Meeting - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Meeting PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 761dd2-MWE5O



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Meeting

Description:

Meeting November 18, 2010 – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:18
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 96
Provided by: Cynth114
Learn more at: http://www.dgsweb.state.pa.us
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Meeting


1
PROCUREMENT POLICY COUNCIL
  • Meeting
  • November 18, 2010

2
Agenda
  • Energy Management - Bruce Stultz
  • BMWBO SBR Program Gayle Nuppnau
  • Legal Chuck Anderson
  • Materials Updates Walt Quade
  • Services Updates Roxana Dietz, Jan Braxton
  • eMarketplace Updates Sue Plecker, Roxana Dietz
  • RFP Changes Jeff Mandel, Roxana Dietz
  • Other Procurement Updates Cheryl Kleeman
  • CRP Jen Smith
  • Training Updates Joan Kraft

3
GESA
Guaranteed Energy Savings Act (Performance
Contracting) Program
4
GESA Program Overview
  • Market as a fiscal tool
  • Budget Neutral - Savings pay for projects
    (utility, operational, capital avoidance)
  • Third Party Lenders (Maximum 20 year project
    payback for standard process, 15 years SESCO)
  • Standard agreements and forms
  • RFP Procurement Process
  • Qualified Energy Service Companies (ESCOs
    SESCOs)

5
  • Starting in 1998, DGS worked with the GGGC
    (Governors Green Government Council), DOC
    (Department of Corrections), and NAESCO (National
    Association of Energy Service Companies) to
    develop the program process and model documents
    for today's GESA (Guaranteed Energy Savings
    Agreement) program.

6
An Application for Qualification (AFQ) was
released to qualify the DGS Energy Savings
Companies (ESCOs) pool which was finalized in
2000.
Governor Ed Rendell release Executive Order
2004-12
DGS designated as the central coordinator for
Commonwealth Energy Management and the
centralized authority for GESA projects.
7
Management Directive 720.5
The original MD 720.5 was released November 22,
2005 Restricted personal appliance
use Temperature set-points (68 in heating
season, 74 in cooling season) Discontinued use of
incandescent lamps Calendar year 06 showed a
reduction in consumption by 9.5 Avoided utility
costs 1.6M A new version was released July 25,
2008 Standardized use of Energy Star lamps and
appliances Adjusted temperature set-points (67
in heating season, 75 in cooling season)
8
Strategic Plan
  • Mission to implement energy and environmental
    strategies in alignment with government
    objectives that continuously improves facility
    use and management.
  • Goal 1 Long term Supply of Energy
  • Goal 2 Energy Conservation
  • Goal 3 Environmental Sustainability
  • Goal 4 Alignment with Governmental Objectives
  • Goal 5 Leveraging Technology

9
Current GESA Program Figures
  • As of this date, there have been 69 GESA projects
    delegated to Commonwealth Agencies.

11 participating agencies which include
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, DOC,
Labor Industry, State System of Higher
Education, Department of Public Welfare, PA
Historical Museum Commission, PA Department of
Transportation, Pennsylvania State Police,
Department of Agriculture, PA Higher Education
Assistance Agency and DGS. 49 projects currently
under contract Total Project Costs amount to
426.6M Total Guaranteed Savings amount to
627.1M Energy Reduction amounts to 606.5M
10
DGS GESA Project Initiatives
8 GESA projects since the year 2005 with all
projects scheduled to be completed January 2009
through December 2010 28 DGS Buildings Rachel
Carson, Governors Residence, North Office, Irvis
(South) Office, East Wing, Finance, Forum,
Central Plant, Labor and Industry, Health and
Welfare, 22nd and Forster, 18th and Herr, State
Records Center, Scranton, Reading DGS Project
Totals Project Costs 70.8M Project
Utility/Operation Reduction 80.1M
11
Completed Projects
  • Governors Residence Geo-Thermal System
  • Labor and Industry Solar Panel application (15 x
    50 4.6m x 127cm 10KW) on top of Commonwealth
    Garage
  • Central Plant Chiller Project
  • Health Welfare windows
  • Capitol Complex LED lighting

12
Governors Residence Geo-Thermal System
13
Labor Industry Solar Panels
14
Capitol Complex Chiller Plant
15
Health Welfare Window Replacement
16
Health Welfare Window Replacement
17
LED Lighting Forum Auditorium
18
LED Lighting Capitol Complex
19
Energy Star
  • All DGS buildings can now be uploaded into the
    Energy Star database
  • A rating of 63 or above on the 1-100 scale is
    needed for LEED-EB and a rating of 75 or above
    qualifies a building for national recognition as
    an Energy Star facility
  • Currently Rachel Carson and Scranton SOB have
    Energy Star Certification
  • Weather Normalization has also been added to
    allow DGS to monitor the effect of weather on
    utility consumption

