1. Solicitation Essentials
2014 CAPPO/NIGP Joint Conference
Solicitation Essentials
TWO ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS TO EVERY SUCCESSFUL SOLICITATION:
SOLICITATION PLANNING (DEFINE GOALS, DECIDE ON BIDDING STRATEGY AND SOW DEVELOPMENT)
SOLICITATION EXECUTION (BIDDING PROCEDURES AND EVALUATION CRITERIA)
October 9, 2014

2. Demographics
1. HOW MANY WITH PROCUREMENT EXPERIENCE HOW MANY WITH EXPERIENCE IN DEVELOPING SOW?
2. YOUR ROLE IN THE SOLICITATION PROCESS (HANDS ON OR …) (BID DEVELOPMENT, EVALUATION TEAM EXPERIENCE, P.M.)
3. YOUR AGENCY HAVE CENTRALIZED OR DE-CENTRALIZED PROCUREMENT
4. CHARTER OR GENERAL LAW
5. COMMODITIIES HANDLED: CONSTRUCTION / SERVICES / IT / COMMODITIES

3. The Good The Marginal The Bad
The Growler
The Good
The Marginal
The Bad

4. Agenda Definitions Solicitation Planning RFx Process
Specification Types
SOW
Solicitation Execution
Evaluation Criteria
Scoring RFP Responses / Evaluation Team
Additional Sources
Why are we here?
What is the evaluation team make-up?

5. Definitions Solicitation Planning
GAP – Assessing difference between current state and solicitation objectives (needs)
Design or Performance Specs.
SOW – Statement of Work / Scope of Work
Solicitation Execution
Evaluation Criteria – Factors specified in the RFP that will be considered for award (Mandatory/Desirable)
Best Value – Determined by comparing solutions against customized criteria
Life Cycle Cost – Total cost of acquiring, support, operation, maintain and disposal (as applicable)
1. GAP ANALYSIS + MARKET KNOWLEDGE = PROCUREMENT PLAN
PLANNING ACTIVITIES INCLUDE: DECIDEING ON BIDDING STRATEGY and SOW ELEMENTS
Execution State
BIDDING PROCEDURES AND EVALUATION CRITERIA
Bidder Conferences
Outreach
COI/Ethics

6. Planning Stage Define Business Goals
Internal and/or External Expertise
Market Research
GAP (Comparing Actual w/ Potential Perf.)
Outsource or Insource Make or Buy
Bidding and Contracting Strategy
Statement of Work Development
GAP ANALYSIS + MARKET KNOWLEDGE = PROCUREMENT PLAN
PLANNING OUTPUTS:
- MANAGEMENT PLAN (FTE COMMITMENTS FOR PROJECT DURATION)
- STATEMENT OF WORK

7. RFI, RFB, RFP, RFQ? Request for …….
Caveat: Refer to your procurement code, rules, process, & procedures.
RFI – non-binding (used to plan the next phase of the procurement not to actually procure the system, product or service.
RFQ can be done prior to RFP to pre-qualify supplier capability

8. What is a RFP? Rely on Market Expertise
Innovation or Creativity is Sought
Should reflect business objectives to allow matching solutions
Promotes Best Value vs. Low Bid
Criteria based Award Determination
Follows a structured evaluation procedure to demonstrate impartiality
A Request for Proposal is a formal invitation to potential suppliers to propose a solution to a need that the issuing organization has identified.

9. When to use the RFP method?
Needed items and/or services are not clearly identified
Department need is goal or results-driven
Proposal requirements allow potential bidders the flexibility to respond
Procurement may be political in nature
Relatively high dollar amount
Highly competitive market
Protest Potential
May be determined for a multiple of reasons.
Protest = Red Light example
*SOW should provide a clear and thorough description of the goods or services

10. RFP Planning Checklist
Did you perform market research?
What are the evaluation team activities?
Do you have an evaluation methodology?
Do you have an evaluation guide?
Do you have debriefing/protest procedures?
Consultant roles
COI & Ethics
Evaluation rules of conduct
Obtain Board/Council blessing
BAFO
Option proposals
1. Consider recommending that evaluators score to their strengths (i.e., technical, business, etc.)
2. Evaluation matrix
3. Criteria weight
4. Optional proposals – SaaS vs. on premise
5. Procedural guides are a must.

