COVER PAGE Department of Administrative Services ... · PDF fileRFP #DASPS-1362-17 – Parking Facilities Management System PFMS RFP #DASPS-1362-17 Page 2 of 38 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION

RFP #DASPS-1362-17 – Parking Facilities Management System

PFMS RFP #DASPS-1362-17 Page 1 of 38

STATE OF OREGON

COVER PAGE

Department of Administrative Services, Enterprise Goods and Services, Procurement Services

on behalf of

Department of Administrative Services, Enterprise Asset Management/Fleet and Parking Services

PARKING FACILITIES MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (PFMS)

Request for Proposal (RFP) DASPS-1362-17

Date of Issue: June 1, 2017

Closing Date: July 11, 2017

Single Point of Contact (SPC): John Anglemier, State Procurement Analyst

Address: 1225 Ferry Street SE

City, State, Zip Salem, Oregon 97301-4285

Phone (voice) 503-378-4650

Phone (fax) 503-378-1626

E-mail: [email protected]



TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION ........................................................................................................ 4 1.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 SCHEDULE ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.3 SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT (SPC) .......................................................................................................................................................... 5

SECTION 2: AUTHORITY, OVERVIEW, AND SCOPE ............................................................................... 5 2.1 AUTHORITY AND METHOD .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 DEFINITION OF TERMS ................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 2.4 SCOPE OF SERVICES ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 12

SECTION 3: PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION ................................................ 14 3.1 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS ...................................................................................................................................................................... 14 3.2 MINIMUM SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................................................................ 15 3.3 ROUND 1 PROCUREMENT PROCESS ................................................................................................................................................... 17 3.4 ROUND 1 PROPOSAL CONTENT REQUIREMENTS ...................................................................................................................... 20 3.5 ROUND 1 EVALUATION PROCESS ......................................................................................................................................................... 23 3.6 ROUND 1 NEXT STEP DETERMINATION .......................................................................................................................................... 24 3.7 ROUND 1 COMPETITIVE RANGE ............................................................................................................................................................ 24 3.8 ROUND 2 PROCUREMENT PROCESS –Demonstrations/resumes/references ........................................................... 25 3.9 ROUND 2 EVALUATION PROCESS ......................................................................................................................................................... 29 3.10 ROUND 2 NEXT STEP DETERMINATION .......................................................................................................................................... 30 3.11 PREFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 30 3.12 POINT AND SCORE CALCULATIONS..................................................................................................................................................... 31 3.13 RANKING OF PROPOSERS .......................................................................................................................................................................... 32

SECTION 4: AWARD AND NEGOTIATION .................................................................................................. 33 4.1 AWARD NOTIFICATION PROCESS ......................................................................................................................................................... 33 4.2 INTENT TO AWARD PROTEST ................................................................................................................................................................. 33 4.3 APPARENT SUCCESSFUL PROPOSER SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS (need to review with Team) ............ 34 4.4 NEGOTIATION OF CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS (need to review with Team) ..................................... 34

SECTION 5: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION................................................................................................. 36 5.1 CERTIFIED FIRM OUTREACH PLAN AND PARTICIPATION ................................................................................................... 36 5.2 GOVERNING LAWS AND REGULATIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 36 5.3 OWNERSHIP/PERMISSION TO USE MATERIALS ......................................................................................................................... 36 5.4 CANCELLATION OF RFP; REJECTION OF PROPOSALS; NO DAMAGES ............................................................................ 36 5.5 COST OF SUBMITTING A PROPOSAL ................................................................................................................................................... 37 5.6 STATEWIDE E-WASTE/RECOVERY POLICY ................................................................................................................................... 37 5.7 RECYCLABLE PRODUCTS ............................................................................................................................................................................ 37 5.8 RESERVED ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 37 5.9 CHECKLIST DISCLAIMER ............................................................................................................................................................................ 37