20
LEED-EB Certification
4 buildings are now pursuing LEED-EB
certification Gold Governors Residence and
Rachel Carson Silver Scranton and Reading State
Office Buildings DGS LEED-EB Manual DGS
Policies Established Credits (27) Points
Certification (Operations Maintenance) Certifica
tion (34-42) Silver (34-50) Gold (51-67) Platinum
(68-92) Program to Maintain Certification DGS
LEED-EB Expertise Offered with GESA Projects
21
Current Energy Utility Savings DGS GESA Goal
Facilities
12 Month Period ending 06/10 Electricity (kWh)
88,715,186 Natural Gas (MCF) 26,759 Steam
(mmBTU) 117826 Total Energy (mmBTU)
455,431 Fiscal Baseline Year 04/05 Electricity
(kWh) 121,926,126 Natural Gas (MCF)
17,615 Steam (mmBTU) 167,039 Total Energy
(mmBTU) 600,665 Energy consumption has
decreased by 24.2
22
Current GESA Cost Savings DGS GESA Goal Facilities
12 Month Period ending 06/10 Electricity
7,013,703 Natural Gas 336,710 Steam
3,560,968 Total Energy 10,911,381 Fiscal
Baseline Year 04/05 Electricity
8,467,004 Natural Gas 223,181 Steam
3,948,719 Total Energy 12,638,904 Energy
Utility Usage Costs have decreased by 13.7
23
Successes
  • Energy Leadership Award for Public Service from
    the US Energy Association
  • Energy Manager of the Year 2008 Award from the
    Association of Energy Engineers
  • Corporate Energy Management Award from
    Association of Energy Engineers
  • National Association of Energy Services Companies
    and Berkeley National Laboratory recognize the
    Commonwealths GESA program as the nations best
    practice and most active for 2007 2008
  • Green Leadership Award from PennFuture
  • NAESCO sponsored delegation from Turkey

24
New Initiatives
  • Small Energy Service Company Program
  • County K12 IU Services
  • Power Purchase Agreements
  • Lower cost electric procurement strategies
  • Block Index / Straight Index

25
Questions?
Contact Bruce Stultz, Director, Energy
Management 717-705-8519 bstultz_at_state.pa.us
26
Small Business Reserves (SBRs)
  • Small Business Reserve
    (SBR) Overview
  • Purpose SBR To allow small businesses to bid
    without competing with larger more established
    businesses and to increase economic opportunities
    for small businesses, including minority and
    women-owned small businesses.
  • Authority
  • Section 2101 of the Commonwealth Procurement
    Code, 62 Pa. C.S. 2101
  • Promotes the growth of Small Businesses
  • -- Provides participation in a designated
    procurement to certified small businesses
  • Provides competition within SBRs
  • Among small businesses only

27
Small Business Reserves (SBRs)
  • Small Business Reserve (SBR) Overview
  • Program is designed for prime contracting
    opportunities
  • No change in the procurement process
  • Only limit is on what businesses can bid
  • Everything else about the procurement is done the
    way it normally would
  • Before an award is made businesses must be
    certified as a small business

28
Small Business Reserves (SBRs)
  • Self-Certification Process for Small Businesses
  • Small Certification Form
  • RFP Appendix D
  • http//www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/com
    munity/procurement_forms/19505
  • IFB Attachment A
  • Self-certification is based on honor system
  • Must affirm that information provided is accurate
    and true
  • Must re-certify each time bid is submitted

29
Small Business Certification
30
Small Business Reserves (SBRs)
  • Qualification/Definition Small Business
  • Independently owned and not dominant in its field
    of operation
  • Contractor employs no more than 100 persons
  • Full-time/full time equivalent
  • Contractor lt20 M in gross annual revenue in each
    of its last two fiscal years (25M for those
    businesses in IT)
  • If Contractor is new business (less than 1 year),
    contractor has an approved business plan by the
    Small Business Development center or by a PA
    enterprise Center authorized by the Minority
    Development Agency of the United States
    Department of Commerce.

31
Independent Agency Procurement Forms
  • Independent Agency Manual Procurement Forms
    Survey
  • Why? To determine use of Procurement Forms
    (Procurement Handbook, Part I Chapter 10)
  • Who? Independent Agencies only
  • 19 Responses Many agencies are still utilizing
    the forms
  • Now what? BOP will update and maintain forms for
    use by agencies
  • Use of Manual Procurement Forms
  • Utilized under the following circumstances
  • Independent Agencies who do not use SRM/SAP
    system
  • Emergencies (system down, power failure, etc.)

32
SRM Attribute Changes
  • Mandatory Attributes in process of being added
  • Did Submitter violate any of the contractor
    integrity provisions in connection with the
    submission of its offer or any contract
    negotiations?
  • In the last 4 years, has Submitters officers,
    directors, associates, partners, or individual
    owners been charged with, or convicted of any
    misdemeanor or felony? If yes, provide
    information in the comment field or as an
    attachment.

