State of California

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Request for Proposal (RFP) CDCR-5225-113Strategic Offender Management System (SOMS)

Section IX

Evaluation

June 18, 2008

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)Strategic Offender Management System (SOMS)

Request for Proposal (RFP) CDCR-5225-113June 18, 2008

Table of Contents

IX. EVALUATION...........................................................................................................3

IX.A. INTRODUCTION 3

IX.B. EVALUATION TEAM 3

IX.C. EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS 3

IX.D. REVIEW OF PRE-QUALIFICATION RESPONSES 4

IX.E. REVIEW OF CONCEPTUAL PROPOSALS 4

IX.F. CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS WITH BIDDERS 4

IX.G. REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF INITIAL FINAL PROPOSALS 5

IX.H. RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS 6

IX.I. PROPOSAL EVALUATION 6

IX.J. SCORING COMPONENTS 7

IX.J.1. Functional Requirements...............................................................................................7

IX.J.2. Technical Requirements Response................................................................................7

IX.J.3. Project Management Approach and Plan.......................................................................8

IX.J.4. Business Process (Change) Management Approach.....................................................8

IX.J.5. Knowledge Transfer and Training Approach..................................................................9

IX.J.6. Design and Development Approach.............................................................................10

IX.J.7. Implementation Approach (includes Interface Management and Data Conversion).....10

IX.J.8. Security Approach........................................................................................................11

IX.J.9. Production Support and Transition Approach...............................................................12

IX.J.10.Staff Management Approach and Staff Qualifications..................................................12

IX.J.11.Costs............................................................................................................................ 13

IX.K. SELECTION OF CONTRACTOR 14

IX.L. Summary of Overall Evaluation Scoring Process 14

Table of Tables

TABLE IX-1: FINAL SCORING MAXIMUM POINTS...................................................................5TABLE IX-2: TOTAL SOLUTION COSTING EVALUATION AND SCORING METHODOLOGY

EXAMPLE..................................................................................................................13Table IX-3: Summary of Overall Evaluation Scoring Process........................................14

Table of Contents ii

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)Strategic Offender Management System (SOMS)

Request for Proposal (RFP) CDCR-5225-113June 18, 2008

Table of Contents iii

IX. Evaluation

IX.A.IntroductionAll Initial Final and Final Proposals will be evaluated in a multi-step process to determine the responsive proposal that offers the best combination of functionality and value to the State. The best business solution is that solution that meets all requirements set forth in the RFP and offers the State the best combination of value, functionality, and cost as determined through the evaluation process specified in this section of the RFP. The process includes reviews of Initial Final Proposals, with confidential feedback to each Bidder, followed by a detailed evaluation of Final Proposals.

Once the State has determined which proposal, if any, offers the best business solution, that proposal will become the basis for a contract.

This section presents the process that the State will follow in evaluating proposals submitted by bidders in response to this RFP. The evaluation process is comprised of a thorough review of each proposal to validate the inclusion of mandatory components, followed by a scored evaluation based on criteria defined later in this section.

IX.B.Evaluation TeamThe State has established an Evaluation Team comprised of individuals selected from the CDCR management, staff, and their representatives. The Evaluation Team will be responsible for the review and evaluation of Bidder proposals in accordance with the process described in this section of the RFP. The team will use consensus to determine pass/fail and to arrive evaluation scores for each bidder. The State will engage additional qualified individuals during the process to assist the Evaluation Team in gaining a better understanding of technical, financial, contractual, or program issues. These individuals will not be part of the consensus process to arrive at an evaluation score.

IX.C.Evaluation and Selection ProcessThe process of evaluating Bidder proposals will consist of the following in order:

Review of Pre-Qualification Responses

Review of Conceptual Proposals

Confidential Discussions with Bidders

Review of Initial Final Proposals

Confidential Discussions with Bidders

Evaluation of Final Proposals

IX.D.Review of Pre-Qualification ResponsesPre-Qualification responses received by the date and time specified in Section I.F – Key Action Dates will be opened and reviewed in detail for compliance with pre-qualification requirements.

The Evaluation Team will conduct the following reviews:

1. Review to identify whether the Bidder met all minimum requirements for references and experience

2. Review to identify whether the Bidder met all administrative requirements stated

3. Review to identify whether the Bidder’s key personnel met all minimum requirements as stated

IX.E.Review of Conceptual ProposalsConceptual Proposal responses received by the date and time specified in Section I.F – Key Action Dates will be opened and reviewed in detail for compliance with RFP requirements.