SECTION 6: LIST OF ATTACHMENTS .......................................................................................................... 38 ATTACHMENT A SAMPLE CONTRACT .............................................................................................................................................................. 38 ATTACHMENT B AFFIDAVIT OF TRADE SECRET ....................................................................................................................................... 38 ATTACHMENT C PROPOSAL CERTIFICATION SHEET ............................................................................................................................. 38 ATTACHMENT D PROPOSER INFORMATION SHEET ............................................................................................................................... 38 ATTACHMENT E PROPOSAL CHECKLIST ........................................................................................................................................................ 38 ATTACHMENT F CERTIFIED FIRM OUTREACH PLAN ............................................................................................................................. 38 ATTACHMENT G CERTIFICATE OF TAX COMPLIANCE/TAX AFFIDAVIT .................................................................................... 38 ATTACHMENT H SPREADSHEET REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................................................... 38 ATTACHMENT I NARRIATIVE REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................................................................ 38 ATTACHMENT J INTERIM PROJECT PLAN .................................................................................................................................................... 38 ATTACHMENT K INTERIM PROJECT PLAN SCHEDULE .......................................................................................................................... 38 ATTACHMENT L COST PROPOSAL ...................................................................................................................................................................... 38



ATTACHMENT M FIRM/KEY PERSONS REFERENCE CHECK FORM ................................................................................................ 38 ATTACHMENT N PARKING DATABASE “AS-IS” DOCUMENT ............................................................................................................... 38 ATTACHMENT O PARKING DATABASE ERD (SCHEMA) ........................................................................................................................ 38 ATTACHMENT P SFMA INTERFACE INSTRUCTIONS ............................................................................................................................... 38 ATTACHMENT Q SFMA INTERFACE LAYOUT ............................................................................................................................................... 38



SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The State of Oregon (“State”), acting by and through the Department of Administrative Services, Procurement Services (“DAS PS”) on behalf of the Department of Administrative Services, Enterprise Asset Management, Fleet and Parking Services (“DAS EAM FPS” or “FPS”), is issuing this Request for Proposal (“RFP”) to procure a Parking Facilities Management System solution (“PFMS” or “PFMS Solution”).

It is the intention of DAS PS to procure a fully functional Software as a Service (“SaaS”) or Third Party Off-Premise Hosted COTS system. This RFP is to replace the State of Oregon’s aging VB6 Parking Database with a modern system capable of managing the State’s parking needs (as described in further detail in this document). The RFP includes additional professional services including configuration of the selected system, training, maintenance and support services.

DAS PS will consider Proposals for either vendor hosted SaaS Solution or Third-Party Off-Premise COTS Solution. All proposed Solutions must be able to integrate or interface with FPS’s other software systems.

Proposers are encouraged to identify in their Proposals which characteristics of, and why, their particular Solution, SaaS or Third-Party Off-Premise, is best suited to the needs of FPS. Proposers may submit proposals for one or more delivery options that meet the requirements identified in this RFP.

NOTE: Proposers shall submit their Proposals based on the type of Solution (e.g. SaaS or Third-Party Off-Premise COTS) they are offering. Proposers who offer and would like DAS PS to evaluate both types of Solutions must submit a separate Proposal for each type of Solution.

DAS PS anticipates the Award of one Contract from this RFP. The initial term of the Contract is anticipated to be 5 years with an unlimited number of options to renew based on FPS needs, Contractor’s positive performance and additional factors.

1.2 SCHEDULE

The table below represents a tentative schedule of events. All times are listed in Pacific Time. All dates listed are subject to change.

Event Date Time

RFP Issued June 1, 2017

Pre-Proposal Conference (Voluntary) June 7, 2017 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM

Questions / Requests for Clarification Due June 12, 2017 5:00 PM

Answers to Questions / Request for Clarification Issued (approx.)

June 16, 2017 5:00 PM

RFP Protest Period Ends June 21, 2017 5:00 PM

Closing (Proposals Due) July 11, 2017 10:00 AM



Presentations, Demonstrations, or Interviews (if applicable) – (approx.)

August 23 – August 24, 2017

Issuance of Notice of Intent to Award (approx.)

August 30, 2017

Award Protest Period Ends 7 days after Notice of Intent to Award

1.3 SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT (SPC)

The SPC for this RFP is identified on the Cover Page, along with the SPC’s contact information. Proposer shall direct all communications related to any provision of the RFP, whether about the technical requirements of the RFP, contractual requirements, the RFP process, or any other provision only to the SPC.

SECTION 2: AUTHORITY, OVERVIEW, AND SCOPE

2.1 AUTHORITY AND METHOD

DAS PS is issuing this RFP pursuant to its authority under OAR 125-246-0170(2).

