Loading...
2011-27771 Reso RESOLUTION NO. 2011 - 27771 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER PERTAINING TO THE RANKING OF PROPOSALS PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NO. 19- 10/11, FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE CITY'S E- PROCUREMENT SYSTEM OF SOLICITATION ANNOUNCEMENTS AND DOCUMENT FULFILLMENT SERVICES; AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP - RANKED PROPOSER, THE PUBLIC GROUP, LLC; AND SHOULD THE ADMINISTRATION NOT BE SUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TOP - RANKED PROPOSER, AUTHORIZING NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE SECOND - RANKED PROPOSER, RFP DEPOT LLC D /B /A BIDSYNC; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT UPON CONCLUSION OF SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATIONS BY THE ADMINISTRATION. WHEREAS, on March 9, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance of Request for Proposals (RFP) No, 19- 10/11, for the expansion the City's E- Procurement System of Solicitation Announcements and Document Fulfillment Services; and WHEREAS, the RFP was issued on March 15, 2011, with an original opening date of April 18, 2011; five (5) addenda were issued which changed the opening date to May 4, 2011; and WHEREAS, a pre - proposal conference to provide information to the proposers submitting a response was held on March 31, 2011; and WHEREAS, BidNet issued bid notices to 158 prospective proposers, BidSync issued bid notices to 2,971 prospective proposers of which 64 viewed the notice, and 45 proposers were notified via e-mail, which resulted in the receipt of the eleven (11) proposals; and WHEREAS, on May 18, 2011, the Procurement Office notified Ariba that their proposal was deemed non - responsive and consequently will not receive further consideration. Therefore, ten (10) proposals were presented to the Evaluation Committee members for further review; and WHEREAS, on May 26, 2011, the City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No. 131 -2011, appointed an Evaluation Committee (the Committee) consisting of the following individuals: • Carlos DaCruz, Office Associate V, Parks and Recreation Department; • Marta Fernandez - Rubio, Procurement Coordinator, Procurement Division; • Nelson Martinez, System Support Manager, IT Department; • Barry Meltz, Director of Procurement Services, School Board of Miami -Dade County; • Silvia Winitzky, Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate; and Alternates • Mathew Garwick, Director of Housing Programs /Operations, Housing Authority of Miami Beach; • Lily Noches, Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate; • Grissette Roque Marcos, Executive Director, Miami Beach Visitor and Convention Authority; and WHEREAS, in addition to the Committee members, 17 staff members from the Procurement, Parks and Recreation, Building, Public Works, Property Management, Police, Fire, Fleet, Sanitation, and CIP Departments served as part of an Evaluation Support Team to assist the Evaluation Committee during the evaluation process by providing feedback on the functionality of the proposed systems; and WHEREAS, the Evaluation Support Team was requested to develop a "Scripted Demo" and elect a chairperson and co- chairperson to provide feedback to the Evaluation Committee after receiving presentations from the short listed proposers: The Public Group, RFP Depot d /b /a BidSync, and IOS Partners, Inc; and WHEREAS, the Evaluation Support Team convened on July 8, 2011 and July 20, 2011 in order to develop the Scripted Demos, which would be provided to the short listed proposers for demonstration and the Evaluation Form to be utilized to evaluate said Scripted Demos; and WHEREAS, on September 15, 2011, all Evaluation Support Team members were invited to attend the Scripted Demos scheduled with the three (3) short listed proposer for a one (1) hour Scripted Demo session and for a 30 minute Question and Answer session in order to address any issues that were not covered during the Scripted Demo sessions; and WHEREAS, on September 16, 2011, the Committee convened to receive feedback from the Support Team Chairpersons on the functionality of the system proposed by each short listed proposer and also receive presentations from the three (3) short listed proposers; and WHEREAS, the Committee further discussed the proposer's qualifications, experience, cost to the vendors and the City, scored the short listed proposers accordingly and unanimously recommend entering into negotiations with the top- ranked firm, the Public Group; and WHEREAS, after considering d g the review and recommendation of City staff, the City Manager exercised his due diligence and is recommending that the Mayor and the City Commission authorize negotiations with the top- ranked proposer, The Public Group, LLC; and should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an Agreement with the top - ranked proposer, authorize negotiations with the second - ranked proposer, RFP Depot d /b /a Bidsync; further authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement upon the conclusion of successful negotiations by the Administration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, that the Mayor and City Commission hereby accept the recommendation of the City Manager, pursuant to Request for Request (RFP) No. 19- 10/11, for the Expansion of the City's E- Procurement System of Solicitation Announcements and Document Fulfillment Services; authorize the Administration to enter into negotiations with the top- ranked proposer, The Public Group, LLC; and should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an Agreement with the top- ranked proposers, authorize negotiations with the second - ranked proposer, RFP Depot d /b /a Bidsync ; further authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement upon the conclusion of successful negotiations by the Administration. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS I N DAY OF G7 her 2011. ATTEST: L a& k woure h lb 4 ‘ CITY CLERK ..e \ , 1 C OR m T: IAGENDAl2011110- 19 -1'!' �- ? r ; P I' r n RESO.doc • P -� � �R -a ; CH 2% APPROVED AS TO FORM & LANGUAGE dp • FOR EXECUTION ib� t �,,��•R''':' om = "� G,, Date COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY Condensed Title: A Resolution A Resolution Of The Mayor And City Commission Of The City Of Miami Beach, Florida, Accepting The Recommendation Of The City Manager Pertaining To The Ranking Of Proposals Pursuant To Request For Proposals (RFP) No. 19- 10/11, For The Expansion Of The City's E- Procurement System Of Solicitation Announcements And Document Fulfillment Services; Authorizing The Administration To Enter Into Negotiations With The Top- Ranked Proposer, The Public Group, LLC; And Should The Administration Not Be Successful In Negotiating An Agreement With The Top- Ranked Proposer, Authorizing Negotiations With The Second - Ranked Proposer, RFP Depot LLC D /B /A Bidsync; And Further Authorizing The Mayor And City Clerk To Execute An Agreement Upon Conclusion Of Successful Negotiations By The Administration. Key Intended Outcome Supported: Make City more business friendly. Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): N/A Issue: Shall the Mayor and the City Commission Adopt The Resolution? Item Summary /Recommendation: On March 9, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance of Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 19- 10/11, for the expansion the City's E- Procurement System of Solicitation Announcements and Document Fulfillment Services. RFP No. 19 -10/11 was issued on March 15, 2011, with an original opening date of April 18, 2011. Five (5) addenda were issued which changed the opening date to May 4, 2011. A pre - proposal conference to provide information to the proposers submitting a response was held on March 31, 2011. BidNet issued bid notices to 158 prospective proposers, BidSync issued bid notices to 2,971 prospective proposers of which 64 viewed the notice, and 45 proposers were notified via e-mail, which resulted in the receipt of eleven (11) proposals. On May 26, 2011, the City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No. 131 -2011, appointed an Evaluation Committee ( "the Committee ") which convened on June 23, 2011 to shortlist the proposer. The Committee recommended inviting the three (3) top ranked proposes to provide Scripted Demos: The Public Group, RFP Depot d /b /a BidSync, and IOS Partners, Inc. In addition to the Committee members, 17 staff members representing Procurement, Parks and Recreation, Building, Public Works, Property Management, Police, Fire, Fleet, Sanitation, and CIP Departments were called to be part of the Evaluation Support Team, to assist the Committee during the evaluation process by providing feedback on the functionality of the proposed systems. On September 15, 2011, all Evaluation Support Team members were invited to attend the Scripted Demos scheduled with the three (3) short listed proposers. Each proposer was scheduled for a one (1) hour Scripted Demo session, and for a 30 minute Questions and Answer session. On September 16, 2011, the Committee convened to receive feedback from the Support Team Chairpersons on the functionality of the system proposed by each short listed proposer. The Committee also received presentations from the three (3) short listed proposers. The Committee further discussed the proposer's qualifications, experience, cost to the vendors and the City, and scored the short listed proposers accordingly. The Committee unanimously recommended entering into negotiations with the top - ranked firm, the Public Group. THE ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDS ADOPTING THE RESOLUTION Advisory Board Recommendation: Financial Information: Source of Funds: Amount Account Approved 1 2 OBPI Total Financial Impact Summary: City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: Gus Lopez, extension 6641 Sign -Offs: Department rector Assistant C' anager City Manager GL _ PDW JMG adifi*■ T:\AGENDA 711 \10 - 19 - 11 \RFP 19 - 10 - 11 - E Procurement - Summary.doc AGENDA ITEM �N IMF N AME to-tq-u DAT MIAMIBEACH City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager DATE: October 19, 2011 AP SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER PERTAINING TO THE RANKING OF PROPOSALS PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NO. 19- 10/11, FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE CITY'S E- PROCUREMENT SYSTEM OF SOLICITATION ANNOUNCEMENTS AND DOCUMENT FULFILLMENT SERVICES; AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP - RANKED PROPOSER, THE PUBLIC GROUP, LLC; AND SHOULD THE ADMINISTRATION NOT BE SUCCESSFUL IN NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TOP - RANKED PROPOSER, AUTHORIZING NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE SECOND - RANKED PROPOSER, RFP DEPOT LLC D /B /A BIDSYNC; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT UPON CONCLUSION OF SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATIONS BY THE ADMINISTRATION. ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION Adopt the Resolution. KEY INTENDED OUTCOME SUPPORTED Make City more business friendly. BACKGROUND The City has been utilizing various vendors for solicitation announcements and document fulfillment services since January 2000. The Mayor and City Commission (the City Commission) at its December 19, 1999 meeting, approved a contract award to Information on Demand, pursuant to St. Johns County Contract No. 99/93, to manage the City's vendor database and to issue solicitation announcements for the City's Procurement Division. Subsequent to the City's contract award, Information on Demand changed its name to DemandStar.com, subsequently; DemandStar.com was purchased by Onvia, and changed their name to DemandStar by Onvia (hereinafter referred to as DemandStar). Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 2 It was anticipated that by contracting with DemandStar, the City would receive a greater number of responses to solicitations, as vendors from across the state of Florida would be merged with the City's current vendors to provide for a more competitive environment. The results showed that there was no significant increase in the number of responses received on solicitations prior to DemandStar, when compared to the number of responses received since the implementation of DemandStar. Since the utilization of DemandStar's services failed to increase the number of responses to the City's solicitations, on May 29, 2002, the City Commission authorized the issuance of an RFP for an E- Procurement System of Solicitation Announcements and Document Fulfillment Services. The City Commission at its January 8, 2003 meeting, accepted the City Manager's recommendation pertaining to the ranking of proposals, and authorized negotiations with BidNet. BidNet's contract for providing solicitation announcements will expire at the end of September 2011, with no options for renewal. Additionally, the City has been utilizing the solicitation announcements of BidSync at no cost to the City or its vendors. BidSync has recently requested that the City allow them to charge the City's vendors a subscription cost of $125 annually. The Administration has not approved BidSync's request, and has advised them that we would be issuing an RFP for an E- Procurement System that would include solicitation announcements. We will also continue to post on the City's website at no cost. ANALYSIS Based on the advancements in the internet, technology has made a significant impact on a public sector entity's ability to acquire products and services more effectively and efficiently. More and more public sector entities are moving toward E- Procurement, which is the process of using electronic technologies for purchasing goods and services. Expansion of the City's current E- Procurement system offers an opportunity for the City to transition more functions from a traditional paper -based process to a real -time electronic platform to improve customer service and reduce costs. Anticipated benefits may include: 1. Cost savings through reduced data entry in procurement systems; 2. Savings in cycle time within the procurement process; 3. The ability to negotiate best value with suppliers; 4. Increased opportunities for streamlining and re- engineering business processes; 5. The potential for improving and monitoring supplier relationships; and 6. Fewer misunderstandings between procurement staff and departments. E- Procurement provides information and streamlines processes, allowing procurement professionals to focus on more strategic issues. E- Procurement covers a variety of options, which have been outlined in the following scope of services: Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 3 SCOPE OF SERVICES The E- Procurement system proposed should offer a high degree of availability (24 hours /day, 7 days /week), and performance to support the level