11. What makes a good RFP?
Well organized procurement goals, objectives, and evaluation process
Risk management assessment
Performance risk management
Well defined statement of work
Well organized deliverables
Well defined criteria
Well defined evaluation process
Performance risk = acceptance criteria/POC

12. RFI/RFB/P/Q or Single/Sole Source?
Bus shelters
Hybrid buses
Parking lot management system project
Professional SAP consulting services
Enterprise Network Storage system replacement
Annual Microsoft Software support
Annual custodial services
Mobile data computers/terminals and installation
Professional consultation services
After a RFI, may have the need to develop a business case using a RFB/Q/P

13. Does the prospective bidder know which one you want?
After a RFI, may have the need to develop a business case for acquisition of …

14. Specification Methods
Performance vs. Design
Performance = vendor risk
Design = buyer risk
Performance + Design = joint risk
Consensus Standards
ANSI, ASME, ASTM, IEEE, ISO, NIST, NFPA, SAE, UL
Procurement methods.
Performance based specifications focus on outcomes or results rather than process.
Design specifications outline exactly how the contractor must perform the service or how the product is made.
Performance based specifications allow respondents to bring their own expertise, creativity and resources to the bid process without restricting them to predetermined methods or detailed processes.

15. Statement of Work Vs. Scope of Work
What is a SOW?
Statement of Work Vs. Scope of Work
The statement of work should provide a clear and thorough description of the goods or services to be provided.
Whereas the scope of work should state the breadth and limitations of the contract effort and an overview
of Tasks/Work Description” and “Deliverables including any “out of scope” work.

16. Statement of Work
Provides a clear and thorough description of the goods or services to be provided
Provide the relevant environment where the product/service will be used
Provides a description of the existing business processes and desired performance
Should be organized into logical groups
A statement of work (SOW) is a formal document that captures and defines the work activities, deliverables, and timeline a vendor must execute in performance of specified work for a client. The SOW usually includes detailed requirements and pricing, with standard regulatory and governance terms and conditions. The Scope of Work is included in the Statement of Work.
The SOW should provide a clear and thorough description of the goods or services to be provided.
If appropriate, provide the relevant environment where the product/service will be used. In certain types of
procurements, it may be critical to describe the existing business processes. If the existing business process will change
as a result of the procurement, then also describe what the business process will be after the procurement objectives
are completed. If agencies want the respondents to suggest new business processes, ensure that this information is
included in the solicitation.

17. SOW Format and Contents
Background and Objectives
Scope
Tasks / Work Description
Project Schedule
Place of performance
Deliverables
Government-furnished resources
Applicable specifications and standards
Security Requirement
Acceptance Criteria/Project Management
Payment Schedule
See next slide for picture of SOW contents.

18. Statement of Work
How many have an existing SOW Guide?
Demo/POC

19. Writing an Effective SOW
Next slide = S.M.A.R.T.

20. SOW Objectives Specific Measurable Attainable Realistic Timely
1. Specific: your objectives must be clear so that if someone reads them, he or she can interpret them without ambiguity.
2. Measurable: you should be able to measure whether you are meeting the objectives or not.
3. Achievable: do not try to attempt more than you can.
4. Realistic: do you have the resources to achieve your objective?
5. Time-specific: specify when an objective will be attained (date).
Next slide = Execution Stage
Specific
Measurable
Attainable
Realistic
Timely

21. Execution Stage Bidding and Evaluation Procedures Procurement Team(s)
Conflict of Interest / Rules of Conduct
Solicitation Specific Evaluation Criteria
Outreach
Bidder’s Conferences
Demonstration Script
Documentation

22. Evaluation Criteria
Must represent key areas of importance and reflect user’s needs
Qualitative (subjective) and Quantitative (obj.)
Always include Costs, think in terms of TCO
Relied on to facilitate proposed solutions
Published
Acceptance Criteria (Demo/POC)
Criteria must sync with RFP Data Requests
Qualitative vs. Quantitative
Qualitative (observations made using the five senses) more subjective than quantitative
Quantitative (measurable)
The first step is to gather an accurate representation of the users requirements - their evaluation criteria.
Don’t allow considerations outside of the published criteria to factor into award decision