DAS PS is using the Competitive Sealed Proposals method, pursuant to ORS 279B.060 and OAR 125-247-0260. DAS PS may use a combination of the methods for Competitive Sealed Proposals, including optional procedures: a) Competitive Range; b) Discussions and Revised Proposals; c) Revised Rounds of Negotiations; d) Negotiations; e) Best and Final Offers; and f) Multistep Sealed Proposals.

2.2 DEFINITION OF TERMS

For the purposes of this RFP, capitalized words will refer to the following definitions.

Capitalized terms not specifically defined in this RFP are defined in OAR 125-246-0110.

Definitions described in the Agreement Section (Definitions) of the SaaS Contract (Attachment A) apply to this RFP.

For the purposes of this RFP, all other capitalized words are defined in Section 2.2.2 of this RFP.

2.2.1 General Definitions

For General Definitions, review the Agreement Section (Definitions) of the SaaS Contract Attachment A. .

2.2.2 Project Specific Definitions 95%

Note: Project specific definitions not in the Sample Contract are listed below:

“Addenda” or “Addendum” mean an addition to, deletion from, a material change in, or general interest explanation of a solicitation document.



“Award” means the Agency's identification of the person(s) or firm with whom the Agency intends to enter into a Contract.

“Business Case” is a structured Proposal for business process improvement that functions as a decision package for the PFMS Project. A business case includes an analysis of business process needs or problems, proposed solutions, assumptions and constraints, alternatives, life cycle costs, benefits/cost analysis, and investment risk analysis.

“Closing” means the date and time specified in the Request for Proposal as the deadline for submitting Proposals.

“Competitive Range” mean the Proposers with whom the Agency will conduct Discussions or Negotiations if the Agency intends to conduct Discussions or Negotiations in accordance with OAR 125-247-0260(2) (d).

“Competitive Sealed Proposals” means the sourcing method according to OAR 125-247-0260 and ORS 279B.060.

“Configurable” means the ability to design, arrange, set up, or shape with a view to specific applications or uses. For this RFP and Contract, Configurable means to use existing modifiable settings and controls within the proposed PFMS Solution to deploy specific business and system parameters desired by the State.

“Contractor” means the Successful Proposer who is awarded the PFMS Solution Contract, once Contract negotiations are completed and the Contract is executed

“Customer” means any person or entity who uses the Parking Database to lease a State of Oregon FPS managed parking space or is placed on a waiting list for a future opening.

“Customize” means to make or alter software to meet individual or personal specifications. For this RFP and Contract, Customization means the proposed PFMS Solution requires individual (hard coded) computer language to deploy one or more specific business and/or system parameters desired by the State.

“DAS PS” means the State of Oregon, acting by and through its Department of Administrative Services.

“End User” means an FPS employee or parking customer who will access, enter information or data into, and use the Solution procured through this RFP (PFMS Solution).

“Engagement Plan” means a Deliverable document prepared by Contractor and approved by FPS that outlines formats for billing, status reports, communications, etc., as detailed in Engagement Plan Deliverable of the Statement of Work.

“Evaluation Committee” means the Evaluation Committee composed of selected individuals selected by Agency to evaluate and score Proposals.

“FPS” means the Department of Administrative Services, Enterprise Asset Management, Fleet and Parking Services (“DAS EAM FPS” or “FPS”), and is the Agency and Sponsor of the PFMS Project.



“Formal Project Plan” means a set of documents developed by the Contractor based on the Interim Project Plan submitted in their Proposal. It allows the Contractor to review and refine their estimates, based on the ability to review data and interview staff. The set of documents include the Contractor’s Amended Statement of Work and Work Breakdown Structure, (based on their specific PFMS Solution), the resource plan and the schedule of Deliverables. This Formal Project Plan collectively describes the Work to be done to deploy the PFMS Solution. Once the Formal Project Plan is accepted by the Agency, the Contractor’s amended SOW will be incorporated into a Contract Amendment, which will be used to manage the contractual relationship between the Contractor and the Agency.