of service needed by City departments, at no cost to the City. The E- Procurement system scope of services may include, but not be limited to the following Y P Y 9 functions. The City reserves the right to have more than one provider of E- Procurement services. Therefore, not all E- Procurement system providers must provide all the functions set forth below. The E- Procurement system is expected to have the following features: 1. Publish solicitations on -line. Solicitations include Invitation for Bids (Bids), Request for Proposals (RFPs), Request for Qualifications (RFQs), Request for Letters of Interest (RFLIs), and Invitation for Quotes (IFQs). In each solicitation, a scope of service will be made available for immediate viewing. The detailed scope of service will prevent vendors from obtaining a bid package for which they cannot supply the required services or commodities. Benefits: Provides important information on business opportunities at no cost to the public and businesses, and available 24 hours /day, 7 days /week. 2. Publish contract awards on -line. Applies to bid openings as well as bid tabulated results. Awards published online should include protest information, such as where and how the protest should be filed. Benefits: Provides important information relative to results available 24 hours /day, 7 days /week. 3. Implement a reverse auction process for the acquisition of goods and services. Reverse auction is a strategy that will be used for spend management, as part of strategic sourcing and supply management activities. Bidding performed in real -time via the Internet results in a dynamic, competitive process. This helps achieve rapid downward price pressure that is not normally attainable using traditional paper -based bidding processes. Benefits: Provides for Increased competition; transparency; and reduction in cost. 4. Issue solicitation /bid announcements electronically. Businesses receive e-mail notification of procurement opportunities for the commodity codes which they have registered for. Benefits: Expedited process of issuing solicitations to the right suppliers /vendors. 5. Create an on -line library of relevant policies and procedures to include: Ordinances, resolutions, sections of the City Code, Florida Statutes, and Federal law as applied to federally funded projects. Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 4 Benefits: Provides valuable information on policies and procedures that are applicable to all solicitations. Must be available for on- screen viewing and downloading. 6. Electronic filing of written communications. E -mail copies of prospective bidders' written communications that fall under the City's Cone of Silence requirements. This feature involves providing an electronic copy of all e-mail communication between procurement staff, proposers, or respondents to RFQs, RFPs and bids, thus satisfying the requirements of the Cone of Silence. Benefits: User friendly, speeds up internal processes, and ensures compliance with Cone of Silence requirements. 7. Enable interactive completion and submission of forms on -line. Form field with scroll -down menus with valid options, thus ensuring correct information is filled in. Benefits: Provides an efficient and effective alternative to providing required information in an expeditious manner, thus reducing the likelihood of disqualifying bidders on technicalities. 8. Accommodate online bidding and proposal submissions. Establish interactive reverse online auctions and make bid tabulations available for real -time online viewing. Benefits: Expedited processes relative to procurement of needed goods and services. Also, ease of obtaining documents should result in increased number of responses. 9. Online acquisition of small purchases (less than $5,000). This feature allows departments to purchase online from approved City vendors any purchase for goods or services via an electronic means. Benefits: Speeds up internal purchasing processes. Empowers Department Directors. Reduces costs associated with manual form processes. 10. Establish on -line reference centers tailored for internal and external users. Create a Help Desk. Make a "Virtual Vendor Information Center." Provide departmental instructions, staff responsibilities and contact information, and checklists. Publish frequently asked questions (FAQs) with answers. Benefits: Sets up a communication link for obtaining assistance. Creates an evaluation means to learn about effectiveness and obtain suggestions for improved service. Provides useful information and guidance 24 hours /day, 7 days /week. 11. Advertise surplus vehicle auctions online. This feature involves posting notices of the time and place of upcoming City auctions, which includes: 1) police confiscated items; 2) City surplus items; and 3) City vehicles. Benefits: Makes information widely available to the public and promotes electronic business transactions with the City. Also provides the potential for increased general fund revenue; police confiscated fund revenue, and increased revenue for the vehicle replacement program. Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 5 12. Publish a list of current the City contracts online including standard details. This option should include information on current contract status, expiration date, and any options for renewal. i internal and Provides a business forecast tool which readily accessible to inte a a d external interested parties. 13. Make available information and links to resources for businesses. This feature involves listing upcoming events for businesses (such as seminars and workshops), and providing links to minority and small business association websites. Benefits: Resources for businesses are publicized and presented in a single location, thus made more accessible to the public and business owners, with encouragement for greater participation by small firms. 14. Publish on -line standard shells for solicitations and contracts to include standard - clause dictionary, and definitions. This feature involves a clarification of commonly used procurement terminology, and the publishing of contract and solicitation templates on the website. Also involves timely posting of any revisions, additions, and deletions to existing legislation immediately upon adoption by the City Commission. Benefits: Assures internal consistency, currency, error reduction and makes contract language and formats accessible to the vendors. 15. Make various databases accessible to City departments. Include databases for registered vendors, vendor applications, Architectural and Engineering firms, debarred and /or suspended firms, vendor performance information, vendors -in- arrears to the City, vendors with current occupational licenses, state of Florida, Secretary of State (for corporate information), and State of Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation (for licensing information). Benefits: Aid to compliance verification and monitoring. Expands staff awareness and empowerment. Works toward ensuring checks and balances in the procurement process. 