When the Department waives DVBE program compliance, a firm’s DVBE participation is optional. Firms proposing DVBE participation are eligible to receive a DVBE incentive calculation from one percent (1.0%) to five percent (5.0%). The incentive applied will be at the level of proposed DVBE commitment.

DVBE Incentive Scale 5.0% and Over 5.0% 4.0% - 4.99% inclusive 4.0% 3.0% - 3.99% inclusive 3.0% 2.0% - 2.99% inclusive 2.0% 1.0% - 1.99% inclusive 1.0%

Sample Incentive Application

Bidder

A

B

C

Responsive/Responsible

Yes

Net Proposed Price $100,000 $102,000 $103,000 Rank 1 2 3 Small Business No Yes Yes Eligible Preference $0.00 $5,000 $5,000 DVBE Participation None 3.0% 100% Incentive Amount $0.00 $3,000 $5,000

Adjusted Bid Amount $0.00 $94,000 $93,000 New Rank 3 2 1

8. TAX DELINQUENT STATUS VERIFICATION

a. Effective July 1, 2012 Public Contract Code 10295.4, requires state agencies to verify the tax delinquent status of bidders responding to state solicitations.

b. At the time of bid evaluation, prior to contract award and execution, the State will verify all proposing firms and identified subcontractors as not listed as tax delinquent by the Franchise Tax Board and the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. Any proposing firms or subcontractor listed as tax delinquent shall result in a proposal rejection and will not be considered for contract award. Proposing firms wanting further clarification can refer to the statute above or to the web sites listed below for additional information.

California Department of Tax and Fee Administration – Top 500 Sales Tax and Use Delinquencies in California https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/top500.htm

Franchise Tax Board – Top 500 Delinquent Tax Payers https://www.ftb.ca.gov/about-ftb/newsroom/top-500-past-due-balances/index.html http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=10295.4.&lawCode=PCC https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/top500.htm https://www.ftb.ca.gov/about-ftb/newsroom/top-500-past-due-balances/index.html

9. GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (GEN AI) DISCLOSURE

a. The State of California seeks to realize the potential benefits of GenAI, through the development and deployment of GenAI tools, while balancing the risks of these new technologies.

b. Bidder / Offeror must notify the State in writing if it: (1) intends to provide GenAI as a deliverable to the State; or (2), intends to utilize GenAI, including GenAI from third parties, to complete all or a portion of any deliverable that materially impacts: (i) functionality of a State system, (ii) risk to the State, or (iii) Contract performance. For avoidance of doubt, the term “materially impacts” shall have the meaning set forth in State Administrative Manual (SAM) § 4986.2 Definitions for GenAI.

c. Failure to report GenAI to the State may result in disqualification. The State reserves the right to seek any and all relief to which it may be entitled to as a result of such non-disclosure.

d. Upon notification by a Bidder / Offeror of GenAI as required, the State reserves the right to incorporate GenAI Special Provisions into the final contract or reject bids/offers that present an unacceptable level of risk to the State.

e. Government Code 11549.64 defines “Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI)” as an artificial intelligence system that can generate derived synthetic content, including text, images, video, and audio that emulates the structure and characteristics of the system’s training data.

10. NOTICE OF INTENT TO AWARD AND PROTEST

a. A Notice of Intent to Award will be posted on Cal eProcure for five (5) business days. All proposing entities will be officially notified via Cal eProcure that the Notice of Intent to Award is posted.

b. Public inspection of all proposals and score sheets will be allowed after the Notice of Intent to Award has been posted.

c. Contracts shall be awarded only after a Notice of Intent to Award has been posted in a place accessible by the general public, including any internet site identified in this RFP, for five (5) business days.

d. Prior to the award, a proposing firm who claims he/she would have been eligible for the award of the contract, may protest the proposed award if DWR had scored his or her proposal correctly or if DWR had correctly followed the procedures specified in the Public Contract Code.

e. A protestant must meet the burden of proof that DWR has committed a material error in the conduct of the proposal award process.

f. Within five business days of filing the protest, the protestant must submit a detailed written statement of protest if the original protest did not contain the complete grounds for the protest.

g. Both the original protest and/or the detailed statement of protest, if any, must include the RFP number, the name of the State Agency involved, agency contact person, and protestant’s fax number, if any.

h. The protest documents may be sent by regular mail, email, courier, or personal delivery to:

Department of General Services Office of Legal Services

Attention: Bid Protest Coordinator 707 Third Street, 7th Floor, Suite 7-330

West Sacramento, CA 95605 Bid Protest Coordinator Email address: OLSProtests@dgs.ca.gov

AND

Contract Specialist Email Address: christina.pal@water.ca.gov

Upon receipt of the protest, Department of General Services (DGS) shall send the protestant an acknowledgement letter and thereafter communicate with the parties regarding further disposition of the protest.

11. DISPOSITION OF PROPOSALS

Upon proposal opening, all documents submitted in response to this RFP will become the property of the State of California and will be regarded as public records under the California Public Records Act (Government Code Section 7920 et seq.) and are subject to review by the public. The State cannot prevent the disclosure of public documents. However, the contents of all proposals, draft proposals, correspondence, agenda, memoranda, working papers, or any other medium that discloses any aspect of a proposing firm’s proposal, shall be held in the strictest confidence until the Notice of Intent to Award is posted. Proposals may be returned at the request and expense of the proposing firm.

D. Standard Conditions of Service

1. Service(s) shall not commence until the Agreement is fully executed and all approvals have been obtained.

2. All performance under the Agreement shall be completed on or before the termination date of the Agreement unless this Agreement is amended to extend the term.

3. No oral understanding or agreement shall be binding on either party.

E. Payee Data Record

1. The Contractor awarded this Agreement must have completed and submitted form STD 204, Payee Data Record, to determine if the Contractor is subject to a seven percent State Income Tax withholding pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 18662, 18805, and 26131.

2. No payment shall be made unless the Payee Data Record form has been completed and returned to

DWR.

F. Key Employee Policies and Guidelines Notice Acknowledgment (Consultants and Contactors)

1. The selected contractor awarded this Agreement must complete and submit the form DWR 9524a, Key Employee Policies and Guidelines Notice Acknowledgment, These policies and guidelines communicate expectations for contractors. Every contractor or subcontractors employee is expected to read and understand the material contained within. Primary contractor/subcontractors are responsible to ensure that their employees are aware of and adhere to the policies and guidelines.

mailto:OLSProtests@dgs.ca.gov

G. Economic Incentive Program

Proposing firms may be eligible for additional preferences when their place of business is located within certain economic regions and when they hire persons living and working within those economic regions. Please access the following links to read information about this economic incentive program.

TACPA CONTRACT PREFERENCE

This solicitation contains Target Area Contract Preference Act (TACPA) preference request forms.

Please carefully review the forms and requirements. Proposerss are not required to apply for these preferences. Denial of the TACPA preference request is not a basis for rejection of the bid.

The State as part of its evaluation process reserves the right to verify, validate, and clarify all information contained in the bid. This may include, but is not limited to, information from proposers, manufacturers, subcontractors and any other sources available at the time of the bid evaluation.

Proposer refusal to agree to and/or comply with these terms, or failure to provide additional supporting information at the State's request may result in denial of preference requested.

Contracts awarded with applied preferences will be monitored throughout the life of the contract for compliance with statutory, regulatory, and contractual requirements.