“Interim Project Plan” means that part of the Proposer’s RFP that sets forth the Proposer’s understanding of the Work, and includes the approach that Proposer will use to complete the Work and the general procedures to be accomplished if the Proposer is accepted as the final Proposer. This includes a proposed Statement of Work and Work Breakdown Structure, resource plan and schedule of Deliverables based on the information available to the Proposer. This Plan will be refined by the Successful Proposer (Contractor) as part of the Formal Project Plan.

“ORPIN” means the on-line electronic Oregon Procurement Information Network administered by the Department, as further described in OAR 125-246-0110.

“Parking Database” means the existing VB6 application used to manage the FPS parking management system which will be replaced by the PFMS Solution.

“PFMS Project” means the Parking Facilities Management System Project, the goal of which is to procure and implement a PFMS Solution to replace the Fleet Parking Services Parking Database.

“PFMS Solution” means the System selected by the State as part of this RFP process, to replace the FPS Parking Database.

“Proposal” means a written response to a Request for Proposals.

“Proposer” for this procurement, means a person/entity who submits a Proposal in response to this Request for Proposal.

“Request for Proposals” or “RFP” is defined in OAR125-245-0110 and means all documents, either attached or incorporated by reference, and any Addenda thereto, used for soliciting Proposals in accordance with ORS.279B.060.

“Responsible Proposer” is defined in OAR 125-246-0110 and means a Proposer who meets the standards of responsibility described in ORS 279B.110.

“Responsive” means having the characteristic of substantial compliance in all material respects with applicable solicitation requirements.

“Responsive Proposal” is defined in OAR 125-246-0110 and means a Proposal that substantially complies with the Request for Proposals and all prescribed procurement procedures and requirements.

“Scope of Work” means the general character of services and product to be provided, the



Work’s purpose and objectives, and DAS PS’s and FPS’s expectations as to the Proposer’s Services. It is a generic description inserted into the RFP to provide Proposers a better understanding as to the Work Product to be provided as part of the Contract.

“Successful Proposer” means the Proposer with whom FPS intends Award a Contract as a result of this RFP.

“Third-Party Hardware” means Hardware acquired as a component of the System, which is not manufactured by the Contractor or its affiliates.

Third Party Off-Premise (Hosted) COTS” means a software application, computer program, routine, or sub-routine including application programs which is licensed on a subscription basis and is centrally hosted by a service provider and made available to customer and its End User by means of a secure network connection, typically the Internet. (The difference is) it may involve a single customer, remotely hosted application instead of a multi-tenancy application.

“Work Breakdown Structure” has the meaning assigned to it in the Project Management Body of Knowledge (“PMBOK”) 5: “A hierarchical decomposition of the total scope of work to be carried out by the project team to accomplish the project objectives and create the required Deliverables.”

2.3 OVERVIEW

DAS Fleet and Parking Services (FPS) Division administers parking services for the state. The Parking Database is the Visual Basic VB6 computer software application used by FPS staff to manage many of the FPS Division’s parking system management activities for the State. Microsoft no longer supports VB6, which places the State at risk if the Parking Database has system problems or failure.

A new parking permit management system (PFMS Solution) is required in order to improve reliability and maintainability and to improve service delivery to FPS customers. The existing Parking Database is antiquated, brittle and poses risks of catastrophic operational failure and security vulnerabilities.

2.3.1 FPS Overview and Background

The DAS-FPS scope of authority and span of control involves the management of parking systems for the State of Oregon. FPS receives funding from state, legislative, contract staff and private citizen use of the parking facilities. The revenue generated from parking leases goes back into the FPS budget.

FPS (which includes the PFMS Sponsors) report to DAS Enterprise Asset Management, who then reports to the DAS Chief Administrative Officer.

FPS has the scope and authority to update this system, and the PFMS Sponsors will provide updates and report progress to EAM and DAS executive management. As this is not an interagency project, the PFMS Sponsors have the authority to make the decisions necessary to move the project forward. Funding for this project is available within the current funding within FPS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scope_(project_management)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_team



2.3.2 Parking Database Project Overview and Background

Reader note: The following is a high level summary of FPS business scope, and activities addressed using the current Parking Database. Attachment N includes a detailed “As-Is” description of specific functions of the Parking Database, including print-screens and associated business processes used to manage parking services for the State. For further details, please review Attachment N.