16. Publish available procurement training information. This feature involves announcing possible future training sessions the e- Procurement application (depending on its features and complexity), and various other procurement issues (i.e. "How To Do Business with the City ", "Understanding Public Sector Procurement ", "Understanding City Ordinances and Regulations ", targeting both City employees and vendors. Benefits: Identifies and provides training opportunities. Facilitates access and use of essential Procurement - related applications and resources. RFP PROCESS On March 9, 2011, the Mayor and City Commission approved the issuance of Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 19- 10/11, for the expansion the City's E- Procurement System of Solicitation Announcements and Document Fulfillment Services. Commission Memorandum RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 6 RFP No. 19 -10/11 was issued on March 15, 2011, with an original opening date of April 18, 2011. Five (5) addenda were issued which changed the opening date to May 4, 2011. A pre - proposal conference to provide information to the proposers submitting a response was held on March 31, 2011. The purpose of this Request for Proposals (RFP) was to select a qualified firm to provide and expand the City's E- Procurement System of Solicitation Announcements and Document Fulfillment Services. BidNet issued bid notices to 158 prospective proposers, BidSync issued bid notices to 2,971 prospective proposers of which 64 viewed the notice, and 45 proposers were notified via e- mail, which resulted in the receipt of the following twelve (12) proposals: 1. Ariba 2. Enporion 3. Info Tech, Inc / Bidx. Com 4. The Public Group, LLC 5. ESM Solutions Corporation 6. K2 Sourcing, Inc 7. lonwave Technologies, Inc 8. E- Three, Inc 9. SciQuest, Inc 10. RFP Depot d /b /a Bidsync 11. IOS Partners, Inc 12. IPT - Interactive Procurement Technologies by BidNet On May 18, 2011, the Procurement Office notified Ariba that their proposal was deemed non- responsive because they failed to provide the cost proposal and other material documentation and consequently will not receive further consideration. Therefore, eleven (11) proposals were presented to the Evaluation Committee members for further review. On May 26, 2011, the City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No. 131 -2011, appointed an Evaluation Committee ( "the Committee ") consisting of the following individuals: • Carlos DaCruz, Office Associate V, Parks and Recreation Department • Marta Fernandez - Rubio, Procurement Coordinator, Procurement Division • Nelson Martinez, System Support Manager, IT Department • Barry Meltz, Director of Procurement Services, School Board of Miami -Dade County. • Silvia Winitzky, Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate , Alternates • Mathew Garwick, Director of Housing Programs /Operations, Housing Authority of Miami Beach • Lily Noches, Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate • Grissette Roque Marcos, Executive Director, Miami Beach Visitor and Convention Authority Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 7 In addition to the Committee members, 17 staff members representing Procurement, Parks and Recreation, Building, Public Works, Property Management, Police, Fire, Fleet, Sanitation, and CIP Departments were called to be part of the Evaluation Support Team to assist the Committee during the evaluation process by providing feedback on the functionality of the proposed systems. The Evaluation Support Team was requested to develop a "Scripted Demo" and elect a chairperson and co- chairperson to provide feedback to the Evaluation Committee after receiving presentations from the "short- listed" proposers. On June 23, 2011, the Committee convened and a quorum was attained. Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate, Silvia Winitzky, was unable to participate. The Committee members were provided with Performance Evaluation Surveys and additional information provided by the responsive proposers. The following Evaluation Criteria was used to evaluate and rank the proposers: 1. Successful past performance in the implementation of E- Procurement system 30 points. 2. Cost to the City's vendors for utilizing the E- Procurement system (the lower the cost to vendors, the greater the allocation of points) 20 points. 3. Approach and Methodology for implementing and maintaining the 25 points. E- Procurement system 4. Number of subscribers (vendors, contractors, firms) in the system 15 points. 5. Added value benefits for City's vendors who participate in the E- Procurement 10 points. system The Committee discussed their individual perceptions of the proposer's qualifications, experience, price, and competence, and ranked the proposers accordingly. SHORLISTED RANKINGS Marta LOW RFP# 19 - 10/11 FOR E - Carlos Fernandez Nelson Mathew AGGREGATE PROCUREMENT SYSTEM DaCruz Rubio Martinez Garwick TOTALS THE PUBLIC GROUP, LLC (84) 3 (90) 1 (88) 1 (94) 1 (6) 1 RFP DEPOT d/b /a BIDSYNC (82) 4 (84) 2 (85) 2 (91) 3 (11) 2 IOS PARTNERS. INC (89) 1 (83) 3 (80) 5 (93) 2 (11) 2 ENPORION (85) 2 (72) 7 (82) 4 (85) 4 (17) 4 IPT - INTERACTIVE PROCUREMENT TECHNOLOGIES BY BIDNET (77) 5 (73) 5 (84) 3 (81) 5 (18) 5 IONWAVE TECHNOLOGIES, INC (75) 6 (79) 4 (73) 7 (78) 6 (23) 6 INFO TECH. INC / BIDX.COM (73) 7 (73) 5 (79) 6 (77) 7 (25) 7 K2 SOURCING, INC (59) 9 (64) 10 (57) 8 (71) 8 (35) 8 SCIQUEST, INC (65) 8 (70) 8 (47) 9 (37) 11 (36) 9 ESM SOLUTIONS CORPORATION (47) 11 (68) 9 (45) 10 (54) 9 (39) 10 E- THREE, INC (54) 10 (60) 11 (36) 11 (49) 10 (42) 11 The Committee recommended inviting the three (3) top ranked proposes to provide Scripted Demos: The Public Group, RFP Depot d /b /a BidSync, and IOS Partners, Inc. Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 8 SCRIPTED DEMOS The Evaluation Support Team members spent many hours in the development of the Scripted Demos to be performed by the short listed proposers. The Evaluation Support Team convened on July 8, 2011 and July 20, 2011 in order to develop the Scripted Demos, which would be provided to the short listed proposers for demonstration and the Evaluation Form to be utilized to evaluate said Scripted Demos. Please see Appendix "A" for the Scripted Demo and Appendix "B" for the Evaluation Form. On September 15, 2011, all Evaluation Support Team members were invited to attend the Scripted Demos scheduled with the three (3) short listed proposers. Each proposer was scheduled for a one (1) hour Scripted Demo session and for a 30 minute Questions and Answer (Q & A) session in order to address any issues that were not covered during the Scripted Demo sessions. After the Scripted Demos, The Evaluation Support Team members convened to finalize the report to be presented to the Evaluation Committee. On September 16, 2011, the Committee convened to receive feedback from the Support Team Chairpersons on the functionality of the system proposed by each short listed proposer. During said meeting, the Committee also received presentations from the three (3) short listed proposers. The Committee further discussed the proposer's qualifications, experience, cost to the vendors and the City, and scored the short listed proposers accordingly. The tabulated results are the following: FINAL RANKINGS Marta LOW RFP# 19 -10/11 FOR E- Carlos Fernandez Rafael Mathew AGGREGATE PROCUREMENT SYSTEM DaCruz Rubio Vitali Garwick TOTALS THE PUBLIC GROUP, LLC (85) 1 (95) 1 (89) 1 (96) 1 (4) 1 RFP DEPOT d/b /a BIDSYNC (80) 2 (90) 2 (83) 2 (87) 3 (9) 2 IOS PARTNERS. INC (70) 3 (75) 3 (73) 3 (88) 2 (11) 3 A motion to recommend proposers as ranked was presented by Mathew Garwich, seconded by Carlos DaCruz, and unanimously accepted by all committee members to recommend entering into negotiations with the top- ranked firm, the Public Group. THE PUBLIC GROUP, LLC The Public Group, LLC (herein referred to as TPG) has proposed the E- Procurement solution, "Public Purchase ", integrated with the vendor solution "Public Vendor ", contract solution, "Public Contract ", and the surplus solution, "Public Surplus ". TPG is proposing a web -based software as a Solution model which is a turn -key approach. TPG has been providing services to government agencies for over 15 years and more than 2,350 agencies depend upon TPG services for E- Procurement and surplus property reallocation /online auction solutions. Agencies of all sizes and types utilize Public Purchase, including the City of Livermore, City of Port Arthur, Education Service Center Region XI (Texas), Sacramento County, and San Joaquin County, City of Milpitas, City of Olathe, City of Palm Bay, County of Northampton, Riverside County. Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 9 Public Purchase and Public Vendor were developed in -house by TPG software developers and enhancements are continually developed and released based on trends in the procurement sector, input from clients, and internally identified needs. Highlights of the applications are as follows: • Fully integrated vendor management and E- Procurement solutions. • Agency- defined bid templates. • Bid Notifications. • Electronic Sealed Bids. • Quick Quotes. • Online Auction Service for Disposing of Surplus Property. • Contract Management functionality. • Electronic Award Notification. • Electronic Bid Bonds. • Access to all reports and receipt feature. • 7 -year audit trail and internal reallocation. • All upgrades and Hosting of software. • Intuitive, easy to use feature and functionality. • Simplification of bidding process for agencies and vendors. • Public Surplus: easy to use and the largest buyer database available exclusively for government surplus to earn maximum revenue. • Increase competitiveness through our Reverse Auction while lowering the cost of commodities. • Agencies that use Public Purchase are able to manage and keep their own vendor management absolutely FREE. The TGP project team includes individuals with years of experience in E- Procurement, online surplus auction service and agency support services, and individuals who have worked in procurement for government agencies. The Public Group's system does not have any restrictions on limits or number of files, file size or file type. They have 600 registered government agencies and over 100,000 vendors in their database. Eric Heaps is the Chief Operating Officer and has over 15 years of experience developing and implementing online auction and E- Procurement solutions. Mr. Heaps has facilitated the implementation of E- Procurement and online auction services for hundreds of agencies, including the City of Houston, the City of Milpitas, the City of Tucson, and the State of California. Jarad Van Wagoner is the Director of Agency Relations and has over 15 years of experience in Federal government finance and procurement. Mr. Van is responsible for agency relation including business development, solution implementation, training, and customer support. REVENUE GENERATOR There is no charge to the City of Miami Beach to utilize Public Purchase and Public Vendor. However, the City at its discretion may choose to charge vendors participating or download fees as a means to offset procurement costs. Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 10 Public Purchase enables public agencies to post, manage and award solicitations, automatic bid tabulation, document and form libraries, plan holders lists, contractor's lists and bid bonds. Public Vendor enables public agencies to manage information and task related to their vendors such as self- registration, robust search capabilities, task management, internal notes, and document and form management. City Cost: $0.00 Vendor Cost: $0.00 Public Contract: It has standard fees based on the number of users. There are two (2) types of users, full access and view only. Public Contract enables public agencies to manage information and tasks related to their contract. Services include expenditure tracking, automated task notification, automated renewal or re -bid information, internal notes, public access link, and document and form management. Full Access User: $100 (Monthly) View Only User: $ 25 (Monthly) Public Surplus Online Surplus Auction Application: The standard fees are based on sold assets. There are no advertising fees, marketing fees, set -up fees, training fees, or upgrade fees. Public Surplus enables public agencies to dispose of assets through internal reallocation or public auction via online auction marketplace at www.publicsurplus.com. Feature includes bid deposits, automatic auction extension, 7 -year audit trail, payment collection, asset tracking, specialty buyer databases, and integrated marketing trough buyer interest lists. Sales on Commission on sold assets are as follows: Buyer's Premium Charged to Buyer $10% Commission Charged to the City of Miami Beach $0% Under this pricing strategy, TPG will collect payment on behalf of the City of Miami Beach, and will retain the 10% buyer's premium collected as compensation. The net proceeds will then be remitted to the City of Miami Beach. Collection of Fees TGP will collect payment on behalf of the City of Miami Beach, and will retain the 10% buyer's premium collected as compensation. The net proceeds will then be remitted to the City of Miami Beach. Vendors under the current provider are being charged $49.95 /annually for this service. Based on a conservative estimate of 3,000 vendors registered with BidNet /BidSync and that the City will charge the same rate of $49.95 annually, the City will generate approximately $89,910, after the 10% charge has been retained by The Public Group, LLC. It must be noted that vendors wanting to do business with the City of Miami Beach, will always have the option of visiting the City's website and obtain bidding information free from our website. However the City's website currently does not have the capability of sending automatic notifications to inform vendors of the City's and other business opportunities. The Public Group, LLC will notify all current City vendors of the new services and therefore, during the first year of service, the City will experience a high volume of vendor registrations. Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 11 On the other hand, if the City elects charging for the downloading of plans and specifications for high dollar amount construction projects the City could also generate revenues. The City has historically charged $20.00 for each CD containing plans and specification related to high dollar construction projects. In order to obtain the CD, the vendor must drive to City Hall, pay for parking, go to the City's Procurement Office for a receipt of form, and Finance Department to pay for the CD. This year alone, the City has collected $1,900, which indicates that 95 vendors have requested CDs with plans and specifications for the City's construction bids. Just in the past few months, the City has utilized the FTP website to post plans and specifications online. The disadvantage of providing plans and specifications via FTP website is that documents are only available for a 72 hour window and after that the documents are automatically deleted. This requires constant posting of the plans and specifications which is very time consuming since there are usually numerous documents related to these high volume construction projects. The