33
Sole Source (SS) Procurement Requirements
  • Services Agencies must create SRM document type
    Supplier Price Request (SPR) for all SS
  • gt5,000
  • Agency creates SPR
  • Set as Restricted Bid Invitation
  • As part of SPR, must include Doc Builder T Cs
  • Supplier submits bid price in response to SPR
  • Agency completes on-line source justification
    form
  • Agency creates follow-on PO/contract from
    suppliers bid
  • Materials DGS creates and processes SPR
  • If delegated back to the agency follow process
    noted above
  • Manual SPR Form
  • Created for use
  • By Independent agencies not using SRM
  • In case of emergency if SRM system would not be
    available
  • Available on DGS Procurement website gt
    Procurement Forms

Note Procurement Handbook updates are
forthcoming.
34
SPR Form
The SPR form is now available on the DGS web
site http//www.dgsweb.state.pa.us/comod/Current
Forms/GSPUR_SPR.doc
35
Electricity Procurement Update
  • Initiated bidding process for electric generation
    for all non-PPL utilities.
  • Deregulation will impact balance of PA 01/11
  • Budgets will continue to be impacted with cost
    increases based on experiences with PPL early
    this year.
  • Early large load account bids have shown prices
    roughly at par to a 5 increase in generation
    costs over previously capped rates!

36
Laboratory Supplies
  • Supplier VWR
  • Go-live with Punch-out - November 22, 2010
  • XML enabled gt auto PO lt 10K

VWR punch-out user guide is available on the DGS
Training web-site
37
MRO Contract
  • December 1, 2010 - planned contract Go-Live
    Date
  • New Contracts are awaiting Attorney General
    approval.
  • If not released by AG prior to 12/1/10, Agencies
    may use Supplier Web sites (via P-Card) to obtain
    supplies.

LOT DESCRIPTION SUPPLIERS Contract Punch-out P-Card enabled
One a) b) Electrical Electrical Square D Schaedler/Yesco Distribution Grainger Industrial Supply 4400007623 4400007622 X X
Two a) b) c) Lighting (Lamps/Ballasts/Fixtures) Sylvania Lighting General Electric Lighting Phillips Lighting Schaedler/Yesco Distribution Grainger Industrial Supply Wesco Distribution 4400007623 4400007622 4400007621 X X X X X X
Three General Hardware, Metal working, Test Equip, Security Grainger Industrial Supply 4400007622 X X
Four Material Handling Grainger Industrial Supply 4400007622 X X
Five Safety Arbill Safety 4400007624 X X
Six Hand Power Tools Grainger Industrial Supply 4400007622 X X
Seven HVAC Grainger Industrial Supply 4400007622 X X
Eight Filters, excluding Automotive Truck filters Grainger Industrial Supply 4400007622 X X
Nine Pumps Plumbing Grainger Industrial Supply 4400007622 X X
Ten Motors Power Transmission Grainger Industrial Supply 4400007622 X X
1. All - System temporarily unavailable A.M. of
go-live with new contract to switch punch-outs to
new contract s. 2. Schaedler - XML enabled gt
auto PO lt10K
38
Contracts-Last 30 Days
Contract Number Description Value Type of Contract
4400002958 Chemical Detection Equipment 1,000,000 Contract Renewal
4600013480 Janitorial Supplies 5,000,000 Contract Renewal
4400002988 Lab Equipment 5,000,000 Contract Renewal
4400000675 Traffic Control Equip 41,000,000 IFB
4600014512 Bulk Propane 250,000 IFB
4400007494 Light Duty Trucks 6,000,000 IFB
4600014517 Bridge Supplies 400,000 IFB
39
New Solicitations next 60 Days
Contract Number Description Value Type of Contract
4400002037 Mine Water Chemicals 100,000 IFB
4400006982 Wood Supply 300,000 IFB
4600014022 Coal Testing 250,000 IFB
Various Fuel Mgt 600,000 IFB
4400004203 Energy Curtailment 1,500,000 ??? Might Renew
40
New Solicitations next 60 Days
Contract Number Description Value Type of Contract
5630-01 Concrete Pipes 2,000,000 IFB
9905-06 Delineators 500,000 IFB
NA Recreation Equipment 1,000,000 IFB
NA Brine Production Units 500,000 IFB
NA Compaction Equipment 4500,000 IFB
41
New Solicitations next 60 Days
Contract Number Description Value Type of Contract
4400002037 Mine Water Chemicals 100,000 IFB
4400006982 Wood Supply 300,000 IFB
4600014022 Coal Testing 250,000 IFB
Various Fuel Mgt 600,000 IFB
4400004203 Energy Curtailment 1,500,000 ??? Might Renew
42
Services Team New Solicitations
43
Services Team Current Solicitations
44
Services Team Current Solicitations
45
Services Team New Contracts
Project Title Agency Commodity Specialist/ Issuing Officer PO/Contract Number Supplier Name Original Contract Start Date Original Contract End Date Contract End Date
PADOT Customer Call Center DOT Shingara, Syline 4400007265 ACS State Local Solutions Inc 12/3/2010 12/2/2015 12/2/2015
Vehicle Decals Markings ALL Noss, Toniann 4400007607 Bill Korman 10/1/2010 9/30/2012 9/30/2012
Silk Screen Printing ALL Williams, Emanuel 4400007659 MM Displays Inc. 11/1/2010 10/31/2012 10/31/2012
46
Consulting ITQ
  • Parent Contract4400007410
  • ITQ posted 10/25/10
  • Contracts to be effective January 2011
  • 32 Service Categories (See appendix - C)
  • Open Enrollment Contract
  • DGS will review suppliers submissions the 15th of
    each month.
  • Agency instructions will be provided in the ITQ
    Document Library.
  • Notify your suppliers