The FPS parking program is staffed at 3.5 full time equivalents (FTE). Two FTE cover all of the office work and 1.5 FTE support the parking enforcement effort. FPS manages 5040 parking spaces (4601 auto and 439 motorcycle and bikes) in 35 facilities. In addition FPS supports approximately 13,000 customer profiles that include state employees, other individuals such as contractors, and 64 customer agencies, 700 agency divisions, 8 agency lot owners and 15 private businesses.

As of February, 2016 there were approximately 1100 people on the state parking facility wait list.

FPS customers include statewide elected officials, state government employees and contractors, the city of Salem, general public and others.

FPS office responsibilities include but are not limited to:

Responding to customer requests and cancellations for parking permits in state lots Responding to calls for forgotten permits Answering questions about parking availability Managing the waiting list for parking spaces Managing car pool certifications and the smart commuter program Monitoring parking lot vacancies Collecting fees, setting up payroll deductions Paying taxes, managing collections for state parking meters, enforcement and other

activities.

The FPS staff also manages the parking and commuter programs for state employees in Salem, Portland, and Eugene. FPS is required to maintain a record of all parking lots and spaces and a record for every customer who leases parking, is on a wait list for parking or participates in an alternate mode program (carpool, bus pass, and smart commuter). For auditing and reporting purposes, FPS also needs to produce invoices and track revenues and provide a variety of reports not currently available within the Parking Database.

2.3.3 Project Need and Opportunity

2.3.2.1 Project Need (Problems)

PFMS is written in the VB6 programming language. Microsoft ended support for the interactive development environment for this programming language April 8, 2008. Since FPS is highly reliant upon the Parking Database for the majority of business functions, FPS business processes cannot change until the Parking Database is replaced with newer



technology (the PFMS Solution). DAS IT cannot support the current Parking Database since Microsoft terminated support for its programming language environment.

In May, 2014, FPS staff reported runtime errors in the Parking Database that stopped work in the management of the parking waitlist. After several weeks of analysis and assembling a test Visual Basic Version 6 (VB6) environment, DAS Enterprise Technology Services Application Delivery Team identified the cause of the runtime error and modified the application so that FPS staff could resume wait list management responsibilities.

Also during this time, FPS staff reported that their automated mass-email process was not working properly. An alternative, manual work-around to this problem was developed. No repair was made to the PFMS application to fix this problem because of the risks involved with working in the unsupported VB6 environment.

Recently (April, 2016) bug fixes or simple changes have been attempted (to include electric vehicles, for example). These changes and fixes had to be backed out because of compile failures related to the unstable VB6 development environment.

Because of the recent issues summarized in the previous section, FPS is concerned that without remediation there is a chance of catastrophic failure of the PFMS. Failure of this system would result in the following:

Revenue Loss

Loss of revenue for the State, as the revenue received from parking leases totals $2.5 million per year. This revenue provides most of the $3.2 million yearly budget for FPS. Unallocated parking spaces means lost revenue, which in turn affects funding for parking facility maintenance and improvements and other essential services.

When a state employee leaves the State service, FPS is notified through PPDB or Payroll. When they remain in State service, but transfer to another location, FPS may (or may not) be advised of the transfer. Sometimes FPS is notified by walk in clientele, and FPS staff process the changes manually.

There are numerous exception processes (most manual due to the age of the Parking Database) that now must be addressed by FPS staff. For example, there are a number of clientele (such as contractors) who pay by the month, or quarter. Sometimes the only way FPS is notified of a vacancy is when the payment for the space is late.

There are 4,500 parking spaces, with people moving to another location or leaving the state on a regular basis.

The waiting list is over 1000 for these spaces. Depending on the location, there can be as much as a ten-year wait for an available parking space.

The inability to quickly identify available parking spaces (and inform customers on the waiting list of an availability) means lost revenue.

Productivity Loss:

For a state employee, access to a reserved parking space saves them considerable money (in paying a much lower monthly lease as opposed to paying city parking meters). In addition, it saves them considerable time, as they do not always have to



“find” parking, and walk numerous blocks from their place of work. They also have the flexibility of attending meetings in other locations (knowing their parking space is available). Not having this space makes it very difficult for state staff, who often must travel to other locations to perform their work.