Public Group, LLC indicated that some agencies charge a sliding scale based on the amount of the construction projects such us $50.00 for construction projects under $500.00; $100.00 for projects between $500.00 - $1,000.000; and $250.00 for projects over $1,000.000. Additionally, the Procurement Office contacted several government agencies to determine how much to charge for the distribution of plans and specifications. To illustrate, • The Port of Miami charges $50 for a regular contract with technical and non technical specifications of 24 x 36 drawings and a CD. • The City of Miami charges $20 per specification booklet and an additional cost for construction plans which varies from $10 to $20. • The City of Coral Gables charges $30 for regular packages and $50 for packages with plans. They also provide a CD for $10 with all the documents including the plans. • City of Tamarac charges from $25 to $90 depending on the complexity of the plans and project cost. Under this scenario, if the City were to charge $30 for the download of plans and specifications, vendors will be able to download the information from the convenience of their computers without having to drive to City Hall, pay for parking, and visit the Procurement and Finance Departments. Vendors would most likely be willing to pay the $30 in order to obtain the plans of specification to bid on a million dollar project. Based on this year's information and with the assumption that The Public Group, LLC would retain 10% of the total amount of $30 collected from the downloading of plans and specifications, the City could have generated $2,565. ADDED VALUE BENEFITS The public procurement process, which is an open and competitive, transparent process, has again served the City to provide the lowest and best proposer for this RFP process, as it has in the past. This RFP has resulted in the recommendation of a proposer which will provide the basic services to the City at no cost and will generate revenue for the City. The following table provides a comparative analysis of the added value benefits that The Public Group, LLC's Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 12 system will bring to the City with the current service provider, ITP Interactive Procurement Technologies by BidNet. SYSTEM FEATURES SYSTEM FEATURES WITH NEW VENDOR WITH CURRENT VENDOR The Public Group, LLC ITP Interactive Procurement Technologies by BidNet Cost to the City $0.00 $0.00 Cost to the Vendors $0.00 $49.95 (annually) Vendors can register for the City of Vendors register for the Miami Beach specifically entire State Publish Solicitations on -line Publish Contract Awards on -line Reverse Auction �I Issue solicitations on -line (vendors) Create on -line library of relevant policies and procedures Electronic Filing or written communications Enable interactive completion of submission forms on -line Accommodate online bidding and proposal submission Online acquisition of small purchase (less than $5,000) Advertise surplus vehicle and other auctions online Publish a list of City Contracts Add -on optional module Make available information and links to resources for business Publish online standard shells for solicitations and contracts Make various databases accessible to City Department Publish available procurement training information Number of subscribers (vendors) Over 100,000 Over 100,000 Number of Agencies 600 500 Revenue Generating Capability Yes. Estimated at $89,910 $0.00 Benefits to the City • No cost to the City for basic program • Advertise and manage surplus items thru online auctions at no cost • Capability of doing Reverse Auctions at cost since it's part of the basic program. • Manage the vendor registration for the City Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 13 • Greater transparency and accountability for all departments: Procurement will oversee all quotes /reverse auctions performed by each department and will have the audit trail of all procured transactions for the threshold dollar amount given to departments • Greater competition which usually results in lower cost • Potential to be a revenue generating system if the City elect to charge for registration or downloading of documents • Interactive completion of submission forms on -line • Provide vendors and contracts databases to City Departments • No restrictions in the number, type or size of files being stored in the system. • Online submission of documents • Easy to communicate with the vendors and share information with all vendors • Track and maintain vendor information such as W9, NIGP Commodity Codes, Equal Benefits compliance, or other business designation such as veteran, women business owned, minority business owned, or local preference Benefits to the Vendors • No cost to the vendors • Vendors can register only for City's projects for free or with any other agency registered with The Public Group for free • Vendors are automatically notified of all projects of their interest being advertised by the City of any other agency that they have registered with. • Easy bidding procedures thru reverse auction • Track competition prices in real time thru reverse auction • Downloading of documents in a timely manner without having leaving the office • Vendors can submit questions and view questions submitted by other vendors • Vendors can be notified of additional bidding opportunities by any other agency that is not currently registered with The Public Group. This is an added value services provide at an annual charge of $399.00. This service also provides the vendor with market analysis and targeted available searches for the market of their interest. This includes receiving bidding opportunities from over 8,700 government agencies across the nation. Reverse Auction: Total Transparency in Real Time Reverse auctions take about the same time as using sealed bids, the vendors do all the data entry, and the system tabulates the bids automatically, which eliminates the need for formal bid tabulation and any potential human errors. Reverse auctions are conducted online in real time, thus enabling suppliers to track and bid down against competitions. The process ensures the best possible price lowest cost to government agencies while all the terms and conditions are determined before the auction begins. The following have been identified as some of the benefits that reverse auctions could bring to governments: • A shorter solicitation cycle: eliminates the scoring, tabulating, and evaluation of responses. • Greater price competition which result in lower expenditures for the agency. • Real Time Transactions which allow vendors to track competitors in real time. • Greater flexibility for vendors since they are allowed to submit multiple bids. Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 14 • Open and Fair opportunity to all vendors which show the willingness to use different supplies. • Transparency and fewer protests GoPro (Government Procurement) in its June /July 2011 publication, presented the following case studies to reveal the recent success of reverse auctions: Knox County's Police vehicles Case Study Knox County's Purchasing Division began planning its first reverse auction in August 2010. The Purchasing Division identified 22 police vehicles in the Sheriffs Office budget that could potentially be acquired through this competitive method. After conversations with several other local government agencies, the Purchasing Division was able to recruit two additional agencies - the Blount County Sheriffs Department and the City of Knoxville - to compete their needs with Knox County. The resulting multi- agency cooperative bidding event was for 164 Police Interceptor Vehicles. Although the Knox County reverse auction stretched over 21 days as required by law, anyone could start bidding immediately as soon as it opened or anytime during the three -week period. Most activity happened in the last hour. On Nov. 2, 2010, at 2 p.m., the state's first agency- managed on -line reverse auction closed and resulted in measurable savings for three local governments. Five different vendors submitted a total of nine bids with Alexander Lincoln- Mercury Ford submitting the winning bid. The price dropped $645,000 from the auction opening for purchase of Knox County police vehicles, and the final bid came in $2,300 under the state prices per vehicle; the county saved enough to purchase extra vehicles. Knox County Purchasing Director Hugh Holt says there are a lot of administrative savings in reverse auctions, and time can be saved on the back -end related to follow -up with vendors. "The vendors saw it happen before their eyes," he said. "It's the most transparent bidding process a public agency can use." There is less chance of a protest - and the resulting huge administrative expense - because everything is based on cost. The Maricopa County Flour Case Study Maricopa County, Ariz., asked its vendor of bulk flour to lower its price of 38.5 cents a pound. The county uses almost 2 million pounds of flour a year to provide bread to about 8,000 county jail inmates, and Matthew Bauer of the county procurement office contended that lower gas prices should translate into a lower floor price. However, the supplier would not budge on the price. Bidding on Maricopa County's flour contract was slow at first, but a flurry of activity in the final hours - eight different prices from four vendors - concluded with a winning bid of 20.5 cents per pound. Ironically, the winning bid came from the same supplier who had earlier refused to budge on price. The county has repeated the reverse auction for bulk flour every six months since then, thus allowing the changing market to dictate the low bidder and the price. In three years, Maricopa County has saved $976,000 on bulk flour through reverse auctions. "Reverse auctions keep Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 15 the price competitive so we know we are getting the right price for the flour," says Bauer, who is now procurement supervisor for Maricopa County. Maricopa County has also begun using reverse auctions for other products ranging from on- site drug testing kits to inmate shoes and canned fruit and beans. Bauer estimates the county has saved more than $2 million in the last year and a half using reverse auctions instead of competitive sealed bids, which only give vendors one chance to provide the lowest bid without knowing what any competitors are bidding We have used reverse auctions for commodities when it is easy to bid apples to apples," said Bauer. "It's not the best type of procurement for specifications that are not well- defined or if there are many different products out there to fit your needs." For example, Maricopa County tried unsuccessfully to use a reverse auction to buy inmate mattresses to supply its six jails and detention facilities. The range of products and varied specifications made it impossible for vendors to compete fairly. State of Arizona Department of Education Print Job Case Study Reverse auction successes in Arizona include a State of Arizona Department of Education print job contract that was awarded at $1,254 below budget, or 20 percent below the opening price. In another reverse auction, Arizona's Department of Transportation saved 5.2 percent on the purchase of seven heavy -duty chainsaws. The auction involved multiple small vendors throughout Arizona, and the contract specified the product had to be delivered instead of picked up, which saved shipping costs. In 24 bids submitted for Arizona Department of Game and Fish all- terrain vehicles, the contract was awarded at 13.6 percent below opening bid. One way the reverse auctions saved time for Arizona was by shortening the time the auction is open, from 14 days to a 5 -to -7 -day period. The Arizona statute does not specify a minimum period of time the auction must be open. Arizona also had good feedback from participating vendors, who are happy with the process. "They appreciate the fact that they don't have to make a decision in a vacuum," said Clark Arizona was also careful in providing specifications, terms and conditions before the auction began. "Everyone has agreed to terms and conditions up front," said Clark. CITY MANAGER'S DUE DILIGENCE After considering the review and recommendation of City staff, the City Manager exercised his due diligence and is recommending that the Mayor and the City Commission authorize negotiations with the top- ranked proposer, The Public Group, LLC; and should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an Agreement with the top- ranked proposer, authorize negotiations with the second - ranked proposer, RFP Depot d /b /a Bidsync; further authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement upon the conclusion of successful negotiations by the Administration. Commission Memorandum — RFP #19 -10 -11 E- Procurement October 19, 2011 Page 16 CONCLUSION The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach, Florida accept the recommendation of the City Manager pertaining to the ranking of proposals pursuant to Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 19- 10/11, for the Expansion of the City's E- Procurement System of Solicitation Announcements and Document Fulfillment Services; authorize the Administration to enter into negotiations with the top- ranked proposer, The Public Group, LLC; and should the Administration not be successful in negotiating an Agreement with the top- ranked proposers, authorize negotiations with the second - ranked proposer, RFP Depot d /b /a Bidsync ; further authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an agreement upon the conclusion of successful negotiations by the Administration. T:WGENDA\2011 \10 -19 -11 \RFP- 19 -09 -10 - E- Procurement Memo.doc • tt /9, /P P&ivL/ K Scripted Demos for E- Procurement Short listed Proposers Pursuant to RFP #19 -10/11 Home Page For Vendors (5 minutes) 1. Show vendor log in. 2. Briefly describe the vendor registration process: • Account set up to include the information requested from the vendor such us phone number, address, e-mail, payment accepted (credit card or check only). • NIGP code selection: Demonstrate how many vendors you have already registered for commodities such as electrical supplies, auto parts, or janitorial supplies. 3. Demonstrate how vendor access the account. 4. Demonstrate how vendor searches for bid opportunities, including quotes. 5. Demonstrate how vendor submit quotes, sealed bids online and how they remind unopened until the opening date. 6. How the vendor is notified of the solicitation /quote opportunity 7. Show Vendor Help Desk from another agency. 8. Show list of bid opportunities for public viewing (no subscription) If available. 9. What information to make available to the vendors from the City? 10. Show any other added value the system will provide to the registered vendors. 