RFP Challenges and Creative Approaches

Swimming in the Deep End, Shark Free!

April 27, 2017

2

3

RFP

4

Protests

Failed Admin Review

Evaluation of CostsLimited

Responses

Changes in

Direction

RFP

5

Limited Responses

• Supplier Base is not Robust• Poor Market Research• Conflicting or Unclear Requirements• Inadequate Timeline to Respond• Service Expectations are Unrealistic

6

• Understand the Market• Conduct your Own Research

• Other States• Consortia• Alternatives – RFI, RFQC

• Validate the Requirements• What are they evaluating?• What are the potential items

that will require clarification?Limited Responses

7

• Timelines• Complexity• Costs• Risk

• Expectations• Business Model differs from the

Marketplace• Scope Creep• Only offered by one supplier

Limited Responses

8

Failed Admin Review

• Requested Forms that are not Required with the Solicitation

• Conflicting Use of Forms/Processes• Requesting Too Many Attachments• Requiring Alternate Processes to be

followed

Failed Admin Review

9

• For Electronic Bids:• Supplier General Information Form• Non-collusion Agreement• DOR Tax Compliance Form• Addendum Forms

Failed Admin Review

10

• Use of Conflicting or Alternate Processes• Suppliers are unclear and

potentially penalized• Inconsistent Responses• Risk of Protests

Failed Admin Review

11

• Too Many Attachments• Inconsistent Responses• Timeframe to Load Attachments• Difficult for Issuing Officer for

Admin Review• Difficult for Evaluators• Risk of Protests

Failed Admin Review

12

Your First Lifesaver!

1.Numbering of Requirements –• Mandatory• Mandatory Scored• Additional Scored Requirement

2.Following Established Processes in the Solicitation Process

3.Program Requirements Document (PRD)

Consistency

H

13

Evaluation of Costs

• Costs are Fixed Programmatic Costs• Poor Market Research• Competing Priorities• Not clearly captured• All or Nothing

Evaluation of Costs

14

• Fixed Programmatic Costs • Assess the Value of the Solution• Quantity Served, Number of

Sessions, etc.• Understand the Market

• Other States• Consortia• Market IndicesEvaluation of Costs

15

• Competing Priorities / All or Nothing Mindset• Validate Cost Methodology prior

to posting• Divide Points across the Costs

Methodology

Evaluation of Costs

16

• Clarifications to correct unclear requirements

• Multi-Award to correct unknown expectations

• Revised Cost Sheets After Bid Closing to capture forgotten items.

• Changing the Cost MethodologyEvaluation of Costs

17

Protests

• Poor Market Research• Conflicting or Unclear Requirements• Inadequate Timeline to Respond• Service Expectations are Unrealistic• Administrative Review was incomplete• Processes not Followed

Protests

18

• Follow the rules posted in the eRFP and the Georgia Procurement Manual.

• Do not award if you have incomplete or inconclusive documentation.

• Do not sacrifice time and award incorrectly.Protests

19

• Do not change Scoring or Award Methodology after the bid has closed.

• Do not use alternate posting or processes in creating a solicitation or award.

• Maintain complete documentation.Protests

20

21

Changes in Direction

• Market and Environment• Costs• Expectations• Legislature• Risk

Changes in Direction

22

• Changes in the Market and Environment can largely be handled with Addenda if the Solicitation is still open.*

• Changes in Budget/Anticipated Costs may require halting a solicitation.

Changes in Direction

23

• Changes in Expectations may be handled with Addenda as needed or may require pulling the solicitation while you reassess.

• Legislative Changes may alter goals and/or solutions.

• Risks have to be evaluated to determine impact…..do not proceed if it has not been fully vetted.

Changes in Direction

Questions

24

Time to Dive In!

25