The Evaluation Team will conduct the following reviews:

1. Review to identify whether the Bidder addressed all of the areas necessary in describing their overall solution approach as documented in Section VI.B.7 – Bidder’s Overall Solution Approach

IX.F. Confidential Discussions with Bidders The Evaluation Team will meet with each Bidder to discuss the conceptual proposals and any other items from the RFP the State deems appropriate. This confidential discussion will allow the Bidder to request clarification or ask questions specific to its proposed solution without having to share those questions with the other participating Bidders, thus protecting the confidential nature of each unique solution. These confidential discussions may include demonstrations and assessment of key team members. Please refer to Section II.B.5 – Bidder’s Confidential Discussions for information on the rules and format of these discussions.

The Evaluation Team will be looking for those bidders with the following:

Most skilled and experienced key personnel / team members as well as most collective company experience

Solution that is closest to meeting SOMS functional requirements “out of the box” or with minimum customization / custom development based on demonstrations given

Best approaches in the areas of implementation, data conversion, change management and training

Least dependence on state resources as well as the bidder’s organizational depth and ability to support the project

IX.G. Review and Evaluation of Initial Final Proposals Initial Final Proposals received by the date and time specified in Section I.F – Key Action Dates will be opened and reviewed in detail for compliance with RFP requirements.

The Evaluation Team will conduct the following reviews:

1. Review to identify and document areas in which the proposal appears to be non-responsive or defective, fails to address requirements, is unclear, demonstrates lack of responsibility, or introduces potential risk. The review will address administrative, functional, technical and management requirements

Table IX-1 below illustrates the maximum points for each scorable requirement area.

Table IX-1: Final Scoring Maximum Points

RFP Reference Description

Proposed CDCR

Maximum Points

Available

Section V Administrative Requirements Response N/A

Section VI.B.6 Functional Requirements Response 200

Section VI.B.7Overall Solution Approach (including Business Process Improvement, Interfaces, Technology, Phasing and Partnership

N/A

Section VI.C.3 Technical Requirements Response 200

Section VI.D.3 Project Management Approach and Draft PMP 50

Section VI.D.4 Procurement N/A

Section VI.D.5 Business Process (Change) Management 100

Section VI.D.6 Knowledge Transfer & Training Approach and Sample Plan 50

Section VI.D.7 Design and Development Plan Approach and Sample Plan 100

Section VI.D.8 Testing Approach and Test Plan N/A

Section VI.D.9 and VI.D.9.a

Implementation Approach and Sample Plan 150

Section VI.D.9.b Capacity Planning Approach and Sample Plan N/A

Section VI.D.9.c Operational Recovery (OR) Approach and Sample Plan N/A

Section VI.D.9.d Interface Management Approach and Sample Plan 150

Section VI.D.9.e Data Conversion Approach and Sample Plan 150

RFP Reference Description

Proposed CDCR

Maximum Points

Available

Section VI.D.9.f Software Configuration Management Approach and Sample Plan N/A

Section VI.D.9.g Requirements Management Approach and Sample Plan N/A

Section VI.D.9.h Pre-Production Release Approach and Sample Plan N/A

Section VI.D.9.i Production Release Approach and Sample Plan N/A

Section VI.D.10 Security Approach and Sample Plan 100

Section VI.D.11 Quality Management Approach and Sample Plan N/A

Section VI.D.12 Production Support and Transition Approach and Sample Plan 50

Section VI.D.14 Staff Management Approach and Staff Qualifications 100

Section VI.D.15 General Contractor Responsibilities N/A

Section VI.D.16 General State Responsibilities N/A

Section VI.E Affirmative Response to the Deliverables and Acceptance Process N/A

Section VIII Cover Letter N/A

Section VIII Executive Summary N/A

Solution Score 1,400

Cost Score 600

Total Score 2,000

IX.H.Receipt of ProposalsComplete proposals must be delivered as specified in Section VIII – Proposal and Bid Format and if not submitted under sealed cover may be rejected and deemed non-responsive.

IX.I. Proposal Evaluation The proposal review will include a comprehensive, detailed evaluation of each Bidder’s unique solution. Proposals will be evaluated and scored by the Evaluation Team. Following the scoring of proposals evaluation criteria, cost components will be scored, and a final score will be determined for each proposal. The cost component is evaluated at the end of the process in order to maintain objectivity and avoid bias that could emerge as a result of exposure to cost information prior to the assessment of other components. The proposal evaluation criteria and process are described thoroughly in this section.