11. Show if vendors are able to see comments from users on their performance. Are vendors rated in the system? For End User (5 minutes) 1. Show end user log in. 2. Demonstrate how the end user can search for quotes which have been issued for the same commodities or type of items by a different end user /department. 3. Demonstrate how the end user can search previous bids /quotes /RFP by commodity codes or keyword search. 4. Show if end users can view vendor performance comments or ratings from other users or organizations. 5. Show how the system flags an existing City of Miami Beach Contract in place when an end user enters a commodity or vendor. Is the system able to show all contracts available for each vendor? 6. Can the system track warranty information on each product purchased. 7. Does the system show or track mean time between failures on each product? General (5 minutes) 1. Demonstrate' if the system proposed is capable of showing our solicitations /quotes opportunities in our City's website. 2. Demonstrate if the system proposed has the capability of linking to our website to direct vendors to the City Clerk's Office to place a Public Record Request by e-mail. 3. Demonstrate if the system proposed has the capability of linking to our website to direct vendors to retrieve Ordinances or any other information posted in the Procurement website. 4. How many user licenses are included in the initial package? How much for each additional licenses? Publish Solicitations Online (15 minutes) Demonstrate how to advertise a Bid /Quote /RFP /RFQ, showing all steps involved, including: 1. Assign Number/Title, pre -bid meeting, deadline for questions, bid opening date. 2. Show if the system allows for paper submission and /or electronic submission. 3. Vendor Selection. 4. Attach Specifications (ITB /RFP Document). 5. Save bid for release at a later date. 6. Demonstrate if the system has the capacity for uploading construction plans and specifications. 7. Demonstrate if the system has the capacity of charging a fee for the retrieval of construction plans. 8. Is the system capable of interfacing with Eden? Can the system use our existing vendor ID from Eden? 9. Release Bid for public viewing. 10. Create a Public Notice advertisement to be released to a newspaper. 11. Show how vendors are notified of new bid opportunities. 12. Issue an Addendum. 13. Issue additional information, not to be recognized as an addendum. 14. How are vendors notified, do all vendors get a notifications, only vendors that viewed, downloaded a document) 15. Show how new vendors can be invited and how the system will notify them that they are being requested to register and participate in this bid. 16. Revise Due Date. 17. Show how vendors can submit questions online, if available. 18. Demonstrate if the system has the capacity of uploading and providing stream audio minutes of pre -bid meetings. Indicate any limitations, if any. 19. Provide overview of alerts and notifications handled by the system (question has been received, pre -bid meeting reminders, etc.) 20. Show vendor activity reports: • Number of vendors that viewed or downloaded the document • Howe many addenda were issued; • Show the plandholder list; 21. Show how to receive sealed bids online. 22. Show how to advertise bid tabulation created by the City. 23. Show how the system generates bid tabulations for line item bids. 24. Show how to advertise Award Information. 25. Show ability to add Custom Fields, if available. 26. Demonstrate if the system has the capability of setting up "private quotes" for vendor awarded under a specific contract by the City where only said vendor are invited to participate. 27. Show if the system can generate a "no bid" document message to be filled out by a vendor that has viewed a document but intends not to submit a bid. Reverse Auction Process (15 minutes) Demonstrate how to conduct reverse actions under the following scenario: The Sanitation, Property Management, and Fleet Departments are scheduling simultaneous reverse auction for g P 9 r 0 different commodity codes. Is the system capable? 1. Create three (3) different reserve auctions for items in the following commodity codes: • Electrical parts:T8 3 Foot Fluorescent Bulbs • Janitorial supplies • Auto parts 2. Show the initial invitation to vendors for one of this reverse auction. 3. Show if the system can invite additional vendors to participate in the reverse auctions. 4. Perform actual reserve auction. 5. Show how the bids are time stamped. 6. Show what happened if two (2) equal bids are received at the same time within the last seconds before the reserve auction is scheduled to close. 7. Show the award of the reverse auction. 8. Show how vendor is notified. RFP Evaluator Tool (5 minutes) 1. Demonstrate the process. 2. How the system assigns evaluators. 3. Show the instructions provided to the Evaluation Committee/ Panel. 4. Demonstrate the point calculation utilized. 5. Show the available reports. Databases (5 minutes) Contract Management: 1. Show how to search for contracts by number, description, expiration date. 2. Demonstrate if the system notifies of expiration dates on the contracts. 3. Demonstrate if the system is capable of generating and sending renewal letters. Vendor performance: 1. Show how end user can submit vendor performance form. 2. Show Reporting capability of the system on vendor performance Online Form Submission (5 minutes) 1. Provide Living Wage Forms as a sample and ask to provide a demonstration of how it is completed and submitted online. 2. Is the system capable of reporting on the applicability of Living Wage or Equal Benefits based on the answers provided by the vendors in the forms (i.e. if more than 50 employees). 3. Will this report or information be saved at least for a year so vendors don't have to submit this information every time? 4. Show if the system is able to generate standardized forms such us protest letters or award letters. 5. Show if the system can generate user check lists to include items which will determine the responsiveness of a bid and send letters to request omitted information or clarification based on this check list. APP RFP #19 -10/11 FOR E- PROCUREMENT SYSTEM — SCRIPTED DEMOS EVALUATION FORM Proposer's Name: Evaluation Support Team Support Team member's name: Date: 1. Home Page Poor Good Excellent Vendor Online registration Information collected on Vendor (Payment type...) Notification of bidding opportunities for vendors Added value to vendors Rating of Vendor's Performance End User Log in and Friendliness of system Query or search of previous quotes /bids Links between system and our website Overall presentation / view TOTAL SCORE: Notes: Poor Good Excellent 2. Publish Solicitations Online Friendliness of the process in general Attachments of Documents and Plans Vendor Outreach Attachment of audio minutes Alerts and notifications to vendors and end users Activity Reports Private Quotes availability Advertisement of Bid Awards and Tabulations Automatic "no bid" notification TOTAL SCORE: Notes: 1 2. Reverse Auction Poor Good Excellent Friendliness of the process in general Invitation to vendors Award to vendors Overall TOTAL SCORE: Notes: 3. Evaluator Tool Poor Good Excellent Friendliness of the process in general Reports TOTAL SCORE: Notes: 4. Database Poor Good Excellent Contract Management Capabilities Vendor Performance Capabilities TOTAL SCORE: Notes: 6. Online Form Submission Poor Good Excellent Online Form Submission Capabilities Standardization of Forms Check Lists Automated Letters TOTAL SCORE: Notes: 2