4050 Esplanade Way Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0950 Tel: 850. 488. 2786
Download 0.64 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Teaming Partners and Subcontractors.
- Evaluation and Selection Process.
Pricing Spreadsheet.The Respondent must complete all of the required information in the Pricing Spreadsheets that are included in Section 7.1. The completed Pricing Spreadsheets must be uploaded in the space provided in the MFMP Sourcing Tool. Descriptions of “Job Families” are displayed in the left columns of the Pricing Spreadsheets. Within each Job Family are a number of Job Titles. The Job Title is often, but not always, broken down into three (3) or four (4) “Scope Variants," which are gradations of experience within that Job Title. The Job Titles contained in Attachment 13 map directly to those positions on the Price Sheet (Attachment 1). Respondents must demonstrate their ability to supply personnel who meet all criteria listed in the Job Descriptions (Attachment 13), and those Respondents who receive an award will be expected to provide personnel who meet such criteria throughout the term of the Contract. If the Respondent is proposing services within Project Areas 1, 2 or 3, the Respondent must fill in pricing for EVERY line item (job title / scope variant) within that Project Area. Failure to complete EVERY line item shall result in immediate disqualification. For Project Areas 1, 2, and 3 expenses directly related to task orders, such as travel and lodging, or materials and equipment specific to the task order should not be built into the hourly rate, but will be accounted for in the Respondent’s task order proposal submitted to the Customer. Respondents seeking an award in Project Area 4 may provide prices for any combination of one or more Scope Variants. In other words, within Project Area 4, the Respondent is not required to provide a price for every Job Title and Scope Variant on the Pricing Spreadsheet as award will be made by line item or job title. Bid Ceiling Rates. The Respondent’s Hourly Rate shall not exceed the Bid Ceiling Rate listed next to each Job Number or Scope Variant. Proposals that contain prices higher than the Bid Ceiling Rates shall be considered non-responsive and shall not be evaluated by the Department. For example, Vendor X bids on Project Area 1 but the Rate offered by the Respondent for one Job Number Scope Variant is above the Bid Ceiling Rate. In this example, the Respondent shall be considered non-responsive for Project Area 1 and shall not be evaluated by the Department.
Responses may include the Respondent’s approach to utilization of “Teaming Partners”, if applicable. Teaming Partners serve two (2) purposes. During the solicitation process, the Respondent may utilize Teaming Partners to demonstrate the Respondent’s ability to provide services on a statewide basis. After the contract is awarded, approved Teaming Partners and subcontractors may perform services under the Contract. In such an event, the Customer will issue the Task Order to the Contractor, who shall remain responsible for the services delivered and for payments to the approved Teaming Partners and subcontractors. No subcontract which the Contractor enters into with respect to performance under the contract resulting from this RFP shall in any way relieve the Contractor of any responsibility for performance of its duties. Payment by Customers for Services provided under the resulting contract will only be made directly to the Contractor. All payments to the subcontractors and Teaming Partners shall be made by the Contractor. A Respondent may utilize “Teaming Partners” as subcontractors in its performance of the contract. Contractors are not limited to those Teaming Partners that have been originally submitted on the Teaming Partner – Subcontractor Information Form (Attachment 14). Use of subcontractors under the contract resulting from this RFP must be approved by any agency utilizing the resulting contract. The Respondent shall provide this information by completing the “Teaming Partner – Subcontractor Information Form (Attachment 14) for EACH subcontractor and Teaming Partner. Please note: the State Term Contract will be established between the State and the Respondent (Contractor). As such, any disputes, issues, defaults, etc. will be resolved between the Customer, the State, and the Contractor, and not the Teaming Partner. The Department must receive copies of each of these forms for every Teaming Partner the Respondent lists in its proposal. Failure to submit forms for each Teaming Partner may result in rejection of Respondent's response as non-responsive.
A “0 through 5” scoring method is applied throughout the evaluation process for the evaluation of Financial, References, Technical, and Price Sections as described below. A score of 0 is the least favorable and a score of 5 is the most favorable in all sections. Financial Section - Supplier Qualifier Report (SQR):
https://sor.dnb.com/sor/jsp/forms/SOF.jsp?SORTAG1=JQ37hS4r&SORTAG2=j58Gjk4x
NOTE: If the Respondent requested and received an SQR report from D&B through the process described above during the Department’s previous RFP for Information and Technology Services (RFP 22-973-561-Y) that was posted and withdrawn in May 2009, the Respondent does not need to request another SQR report. The Department will utilize the Respondent’s SQR report provided by D&B under solicitation RFP 22-973-561-Y. It is the Respondent’s responsibility to ensure verification from D&B under the previous solicitation that this report was obtained.
Failure to submit a SQR report will result in a ZERO Financial Score.
References Section: A “0 through 5” scoring method will be applied to the Reference Check Form (Attachment 15). The Respondent shall submit three (3) References Check Forms from three (3) different businesses who have received IT Consulting Services by the Respondent for at least four (4) months in the past four (4) years. References Forms will be scored by the Department in accordance with the ratings received by the Proposer’s selected references and in accordance with the following scale: 0 = Failure to submit three (3) Reference Check Forms (Attachment 15). 1= Poor. 2= Fair. 3= Adequate. 4= Very Good. 5= Excellent. Any missing ratings, missing forms, or illegible information will result in a zero (0) for the missing or illegible item. Each Proposer’s References Score is determined by calculating the average of all ratings from the three (3) References Forms. The Department may contact references and verify information. Technical Section: A “0 through 5” scoring method will be applied to the Technical Section Narrative (Attachment 16). In order for the Technical Section Narrative to be evaluated, the following instructions shall be adhered to by the Respondent: a) Each narrative submission must not exceed five (5) pages double-spaced. This limitation of five (5) pages should be considered as a maximum, and not necessarily a goal. Any narrative submission that goes beyond the five (5) -page limit will not be considered in the evaluation process. b) The font size may be no smaller than 10 point and the margins must be at least one inch on all sides. c) Only 8.5 x 11 inch paper may be used. Do not use colored, oversized, or folded materials. d) Do not include organizational brochures or other promotional materials, slides, films, clips, books, videotapes, or CDs as they are not easily reproduced and are therefore inaccessible to the evaluators. Any narrative submission that does not adhere to the instructions above will result in a ZERO Technical Score, shall be considered non-responsive, and shall not be evaluated by the Department. The Respondent’s Technical submission will be scored by evaluators in accordance with the following scale: 0 = Failure: Failure to adhere to the Technical Section instructions - Immediate Disqualification. 1= Unsatisfactory: Not responsive to the question or no data submitted. 2= Below Minimum Standards: Responsive to the question but below acceptable performance standards. 3= Adequate: Minimum acceptable performance standards and responsive to the question. 4= Satisfactory: Above minimum performance standards, effective and responsive to the question 5= Exceeds Expectations: Exceed minimum performance standards for effectiveness and responsiveness to the question. Each Proposer’s Technical Score will be calculated according to the Evaluation Criteria detailed in Attachment 17. If the final Technical Score is below 3.00, the proposal shall not be further scored for Financial, References, and Price and will not be eligible for award. Price Section:
|