The FPS “Wait List” is a very important mechanism for ensuring long term staff are provided parking. The wait list is prioritized by among other things, disability, agency need, and whether the requester is a state employee or non-employee. Since 90% of the requestors are state employees, this group is prioritized by the date they requested services. If the system does not identify available parking spaces quickly, more and more people are then having to find alternative parking while wait lists increase.

Security Issues

A larger threat exists, however. As IT security becomes more sophisticated and complex, the chasm between the VB6 security and modern security infrastructure widens. This may create a security threat not only to the PFMS data, but also within the state IT infrastructure. Older technology (particularly technology that is no longer supported) can often be vulnerable to external attacks. This may impact not only the VB6 Parking Database application, but other applications located on that server, or separate servers within the State system. In addition, customer data may also be vulnerable. If customer data is breached or stolen, this causes significant problems to the State. Using newer technology, supported by technical staff familiar with modern security techniques, will mitigate these risks.

The Limitations of Older Systems:

As FPS staffs have been reliant on this older architecture with limited features or capacity for improvement, they have also had to develop a number of additional supporting systems and processes to meet FPS business needs. These include manual processes, checklists, manual forms, and numerous Excel spreadsheets and Word documents to ensure business needs are met.

For example, FPS Parking daily processes and activities are often limited to what the current Parking Database can provide. FPS would like to change their processes in order to improve customer service and to improve staff efficiency.

Currently, customers call FPS staff on the telephone to request parking services. During the telephone conversation, FPS staff uses the Parking Database to collect information about the customer, search for a parking space, identify priority and add the customer to the wait list. Other information is provided by customers on paper forms which FPS staff must then key in the data from the forms.

Lastly, these manual processes are complex and time consuming. When a FPS staff leaves the agency, it requires significant training to get the new staff up to speed.

2.3.2.2 Project Opportunities

FPS requires a modern, resilient and supportable, web-based, self-service, software application to improve FPS staff efficiencies, to provide better service to its customers



and to provide essential data for performance measures, quality control, audits and cost comparisons.

To gain knowledge of features available within newer parking and fleet management systems, the PFMS Project Sponsors and Team conducted an RFI in the winter of 2015. Feedback from potential vendors responding to the RFP provided a wealth of information on various features and components available in newer systems. This information will be utilized in developing the scope of the resulting RFP.

An example of an additional feature FPS is considering is the following: FPS would like the PFMS application to allow customer self-service. The customer could enter their own personal information, search for parking spaces and add themselves to the wait list. This would free FPS staff to work on other business processes and allow customers more freedom in requesting parking and provide a higher level of transparency in checking on wait list status.

Other services that customers could perform in the self-service platform include Van and Car Pool updates and allow annual Smart Commuter certifications.

The PFMS Business Case described the cost/benefit of trying to add these features into the existing Parking Database. It was clear for total cost of ownership and other areas, the better solution is to select a commercial solution, such as an externally supported (off premise) Third-Party or/SaaS application which already contains these features.

It will be the direction of the PFMS Project Team to select a PFMS Solution application which already contains the business functions needed to manage FPS services of a scope and size similar to the State. The State does not want to procure a system which needs additional customization, but requires a system that can be configured to meet State of Oregon business needs.

Additional Note: The result will be a significant change from current FPS business processes. As part of the PFMS Project Execution Phase, the PFMS Solution Contractor will also be required to include business transition and change management services, to work with the existing FPS Business Team to configure their Solution to meet their business needs, and take advantage of newer technology.

2.4 SCOPE OF SERVICES

It is critical for any project to manage expectations, and the purpose of this section is to identify the project scope for the PFMS Project. This section summarizes what is in-scope and out-of-scope for the project. In-scope activities will be included in the Statement of Work.

2.4.1 In Scope for this RFP

The scope of the PFMS Project is limited to replacing the Parking Database with a PFMS Solution, preferably from a vendor that utilizes an off-premise Third Party or SaaS System. This system must be capable of replacing the Parking Database (and selected additional FPS Business activities) within their off-premise application.

The PFMS Solution must replace the minimum mandatory requirements (spreadsheet and narrative) outlined in the RFP to replace existing business functions of the Parking Database. While exact workflows (from the current Parking Database) do not need to



be replicated, the business processes necessary for FPS to perform their work must be available within the PFMS Solution.