23. Developing the RFP Evaluation Criteria
Well developed Criteria produce market solutions targeting your needs
Involve stakeholders knowledgeable about goals
How will responses be measured against criteria
Rating Scales
Scoring Phase(s) consideration
Determine relative importance (Criteria Weight)
Concurrently develop the scoring matrix / evaluation worksheet
Use the information from the Planning stage to pinpoint your evaluation factors tied to your main contracting objectives

24. Sample Criteria Technical Approach and Understanding
Key Personnel Capabilities
Demonstrated Successful Experience
Project Management Plan / Timelines
Risk Assessment / Fiscal Strength
Ability to meet standards
Cost (TCO)

25. Evaluation Methodology Objectives
Encourage accurate comparison of potential suppliers against individual RFP criteria
Align weighting to reflect overall procurement goals
Allow criteria to be grouped into sections
Allow the scores of multiple evaluators to be contrasted or aggregated
Enable multiple evaluators to contribute to the scoring process
Compare TCO
Fairness/Transparency
Enable criteria to be weighted - not all criteria are of equal importance * Allow criteria to be grouped into sections, and allow weightings to be assigned both at section and criteria level * Enable multiple evaluators to contribute to the scoring process * Allow the scores of multiple evaluators to be contrasted or aggregated
Provides consistency, discipline and rationality to the source selection process

26. Criteria Publishing Decisions
Proposal criteria must be established prior to the release of the RFP and published in the RFP document. The evaluation criteria (not the weights?) were included in the RFP document.
Query audience on posting criteria and/or weights.
Weights?
Evaluation Criteria
Company Qualifications and References
System Capabilities
Customer Service and Support
Pricing
Risk Assessment
Total

27. Weighting Methodologies
Fixed Weights
Variable Weights
Trade-off Analysis (overall value determined as a trade-off between technical differences and their relative worth to the agency)
Go, no-go (are minimum technical and/or managerial needs met?, if yes then the proposal clears to cost evaluation)
Variable weights: This weighting system allows more flexibility in the weighting of criteria
where it is determined that, as to satisfying certain criteria, proposals are of relatively
equal merit. In such a case, the selection committee could give greater weight to other criteria. For
example, the weight given to cost as a criterion could increase as the selection committee determines
that the proposals are relatively equal based on other certain criteria evaluated.
Trade-off analysis: determination of best value will be made by comparing the differences in the value of
performance capability factors with the differences in the costs proposed

28. Evaluation Scoring Methods
Comparing relative proposal cost
Low cost vs. points
Assigning weighting
TCO/Life Cycle
Consensus scoring
Demo/POC
1. The most simplistic RFP scoring method is to assign a score (1 to 10) to each supplier for each criteria.
Ideally, reflect the varying importance of criteria to score each question on a different scale based on importance.
2. Lowest cost vs. points = a price-based approach
Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) = Used mostly by the Feds.
Competitors that are graded “technically acceptable” defined in the request for proposals make it to the final round. Between these finalists, price alone dictates which proposal wins.
3. Pass all the Mandatory requirements scores are given for Rated requirements = points
The price is calculated by comparing relative cost between proposers.
*Develop standard evaluation scoring sheets.

29. Typical RFP Cost Evaluation “Normalization”
Price of Lowest Cost Proposal / Price of Proposal being rated X Maximum cost points available = Awarded Price points
Example: The total points available for cost in the RFP was fifty (50) points. The cost of the lowest acceptable proposal is $100,000. Therefore the lowest proposal cost of $100,000 would be awarded fifty (50) points. The second lowest acceptable proposal submitted a cost of $125,000. The second lowest proposal cost of $125,000 would be awarded forty (40) points.
$100,000 / $125,000 = X = 40

30. Evaluation Phases Step 1 - Responsiveness Review
Step 2 - Mandatory elements met
Step 3 - Minimum / steps / threshold score
Step 4 - May include interviews, demos, presentations
Step 5 - Post Award POC
Ex: Proposal’s receiving less than 20 points on the Project Plan will be eliminated from further consideration.
Discuss variances in evaluation scores.