47
Consulting Thresholds
  • 0 to 50K
  • Select any qualified service provider from the
    applicable service category and request a quote.
  • Limit of 50K per project, per Agency.
  • 50K to 500K
  • Solicitation - RFQ template on ITQ website and
    solicit all service providers in applicable
    service category.
  • Threshold processes described in the Consulting
    Services ITQ Threshold Processes document .
  • Based on best value determination to be provided
    to DGS for review.
  • 500K and over
  • If delegated by DGS, use RFQ template on ITQ
    website and solicit all service providers in
    applicable service category.
  • Agency must form evaluation committee and follow
    procedures for RFP.

48
Consulting ITQ
  • Special Approvals
  • For following categories, OB approval must be
    received prior to agency conducting an RFQ
    regardless of the threshold
  • Actuarial Services
  • Accounting Services
  • Financial Services
  • Auditing Services
  • Complete the Consulting Services ITQ Review Form,
    and
  • Provide a copy of the SOW
  • Send request to OB resource email account
    (provided on the form)
  • In addition, the Auditing Services Category, will
    require Auditor General approval.
  • The OB approval must be attached to the resulting
    PO.

DGS Contact Information Kay Whitsel, Commodity
Specialist Phone 717-787-7675 Email
kwhitsel_at_state.pa.us
49
eMarketplace Enhancements
  • Objective
  • To provide current and potential suppliers longer
    term visibility of anticipated/expected
    forthcoming procurements prior to their actual
    issuance to assist them in planning and
    preparation.
  • New Functionality
  • Automation of
  • Notice of Forthcoming Procurements ( NFP)
  • Request for Delegation (RFD )
  • Award Form
  • Upcoming Procurements
  • Benefits
  • Advanced public notice
  • Electronic internal agency approvals via e-mail
  • Electronic DGS approvals via e-mail
  • Archiving of electronic forms and all related
    documentation for 4 years
  • Internal DGS reporting features and all forms
    documentation in one central location
  • Form automation feeds pending procurements.

50
eMarketplace Enhancements continued
Key Steps Key Dates
Demo provided to the eMarketplace Agency Focus Group 10/22/10
Testing with agency personnel 11/9/10
Go live 11/19/10
Agency notification 11/19/10
51
RFP / RFQ Changes
  • RFP vs. IFB
  • Q A section
  • Technical Scoring
  • Evaluator Scoring Guide
  • Master Scoring Sheet
  • Criteria for Selection
  • Contractor Responsibility
  • Options for Process
  • RFQ Selection Memo
  • RFQ Best Value Selection

RFP Playbook and Procurement Handbook updates
forthcoming.
52
RFP vs. IFB
  • Issuing Officers are required to disclose the
    justification for use of competitive sealed
    proposals vs. competitive sealed bidding.
  • Check the appropriate box as is to why it is not
    practical or advantageous for COPA to issue an
    IFB vs. an RFP.
  • The completed form should be submitted to DGS in
    conjunction with the Notice of Forthcoming
    Procurement and DGS will post with the
    solicitation when issued.
  • For agency led procurements the form should be
    posted in conjunction with solicitation issuance.
  • The form can be located on the DGS website in the
    agency forms directory. Refer to link below.
  • http//www.dgsweb.state.pa.us/comod/CurrentForms/B
    OP124.doc

53
RFP vs. IFB
54
Q A on RFP
  • Questions Answers (I, 9)
  • If Offeror has questions, they must be submitted
    via email no later than the date indicated on the
    Calendar of Events.    The Issuing Officer shall
    post the answers to the questions on the DGS
    website by the date stated on the Calendar of
    Events. 
  • An Offeror who submits a question after the
    deadline date for receipt of questions indicated
    on the Calendar of Events assumes the risk that
    its proposal will not be responsive or
    competitive because the Commonwealth is not be
    able to respond before the proposal receipt date
    or in sufficient time for the Offeror to prepare
    a responsive or competitive proposal.
  • When submitted after the deadline date for
    receipt of questions indicated on the Calendar of
    Events, the Issuing Officer may respond to
    questions of an administrative nature by
    directing the questioning Offeror to specific
    provisions in the RFP. 
  • To the extent that the Issuing Office decides to
    respond to a non-administrative question after
    the deadline date for receipt of questions
    indicated on the Calendar of Events, the answer
    must be provided to all Offerors through an
    addendum.