IX.J.Scoring ComponentsProposals will be assessed using the scoring model and given an overall score. The scoring model that will be employed to assess Bidders’ proposals was developed in adherence to the business objectives and the overall goals of the project. The maximum points available for a single proposal is 1,400 points, which will be awarded based on consensus of the Evaluation Team. The scoring components that comprise each Bidder’s Total Score and their relative weights are listed in Table IX-1 above.

IX.J.1. Functional Requirements

(Maximum Score = 200 Points)

The functional requirements for the proposed SOMS solution will be scored. The Bidder should refer to Section VI.B – Functional Requirements, for specific functional requirements and Section VI.D – Management Requirements for additional details and response requirements.

The bidder’s score will be determined based on the approach used to meet each of the functional requirements based on the following criteria:

Ability to Meet the Requirements Rating

Meets the requirements as the product is delivered “out of the box” A

Meets the requirements by a user-defined set-up parameters B

Meets the requirements by integrating with another “off the shelf” product C

Requires source code modification to meet the requirement D

Requires development of a new module to meet the requirement E

Requirements that are met with the “out of the box” approach will receive the highest score and requirements requiring development of a new module will receive the lowest score.

IX.J.2. Technical Requirements Response

(200 points)

The Bidder should ensure that the proposed approach to each technical component meets the RFP requirements. The Bidder should refer to Section VI.C – Technical Requirements for specific technical requirements and Section VI.D – Management Requirements for additional details and response requirements.

The bidder’s score will be determined based on the approach used to meet each of the technical requirements based on the following criteria:

Ability to Meet the Requirements Rating

Meets the requirements as the product is delivered “out of the box” A

Meets the requirements by a user-defined set-up parameters B

Meets the requirements by integrating with another “off the shelf” product C

Requires source code modification to meet the requirement D

Requires development of a new module to meet the requirement E

Requirements that are met with the “out of the box” approach will receive the highest score and requirements requiring development of a new module will receive the lowest score.

IX.J.3. Project Management Approach and Plan

(Maximum Score = 50 points)

Based upon requirements provided in Section VI.D.3 – Project Management, the State will evaluate the Bidder’s approach and draft PMP and scoring will reflect the Evaluation Team’s assessment of probability that the Bidder’s solution will result in a successful implementation of a comprehensive solution that is fully compatible with the State’s requirements.

The following factors will be taken into consideration when awarding points for this category:

The PMP must include:

o PM Methodology

o Staffing / Resource Plan

o Issue Management Plan

o Risk Management Plan

o Scope Change Management Plan

o Requirements Management and Traceability Methodology

o Quality Management Plan

o Project Schedule

IX.J.4. Business Process (Change) Management Approach

(Maximum Score = 100 Points)

Based upon information provided in Section VI.D.5 – Business Process (Change) Management, the State will evaluate the Bidder’s Change Management and scoring will reflect the Evaluation Team’s assessment of probability that the Bidder’s change management approach will result in successful implementation of an integrated solution and meet the State’s requirements.

The following factors will be taken into consideration when awarding points for this category:

The proposal demonstrates a good understanding of the required change management tasks and deliverables and addresses the work involved, underlying assumptions, and the interplay of factors. Mere restatement or paraphrasing of RFP requirements does not demonstrate understanding

Completeness and thoroughness of the approach, including items such as, but not necessarily limited to:

o Are change management methods for assessment, readiness and suggestions for implementation included?

o Are change management scheduling criteria included?

o Is CDCR’s staff involvement clearly defined?

o Is a communication plan included?

o Change management for staff in multiple physical locations?

Compliance with CDCR’s requirements:

Has sufficient information been included that demonstrates the proposed change management approach will meet CDCR’s change management and communication requirements?

IX.J.5. Knowledge Transfer and Training Approach

(Maximum Score = 50 Points)

Based upon information provided in Section VI.D.6 – Knowledge Transfer and Training, the State will evaluate the Bidder’s Knowledge Transfer and Training Approach and scoring will reflect the Evaluation Team’s assessment of probability that the Bidder’s knowledge transfer and training approach will result in successful implementation of an integrated solution and meet the State’s requirements.