A major requirement for the PFMS Solution is that the solution must be scalable, and cannot introduce any barriers to incorporating future functionality or integration with future systems.

As the PFMS Solution will likely be a significant change to FPS business operations, the PFMS Solution deployment must include an analysis of the FPS changes needed to integrate the PFMS Solution into existing FPS business processes. This includes a Fit-Gap analysis as part of the Formal Project Plan, and Change Management components to train FPS staff and assist in the transition to using the PFMS Solution. The PFMS Solution will provide functionality that extends beyond what the current Parking Database provides and will eliminate the need for many supporting business processes (such as Excel reports/Word documents) which were produced manually as these features are not available in the Parking Database.

It is anticipated the PFMS Solution will contain advanced reporting features, and the ability to create menu driven reports for FPS staff and management. In addition, it is anticipated the PFMS Solution will have the ability for the State PFMS System Administrator (once trained) to have ad-hoc reporting capability. Training the State System Administrator to develop, modify and maintain reports is in the scope of this RFP.

It is anticipated the PFMS Solution will contain configurable FPS workflow options, and FPS work queues (to allow FPS staff to review and process incoming requests for parking services). Configuring these workflow options to meet FPS business needs is in the scope of this RFP.

The PFMS Solution RFP Sample Contract and Statement of Work will be written in a manner to allow PFMS Sponsors and Team to evaluate optional features and enhancements provided by Proposers, and include selected components into the resulting PFMS Solution Contract.

The PFMS Solution will support the current existing Parking Database interface with SFMA (Stateside Financial Management Application). This is a monthly update file that needs to be in the same specification as the current Parking Database interface.

o Note: Potential additional interfaces to additional systems or enhanced interfaces to current systems (sharing larger data streams), which are currently outside the scope of the current RFP may be evaluated and prioritized for future deployment. They may be included in future amendments, but at this time they are not in the initial SOW of this Contract.

The Parking Database data (and supporting data from State selected ancillary business systems, such as Word Documents or Excel spreadsheets which have supplemented the minimal reports contained in the Parking Database) will be migrated into the PFMS Solution System.

2.4.2 Out of Scope for this RFP

There will be no additional modifications to existing Parking Database interfaces (and their systems). The scope is limited to submitting data via interfaces (in the same format as the current Parking Database) into existing interfaces, and uploading data (if applicable) to the PFMS Solution.



There will be no additional repairs to the current Parking Database. The data must be migrated to the PFMS Solution or ancillary business applications.

2.4.3 PFMS Solution Implementation Approach (See Statement of Work)

Proposer Note:

To allow Proposers to have a better understanding of the details required by the State of Oregon, regarding project infrastructure for IT projects, we have provided in the Phase I Statement of Work in the Sample Contract, which describes explicit Deliverables for Phase I. We included the specificity to assist Proposers in developing their cost proposal. Note that specifics for Phase I (Ramp-up Work) will be negotiated in Round 1 (after initial award). Due to the specificity in the Sample Contract Phase I SOW, we anticipate minimal need for negotiations. Negotiations for Phase II (Deployment) will be after the Contractor has the opportunity to review the Parking Database and artifacts, work with the Project Team and complete the Fit-Gap and Formal Project Plan as part of Phase I. We have included high level sections, with the understanding that Proposer can also insert milestones and add sub-Deliverables that are unique to their deployment, within the Microsoft Excel Schedule included as part of the Interim Project Plan. During negotiations the State has the option (at their sole discretion) to add features not included in the Statement of Work, or reduce requirements after review and discussion with the Contractor, (see details below) Please also note if after the Contractor has the opportunity to review additional artifacts and the Parking Database, as part of the Fit-Gap and Formal Project Plan any additional costs to existing Deliverables (in Phases I and Phase II) must be justified as part of the Formal Project Plan. For further details on the proposed Implementation Strategy and Statement of Work, please review the SOW in the Sample Contract.

SECTION 3: PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION

3.1 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS

To be considered for evaluation, Proposal must demonstrate how Proposer meets all requirements of this section:

3.1.1 Minimum Proposer Requirements

Using Attachment D, Proposer Information Sheet, Proposers are to provide responses to their minimum qualifications as per the instructions in Attachment D. Proposers not meeting the minimum qualifications described in Attachment D will not move forward to Evaluation.