Changes incorporated into RFP template
55
Technical Scoring
  • Technical Scoring (III, 4)
  • In order for a Contractor to be considered
    responsible for this RFQ/RFP and therefore
    eligible for selection for best and final offers
    or selection for negotiations the total score for
    the technical submittal of the Contractors
    proposal must be greater than or equal to 70 of
    the available technical points.
  • Using adjusted scores was difficult
  • Hard to understand
  • Dont know final scores until all suppliers are
    scored and adjusted
  • Raises the bar in terms of  supplier
    qualifications
  • Previously, suppliers with raw scores under 50
    of available technical points were receiving an
    adjusted score gt 70
  • Creates necessary differentiation among suppliers
  • The 70 threshold was established several years
    ago at a very conservative point and it was
    intended to reevaluate.
  • Simplifies and expedites process

56
Technical Scoring Sample
57
Evaluator Scoring Guide
58
Master Scoring Sheet
Project Name  
Project Number  
Technical Points Allotted 0
Statement of the Problem  
Management Summary  
Prior Experience  
Work Plan  
Cost Points Allotted  
Disadvantaged Business Points Allotted  
Enterprise Zone Points (Bonus)  
Domestic Workforce Points (Bonus)  
Contractor Participation Program Points (Bonus)  
Total Points Allotted 0

Technical Scoring Technical Scoring Cost Scoring DB Scoring Bonus Scoring Bonus Scoring Bonus Scoring Grand Total Initial Score
Supplier Name Initial Score 70 Met Initial Score Initial Score Enterprise Zone Score Domestic Workforce Score Contractor Participation Program Score Grand Total Initial Score
Supplier 1 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 2 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 3 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 4 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 5 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 6 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 7 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 8 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 9 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 10 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 11 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 12 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 13 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 14 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 15 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 16 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 17 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 18 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 19 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
Supplier 20 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIV/0!
59
Master Scoring Sheet
TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET TECHNICAL SCORING WORKSHEET
Total Technical Points Allotted For This Project Total Technical Points Allotted For This Project Total Technical Points Allotted For This Project Total Technical Points Allotted For This Project Total Technical Points Allotted For This Project Total Technical Points Allotted For This Project Total Technical Points Allotted For This Project 0
Percentage Of Technical Points Needed To Qualify Percentage Of Technical Points Needed To Qualify Percentage Of Technical Points Needed To Qualify Percentage Of Technical Points Needed To Qualify Percentage Of Technical Points Needed To Qualify Percentage Of Technical Points Needed To Qualify Percentage Of Technical Points Needed To Qualify 70

Initial Score Supplier Name Technical Team Members Technical Team Members Technical Team Members Technical Team Members Technical Team Members Technical Team Members Total Points Average Points Initial Score Rank of Technical Points 70 Met
Initial Score Supplier Name Reviewer 1 Reviewer 2 Reviewer 3 Reviewer 4 Reviewer 5 Reviewer 6 Total Points Average Points Initial Score Rank of Technical Points 70 Met
Initial Score Supplier 1             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 2             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 3             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 4             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 5             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 6             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 7             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 8             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 9             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 10             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 11             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 12             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 13             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 14             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 15             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 16             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 17             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 18             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 19             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
Initial Score Supplier 20             0.00 DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0! DIV/0!
60
Master Scoring Sheet
PROPOSERS NAME______________________________________ PROPOSERS NAME______________________________________                  
                     
Evaluation Team Member Name_________________________________ Evaluation Team Member Name_________________________________         Enter 0-100 for each question     Enter 0-100 for each question  
Evaluation Component Evaluation Criteria Max Pts RFQ Response Section RFQ SOW Section   Initial Score Pts   Adjusted Score Pts
Understanding the Problem and Proposed Technical Solution   150         0.0     0.0
IVV RFQ   50         0.0     0.0
  Does the Contractor state in succinct terms an accurate understanding of the problem presented and services required for this IVV RFQ? 10 Statement of Problem (II-2) Primary Objectives (I-4) Objectives (IV-1)Nature and Scope of Project (IV-2)     0.0     0.0
  Has the Contractor made an accurate assessment of the service to be provided based on its interpretation of the requirements as defined in the work statement? 10 Management Summary (II-3)Work plan (II-4) Requirements (IV-3)     0.0     0.0
  Are the problems of providing the service clearly delineated or are they merely parroted from the RFQ? 10 Statement of Problem (II-2) Primary Objectives (I-4) Objectives (IV-1)Nature and Scope of Project (IV-2)     0.0     0.0
  How consistent are the scope of effort and resources proposed by the Contractor with the size and nature of the service to be provided? 10 Management Summary (II-3)Work plan (II-4) Primary Objectives (I-4) Objectives (IV-1)Nature and Scope of Project (IV-2)     0.0     0.0
  Does the Contractor demonstrate a thorough understanding of the overall project (IVV RFQ, ITS RFP and DORs needs) and its requirements? 10 Statement of Problem (II-2) Primary Objectives (I-4) Objectives (IV-1)Nature and Scope of Project (IV-2)     0.0     0.0
ITS RFP   50         0.0     0.0
61
Master Scoring Sheet
SUPPLIER NAME SUPPLIER NAME       INITIAL SCORE ADJUSTED SCORE            
Scoring 0-100 each question Scoring 0-100 each question       INITIAL SCORE ADJUSTED SCORE            
            Evaluation Team Scores            
Evaluation Component Evaluation Criteria Max Pts RFQ Response Section RFQ SOW Section   Initial Average Score   Adjusted Average Score   Ave Pts
Understanding the Problem and Proposed Technical Solution   150           130.1
IVV RFQ   50               43.9
  Does the Contractor state in succinct terms an accurate understanding of the problem presented and services required for this IVV RFQ? 10 Statement of Problem (II-2) Primary Objectives (I-4) Objectives (IV-1)Nature and Scope of Project (IV-2) 85 88   89.0   90.0   9.2
  Has the Contractor made an accurate assessment of the service to be provided based on its interpretation of the requirements as defined in the work statement? 10 Management Summary (II-3)Work plan (II-4) Requirements (IV-3) 85 82   86.3   85.3   8.7
  Are the problems of providing the service clearly delineated or are they merely parroted from the RFQ? 10 Statement of Problem (II-2) Primary Objectives (I-4) Objectives (IV-1)Nature and Scope of Project (IV-2) 85 82   84.8   84.3   8.4
  How consistent are the scope of effort and resources proposed by the Contractor with the size and nature of the service to be provided? 10 Management Summary (II-3)Work plan (II-4) Primary Objectives (I-4) Objectives (IV-1)Nature and Scope of Project (IV-2) 85 85   85.0   84.5   8.5
  Does the Contractor demonstrate a thorough understanding of the overall project (IVV RFQ, ITS RFP and DORs needs) and its requirements? 10 Statement of Problem (II-2) Primary Objectives (I-4) Objectives (IV-1)Nature and Scope of Project (IV-2) 93 93   89.0   89.0   9.0
ITS RFP   50             42.6
62
Criteria for Selection
  • Supplier Financial Capacity (III, 4)
  • Financial Performance
  • The Issuing Office will assess each offerors
    financial capacity based on industry standard
    analysis of the offerors financial information
    submitted with the Technical Submittal. This may
    include
  • ratio, horizontal or vertical analysis
  • industry comparison using Dun Bradstreets Key
    Business Ratios to measure offerors solvency,
    efficiency and profitability
  • the ratio of the offerors annual sales revenue
    to the expected annual spend for this contract
  • the percentage of the offerors annual sales
    revenue attributed to the Commonwealth and
  • the offerors sustainable growth rate (SGR). 