The following factors will be taken into consideration when awarding points for this category:

The proposal demonstrates a good understanding of the required training and tasks and deliverables and addresses the work involved, underlying assumptions, and the interplay of factors. Mere restatement or paraphrasing of RFP requirements does not demonstrate understanding

Completeness and thoroughness of the approach, including items such as, but not necessarily limited to:

o Are training methods included?

o Are training scheduling criteria included?

o Is CDCR’s staff involvement clearly defined?

o Is a communication plan included?

o Training staff in multiple physical locations?

Compliance with CDCR’s requirements:

IX.J.6. Design and Development Approach

(Maximum Score = 10 Points)

Based upon information provided in Section VI.D.7 – System Design, Development, and Customization, the State will evaluate the Bidder’s system design and development approach and scoring will reflect the Evaluation Team’s assessment of probability that the Bidder’s system design and development approach will result in successful implementation of an integrated solution and meet the State’s requirements.

The following factors will be taken into consideration when awarding points for this category:

The proposal demonstrates a good understanding of the required system design and development tasks and deliverables and addresses the work involved, underlying assumptions, and the interplay of factors. Mere restatement or paraphrasing of RFP requirements does not demonstrate understanding

Completeness and thoroughness of the approach, including items such as, but not necessarily limited to:

o Does the approach address the design and development for functionality that is “out of the box”?

o Does the approach address the design and development for custom developed code?

o Does the approach address the change request process?

Compliance with CDCR’s requirements:

IX.J.7. Implementation Approach (includes Interface Management and Data Conversion)

(Maximum Score = 150 Points) for Implementation

(Maximum Score = 150 Points) for Interface Management

(Maximum Score = 150 Points) for Data Conversion

Based upon requirements provided in Section VI.D.9 – Implementation, the State will evaluate the Bidder’s Proposed Implementation Approach and scoring will reflect the Evaluation Team’s assessment of probability that the Bidder’s solution will result in a successful implementation of a comprehensive solution that is fully compatible with the State’s requirements.

The following factors will be taken into consideration when awarding points for this category:

The proposal demonstrates a good understanding of the required implementation tasks and deliverables and addresses the work involved, underlying assumptions, and associated risks. Points are subtracted for each instance of task or deliverable not clearly understood and described. Mere restatement or paraphrasing of RFP requirements does not demonstrate understanding

The implementation approach includes implementation of multiple locations at one time

Completeness and thoroughness of the Implementation Approach, including but not limited to:

o System Development

o Configuration Management

o Testing

o Interfaces

o Data Conversion

o Implementation

o Maintenance and Support

Potential risks of the proposed implementation approach

The CDCR’s staff involvement has been clearly defined

IX.J.8. Security Approach

(Maximum Score = 100 points)

Based upon information provided in Section VI.D.10 - Security, the State will evaluate the Bidder’s security approach and scoring will reflect the Evaluation Team’s assessment of probability that the Bidder’s security approach will result in successful implementation of an integrated solution and meet the State’s requirements.

The following factors will be taken into consideration when awarding points for this category:

The proposal demonstrates a good understanding of the required security and tasks and deliverables and addresses the work involved, underlying assumptions, and the interplay of factors. Mere restatement or paraphrasing of RFP requirements does not demonstrate understanding

Completeness and thoroughness of the approach, including items such as, but not necessarily limited to:

o Are the necessary security controls addressed?

o Are the necessary operational controls addressed?

o Are the necessary technical controls addressed?

Compliance with CDCR’s requirements:

IX.J.9. Production Support and Transition Approach

(Maximum Score = 50 points)

Based upon information provided in Section VI.D.12 – Production Support & Transition, the State will evaluate the Bidder’s approach to production support and transition and scoring will reflect the Evaluation Team’s assessment of probability that the Bidder’s production support and transition approach will result in successful implementation of an integrated solution and meet the State’s requirements.

The following factors will be taken into consideration when awarding points for this category:

The proposal demonstrates a good understanding of the required production support and transition tasks and deliverables and addresses the work involved, underlying assumptions, and the interplay of factors. Mere restatement or paraphrasing of RFP requirements does not demonstrate understanding

Completeness and thoroughness of the approach, including items such as, but not necessarily limited to:

o Are the general aspects of production support included?

o Is the defect identification and resolution included?

o Is the transition of production support to CDCR staff included?

o Is CDCR’s staff involvement clearly defined?

Compliance with CDCR’s requirements:

IX.J.10. Staff Management Approach and Staff Qualifications

(Maximum Score = 100 points)

The review of the staff management approach and qualifications will be performed as part of the pre-qualification review and evaluation.