31. Scoring Proposals
Sample Scoring Scale (0-3) 3. Exceeds requirements 2. Meets requirements 1. Minimally meets requirements 0. Does not meet requirements *Should match proposal strengths/weakness

32. Rating Considerations
90-100%: Meets or exceeds all requirements
80-89%: Meets all requirements and standards
70-79%: Proposal indicates a basic understanding
60-69%: Proposal indicates only a marginal
0 - 59%: Proposal demonstrates a significant lack of
understanding of the requirements.
* Rating should match description
Meets or exceeds all requirements could also equal 70-79% Proposal indicates a basic understanding of the requirements
You need to have agreement / understanding as to the scoring scales so evaluators are on the same page
Combined with Scoring Proposals (e.g., technical team performs 1st pass, Exec Team final pass).

33. Bad things do happen! Unbalanced and missing bid prices
Bid Calculation Errors
Material vs. immaterial
Bid price conflict between words and numbers
Protests
Mismatch between specifications and goals
Missing information
Communication and politics
Check with your legal.

34. Only One Response? Open or Not to open Call potential suppliers
Review specifications
Review pricing methods/formulas
Review terms and conditions
Too many projects on the table
* Consult with your legal folks
Did you remember to perform vendor outreach?

35. Scoring Examples
Consider weighting the importance.

36. Weighted Criteria – Ex1 Criterion Weight PM Strengths 10
Previous Experience 20
Understands Problem
Financials 5
Project Support
Project Price 40
Total Weight
100
* Determine importance

37. Scoring – Ex2 Proposer Qualifications and References Score (20 points)
Proposer
Qualifications and References Score (20 points)
System Capabilities Score (25 points)
Customer Service/Support Score (20 points)
Pricing Score
(25 points)
Risk Score
(10 points)
TOTAL Score
(100 points)
Redflex
18.60
16.88
12.50
25.00
10.00
82.98
ATS
19.40
18.44
18.83
79.17
Xerox
17.94
15.94
14.50
15.69
74.06
Gatso
14.13
16.25
8.50
9.55
58.44

38. Score Variance – Ex1 Evaluator Proposal A Proposal B Proposal C
PM Strengths
Proposal B
Proposal C
Michael 2 5
Raymond 4
Diana 6
TOTALS 9 12
Proposal strengths & Weakness
0-5 Rating Scale:
5 - Excellent response. Meets or exceeds reasonable expectations and requirements
4 - Meets expectations and requirements with minor issues. Response lacked insight or detail.
3 - Meets expectations and requirements with significant issues. Response lacks evidence.
2 - Does not meet significant expectations. Response shows lack of understanding
1 - Minimally meets requirements. Response is unconvincing, empty claims.
0 - Does not meet requirements
* Variance in evaluator scores

39. Score Variance – Ex2 Evaluator Proposal A Proposal B Proposal C
Michael 1 4 10
Raymond 9 6
Diana 7 8
TOTALS 17 20 24
0-10 Rating Scale:
Consider balancing the scores.
Make sure that an evaluator doesn’t spread their scores across the range.

40. Balancing price and qualifications
Proposer
Total Proposal Price
Price Proposal Score
Technical Proposal Score
Total Proposal Score
Vendor A
$985,142,530
70.00
20.55
*90.55
Vendor B
$1,085,111,111
63.55
26.13
89.68
Vendor C
$1,365,770,098
50.49
27.71
78.20
Vendor D
$1,537,049,000
44.87
21.41
66.28
Do you really want a contractor that scored the lowest in the technical evaluations?
Low bid or best value?
* 30 points = technical evaluation
70 points = price
Abstract scoring
* Test scoring

41. Differences in Total Scores
Total Score (Pts)
Vendor A 87
Vendor B
*86.5
Vendor C 83
What happens when there’s a small difference between top scorers?
A re-evaluation of the vendors with near similar scores is warranted.
* Check decimal placement

42. Need for Documentation
Decision Maker Data Repository
Auditor or Administrative (Board) needs should an issue arise relative to selection
Facilitates FOIA requests
Facilitates final Contract Development
EX. Sharepoint collaboration.
Support Board/Council approvals/decisions.

43. Recap RFP Planning Process Statement of Work Specification Types
Evaluation Criteria and Scoring Methodology
Document the Process

44. Nugget Successful solicitations always involve: Sound Planning
Solid Execution
Planning = defined business goals, proper bidding strategy and SOW development
Execution = bidding procedures in place, procurement teams, criteria documentation

45. Sources http://cappo.org Leginfo http://www.rfpmentor.com/
Check with your legal.

46. The End Beginning
Check with your legal.