Changes incorporated into RFP template
63
Contractor Responsibility
  • Contractor Responsibility (III, 4)
  • Size/ Capability
  • The Issuing Office reserves the right, in its
    sole discretion, not to consider for best and
    final offers or selection for contract
    negotiation, any offeror which fails to achieve
    acceptable scores on the Dun Bradstreets Key
    Business Ratios
  • has annual sales revenue less than three (3)
    times the expected annual spend for this
    contract
  • with the award of this contract would receive
    more than half of its annual sales revenue from
    the Commonwealth
  • or which has a SGR that does not support the
    addition of the expected annual spend for this
    contract.
  • See Appendix A B for information on the Key
    Business Ratios
  •  

64
Options for Process
  • BAFO (I, 20)
  • While not required, the Issuing Office reserves
    the right to conduct discussions with Offerors
    for the purpose of obtaining best and final
    offers. To obtain best and final offers from
    Offerors, the Issuing Office may do one or more
    of the following, in any combination and order
  •  i) Schedule oral presentations
  •  ii) Request revised proposals
  •  iii) Enter into pre-selection negotiations and
  •  iv) Conduct a reverse online auction.
  • The Issuing Office will limit any best and final
    offer opportunities to responsible Offerors
    (defined in Part III, Section III-4 of this RFP)
    whose proposals the Issuing Office has determined
    to be reasonably susceptible of being selected
    for award as being within the top competitive
    range of responsive proposals.

65
RFQ Selection Memo
  • To date, utilizing RFP Recommendation Letter
    template.
  • Unlike an RFP, the ITQ is a multiple award
    contract wherein a best value decision is being
    made (follow-on PO)vs. contract award.
  • Key modifications