Factors including the following will be taken into consideration when awarding points for this category:

The degree to which the staff experience exceeds the minimum requirements. as determined by the resume and client references

The demonstrated ability of staff to meet or exceed client expectations

The maximum points for each key staff position are outlined in the table below:

Key Staff Positions Maximum Points Available

Project Manager 12

Senior Architect (Technical Lead) 24

Software Development Manager 23

Business Process Change Manager 10

Data Conversion Manager 25

Training Manager 6

Total Points 100

IX.J.11. Costs

NOTE: Cost information will not be opened until the Evaluation Team has completed the previous steps in the evaluation process.

(Maximum Score = 600 points)

Cost information will only be evaluated for responsive bids. If a Bidder’s proposal has been determined to be non-responsive during the earlier steps, cost information will not be opened. The cost assessment will incorporate costs defined in Section VII - Cost, and provided by the Bidder in Appendix C: Cost Worksheets. The evaluation will assess the total cost of the proposed solution, including the sum of software costs, implementation costs, and average labor costs for the contract.

Each Bidder’s cost component score will be calculated based on the ratio of the Bidder's cost to the lowest cost from the other responsive proposals, multiplied by the maximum number of cost points available. The formula for scoring the cost component of each proposal is as follows:

( Lowest Total Cost Bid x Total Cost Points Available )

Bidder Total Cost

To help illustrate this process, refer to Table IX-2, for an example of the cost score calculation process. Cost figures in the examples explain the calculations and have no other significance.

Table IX-2: Total Solution Costing Evaluation and Scoring Methodology Example

Bidder Total Cost Calculation Cost Points Awarded

A $500,000$500,000 X 600

$500,000600

B $1,000,000$500,000 X 600

$1,000,000300

Bidder Total Cost Calculation Cost Points Awarded

C $1,500,000$500,000 X 600

$1,500,000200

IX.K.Selection of ContractorThe Evaluation Team will determine which Bidder proposal has the highest combined score for evaluation factors, up to a maximum of 1,000 points. This Bidder will be declared the “potential contractor”, pending final authorization by the State.

IX.L.Summary of Overall Evaluation Scoring ProcessIn order to further illustrate the manner by which proposals will be assessed, Table IX-3 presents a summary of the overall evaluation process and demonstrates how the Evaluation Team will score each Bidder proposal.

Table IX-3: Summary of Overall Evaluation Scoring Process

EVALUATION COMPONENTSMAXIMUM SCORE

BIDDER’S SCORE

ADMINSTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS

- Responses provided for requirements outlined in Section V N/A N/A

If yes to all questions, continue, otherwise stop at this point.

FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS RESPONSE 200

1. Functional Requirements 200

TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS RESPONSE 200

1. Technical Requirements 200

PROJECT MANAGEMENT APPROACH AND PLAN 50

1. Meets the requirements outlined in Section VI.D.3 50

BUSINESS PROCESS CHANGE MANAGEMENT APPROACH 100

1. Meets the requirements outlined in Section VI.D.5 100

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER AND TRAINING APPROACH 50

1. Meets the requirements outlined in Section VI.D.6 50

DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT APPROACH 100

1. Meets the requirements outlined in Section VI.D.7 100

IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH 150

1. Meets the requirements outlined in Section VI.D.9 150

INTERFACE MANAGEMENT APPROACH 150

1. Meets the requirements outlined in Section VI.D.9.d 150

EVALUATION COMPONENTSMAXIMUM SCORE

BIDDER’S SCORE

DATA CONVERSION APPROACH 150

1. Meets the requirements outlined in Section VI.D.9.e 150

SECURITY APPROACH 100

1. Meets the requirements outlined in Section VI.D.10 100

PRODUCTION SUPPORT AND TRANSITION APPROACH 50

1. Meets the requirements outlined in Section VI.D.12 100

STAFF MANAGEMENT APPROACH AND STAFF QUALIFICATIONS 100

1. Project Manager 12

2. Senior Architect (Technical Lead) 24

3. Software Development Manager 23

4. Business Process Change Manager 10

5. Data Conversion Manager 25

6. Training Manager 6

COST 600

1. Total Cost (one-time) 600

TOTAL POINTS AVAILABLE 2,000*

*Note: All pertinent preferences will be applied to the applicable evaluation criteria before selection is announced. Small Business Preference will be applied as required by law.