II B Notice Closed bid via eAlerts vs. public posting.
III B. 1 Opening Added if proposals submitted late and disqualified as untimely.
III B. 2 Added proposals will be reviewed for responsiveness.
III E. 2 Added technical thresholds to match RFP process
III E. 3 and 5 Added EZ and DW provisions
III. E. 8 Pre-selection negotiations Added provisions if engage in with multiple suppliers, if not, delete
III. E. 9 Added EZ and DW in overall scoring totals
III. E. 11 Revised to read that if pre-selection negotiations conducted, they were done so after final scores were derived
III. E. 15 EZ points can be obtained with sub-contractor participation
Required for all solicitations greater than 250K
66
RFQ Best Value Selection
67
Award Letter continued
68
Award Letter continued
69
Procurement Handbook Progress Report Completed
Chapter Description Location Change
Contract Compliance Data Form, STD-21 references Various Standardized name and updated link for Initial Contract Compliance Data Form, STD-21.
Nondiscrimination Pt I Ch 20 Changes made throughout as a result of Management Directive 215.16 being revisions
Competitive Sealed Proposals RFP Process Pt II Ch 07 Revisions due to Management Directive 215.9 (Contractor Responsibility) revisions.
Monthly Contract Compliance Report for Construction Contractors, STD-28 references Pt IV Chs 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 11, 12 STD-28 form replaced STD-21 form STD-28 (Monthly Contract Compliance Report for Construction Contractors) form link language added "Requires the contractor to complete, sign and submit Form STD-28, Monthly Contract Compliance Report for Construction Contractors, each month no later than the 15th of the month following the reporting period beginning with the initial job conference and continuing through the completion of the project."
70
Procurement Handbook Progress Report In Progress
Change Description Location Status
Definition and use of RFEI Pt I Ch 02 Pt I Ch 06 In Development (Legal)
RFP process distinction between BAFO and Pre-selection Negotiation Pt I Ch 06 In Development (BOP)
Update to section on Debriefings (B.13 B.12)This change will be published as soon as complete Pt I Ch 06 Draft Language Under Review
Adding language on Established Catalog Price Contract Types Pt I Ch 08 In Development (BOP)
Chapter being revised to remove obsolete forms and add new forms Pt I Ch 10 In Development (BOP)
Use and approval of Funds Commitments Pt I Ch 30 In Development (BOP)
Chapter being revised to remove obsolete forms, unused terminology and to reflect current processes Pt I Ch 32 In Development (BOP)
71
Procurement Handbook Progress Report In Progress
Change Description Location Status
Revisions to language indicating that contractor must sign SPR for sole sourcesThese changes will be published as soon as complete (within a few weeks) Pt I Ch 06Pt II Ch 05Pt III Ch 05 Draft Language Under Review
Revisions to reflect the proper use of the Delegation Request and Notice of Forthcoming Procurements and requirement to complete the automated Source Justification Form Pt II III Ch 04 Draft Language Under Review
Revisions to processes associated with the procurement of vehicles Pt II Ch 18 19 In Development (DGS BVM)
New chapter on the Acquisition of Federal Surplus Property Pt II Ch 27 To Be Drafted (BOP BSSO)
72
Contract Alert Notifications for Agencies
  • Notifications sent via outlook and the alerts tab
    in the universal work list (UWL)
  • Alert Contract Alert for 440000XXXX is at
    least 180 days to expiration or has reached 75
    target value/qty.
  • Went live for DGS October 12, 2010
  • Monitoring for issues
  • Planned roll-out for agencies
  • After completion of Support Pack implementation
  • Initiate process (mid-December)

73
Ship To Address Change Form
  • COMING SOON
  • New web form to change SRM Ship-To Addresses
  • Available for agency use
  • Located on DGS Procurement website
  • Under Agency Dashboard

Note When you save this form it will
automatically be sent to the QA Resource account
for review.
74
Changes to Auto-POs
  • Issue When making a change to a PO that is
    generated via auto-PO the changed document will
    auto-fax to the supplier.
  • Resolution For auto-fax orders, the Purchaser
    should change the Output method from Fax to
  • Print for those changes that do not require
    notification to the supplier (i.e. liquidations).
  • System Reminder When a PO is output to a
    supplier, regardless of the method of
  • output, the System will generate a message to
    the Purchaser when initiating a change

75
DGS and OB Partnering on Project to Expand Use of
P-card While Maintaining Proper Controls
P-Card Expansion
  • Goals
  • Actions Under Review
  • Increase COPA revenue thru higher rebates
  • Decrease administrative costs
  • Make shopping experience easier for agencies
  • Increase reporting/tracking ability via Business
    Intelligence
  • Provide prompt payments to suppliers
  • Increasing number of P-card Enabled contracts
  • Increasing number of suppliers who accept P-card
  • Exploring opportunities to expand P-card
    threshold
  • Expanding SW contract opportunities
  • Examining off contract P-card spend
  • Reconciling P-card designation in eMarketplace

76
P-Card Accepted Enabled
  • P-Card Accepted Supplier accepts P-card for
    payment on SW contracts.
  • Orders are not processed through SRM and are not
    auto-PO generated.
  • P-Card Enabled Suppliers are enabled through
    SRM 
  • Supplier must have auto-PO functionality and have
    a Punch-Out Catalog or Material/Service Contract
    Catalog (MSCC). 
  • P-card Requisitioner can create POs through SRM
    and use P-card to pay for purchases lt5K from
    P-card enabled supplier.
  • P-card orders are auto-faxed to supplier with
    appropriate P-card data on PO.
  • P-Card Payment Requirements
  • Supplier must be registered in SRM PA Supplier
    Portal.
  • Contracts must include standard terms
    conditions containing P-card payment language.
  • When using non-standard terms and conditions,
    supplier must agree to accept P-card payments.

77
P-Card Designation in eMarketplace
78
CRP Updates
  • Begin using new system again.
  • After performing check in new system, also do
    check in SAP or Oracle in order to verify results
    of the check.
  • If you receive conflicting results, please ask
    consider Question 1 below
  • Is the conflict with obligation records?
  • If yes, reply to this resource account
    immediately at RA-Finance_Transform_at_state.pa.us.
    Provide as much information as possible about the
    check you performed.
  • If no, see question 2. 
  • Is the conflict with performance issue records? 
  • If yes, likely a result of clean-up effort that
    took place in August 2010.  Agencies reviewed all
    performance issues and made quite a few
    changes. Updated data was loaded into CRPS, but
    SAP and Oracle were not updated.  Info in CRPS is
    accurate for performance issues, therefore you do
    NOT need to report these discrepancies to us.
  • If no, see question 3. 
  • Is the conflict with suspensions or debarments?
  • If yes, likely due to 1) CRPS is checking the
    Federal suspension/debarment listing, whereas SAP
    and Oracle do not so may get result in new system
    not displayed in SAP or Oracle.  2)  Clean-up
    effort for performance issues as well as
    suspensions/debarments that took place in August
    2010.  If concerns about these conflicts, contact
    resource account RA-Finance_Transform_at_state.pa.us
    .
  • If no, see 4. 
  • Report issue immediately to RA-Finance_Transform_at_s
    tate.pa.us.  Provide as much info as possible
    about the check performed.
  •  

79
Training Updates
  • Contractor Responsibility Program (CRP) System
    Upgrade
  • Training Courses
  • DGS BOP WBT - Contractor Responsibility Program
    System
  • DGS BOP WBT - Executing a CRP Check/Search
  • Note The CRPS web-based training courses remain
    available in ELMS. Ensure that you have enrolled
    and completed the appropriate course for your
    role as the system is functional again.

Roles Total of Users Total of Users Trained Enrolled to Date DOT Trained
CRP User (to search check) 1896 1228 743 485
Performance Issue (PI) Creator 556 327 315 12
Performance Issue (PI) Approver 75 31 27 4
80
Training Updates
  • 142 PAs attended Certified PA Purchasing Agent
    training.
  • 109 Receiving their CPPA certification
  • Latest Certification recipients
  • Susan Barket Office of Administration
  • Lisa Burchfield Office of Administration
  • Maggie Boyer Dept of Conservation Natural
    Resources
  • Michelle Flynn Dept of Conservation Natural
    Resources
  • Gary Forman Dept of Health
  • Patricia Perkins Civil Service Commission
  • Suzanne Schmitt PA Historical Museum Commission
  • Gloria Strawser Dept of Conservation Natural
    Resources
  • Veronica Ulrich Office of Inspector General
  • Nancy Weibley Dept of Conservation Natural
    Resources
  • Danni Werntz Dept of Public Welfare

Next class tentatively scheduled for 2/28/11
through 3/3/11 Enrollment is through ELMS
81
Contact Information
  • Chuck Anderson, DGS Attorney, Strategic
    Source 717-214-7739 chanderson_at_state.pa.us
  • Jan Braxton, Associate Commodity Manager,
    Services 717-703-2943 jabraxton_at_state.pa.us
  • Roxana Dietz, Director, Services
    Procurement 717-783-8062 roxdietz_at_state.pa.us
  • Dennis Fellin, Commodity Manager,
    Services 717-346-2675 defellin_at_state.pa.us
  • Cheryl Kleeman, Strategic Development Manager,
    BOP 717-346-4326 ckleeman_at_state.pa.us
  • Joan Kraft, Director, Business Process
    Improvement 717-705-0564 jokraft_at_state.pa.us
  • Gayle Nuppnau, BMWBO Procurement
    Liaison 717-346-3819 gnuppnau_at_state.pa.us
  • Jeff Mandel, Chief Procurement Officer 717-787-5
    862 jmandel_at_state.pa.us
  • Susan Plecker, Systems Manager,
    BOP 717-346-2678 splecker_at_state.pa.us
  • Walter Quade, Director, Materials
    Procurement 717-787-4775 wquade_at_state.pa.us

82
Appendix
  • Appendix A Key Business Ratios
  • Appendix B Sustainable Growth Rate
  • Appendix C ITQ, Consulting Services

83
Appendix A, Key Metrics
84
Appendix A, Key Metrics continued
85
Appendix B, Sustainable Growth Rate
  • Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) of a firm is the
    maximum rate of growth, in sales, that can be
    achieved, given the firm's profitability, asset
    utilization, and desired dividend payout and debt
    (financial leverage) ratios.
  • The SGR for sales is limited by the growth a
    company can obtain using the information on the
    Balance Sheet and Income Statement.  Thus,
    sustainability is a function of equity growth
    rates, not sales growth rates.
  • The formula for calculating Sustainable Growth
    Rate (SGR) is
  • G Margin x Turnover x Leverage x Retention
  • Margin Net Income / Sales
  • Turnover Sales / Assets
  • Leverage Assets / Equity
  • Retention of Earnings Retained

86
Appendix B, SGR Samples
Within desirable parameter
Risky, exceeds SGR
87
Appendix C, ITQ, Consulting Services
88
Appendix C, ITQ, Consulting Services
89
Appendix C, ITQ, Consulting Services
90
Appendix C, ITQ, Consulting Services
91
Appendix C, ITQ, Consulting Services
92
Appendix C, ITQ, Consulting Services
93
Appendix C, ITQ, Consulting Services
94
Appendix C, ITQ, Consulting Services
95
Appendix C, ITQ, Consulting Services
About PowerShow.com