3.1.2 Minimum Key Person Requirements

For this procurement the State requires the following two person/roles from the Proposer’s firm to be designated as Key Persons. Please refer to the Sample Contract as to the roles and responsibilities of Key Persons.

1. Project Manager

2. Technical Lead

Note: It is not required that the Proposer provide specific staff for these key positions at this time, but any person submitted for one of these two positions must meet the minimum qualifications listed in Section 3.8.4 Key Person Resumes. Proposers submitting specific persons (as opposed to generic staff) will receive considerably more points in Round 2, Resumes and References. For further information, review Section 3.8.4 (Key Person’s Resumes) and Section 3.8.5 (Key Person References).

3.1.3 Compliance Requirements: Information Security Standards and Statewide Cloud Policy

Proposers must be able, to the extent the standards apply to Proposer’s Proposed COTs or SaaS solution, to substantially comply with all of the following minimum standards:

Statewide Information Security Standards: http://www.oregon.gov/das/OSCIO/Documents/2017%20ISO%20Standards%20Oregon.pdf

Statewide Cloud Computing policy:

http://www.oregon.gov/das/policies/107-004-150.pdf

3.2 MINIMUM SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

3.2.1 Proposal Format and Quantity

Proposal should follow the format and reference the Sections listed in Section 3.4, the Proposal Content Requirements, below. Responses to each Section and Subsection should be labeled to indicate the item being addressed. Proposal must describe in detail how requirements of this RFP will be met and may provide additional related information.

Proposer shall submit an original hard copy in a 3-ring binder, bearing the Proposer’s authorized representative’s Signature, and six (6) electronic copies of the un-redacted Proposal on electronic media such as USB drive or CD and must be in a searchable Adobe Acrobat (pdf), Microsoft Word (docx), or Microsoft Excel (xlsx) format.

The original Proposal submitted in hard copy shall be submitted on white 8 ½” x 11” recycled paper and must not include extensive art work, unusual printing or other materials not essential to the utility and clarity of the Proposal. Proposer shall not include marketing materials.

Proposals must use 12-point minimum font size for the substantive text (including text in tables) with the following exceptions which must use an 11-point minimum font size: “Key Person Resumes”. Proposers may use their discretion for the font size of other materials that do not include substantive text (e.g. graphics, picture or graphics captions, and organizational charts).

http://www.oregon.gov/das/OSCIO/Documents/2017%20ISO%20Standards%20Oregon.pdf

http://www.oregon.gov/das/OSCIO/Documents/2017%20ISO%20Standards%20Oregon.pdf

http://www.oregon.gov/das/policies/107-004-150.pdf



All of the 6 electronic copies of the Proposal submitted shall be exact duplicates and meet the same criteria required of the original hard copy Proposal submitted.

In addition, if Proposer believes any of its Proposal is exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.410 through 192.505), Proposer shall complete and submit the Affidavit of Trade Secret (Attachment B) and a fully redacted hard copy version of its Proposal, clearly identified as the redacted version. See Section 3.2.2 below for additional information regarding the applicability of Oregon Public Records Law.

Proposer shall submit all parts of its Proposal in a sealed package addressed to the SPC with the Proposer’s name and the RFP number clearly visible on the outside of the package.

Proposer shall submit its Cost Proposal in a separate sealed envelope along with a separate CD or USB drive addressed to the SPC with the Proposer’s name and the RFP number clearly visible on the outside of the package. The Cost Proposal must also be formatted using searchable Adobe Acrobat (pdf), Microsoft Word (docx), or Microsoft Excel (xlsx).

3.2.2 Proposal Page Limit

The PFMS Team has inserted specific page limits for the Narrative Requirements and Interim Project Plan. For any requirement that exceeds the page limit, no points will be awarded for that particular response. The following items do not count toward the page limit:

Proposal Certification Sheet (Attachment C)

Proposer Information Sheet (Attachment D)

Any required forms

Cost Proposal

3.2.3 Public Record/Confidential or Proprietary Information

All Proposals are public record and are subject to public inspection after DAS PS issues the Notice of the Intent to Award. If a Proposer believes that any portion of its Proposal contains any information that is a trade secret under ORS Chapter 192.501(2) or otherwise is exempt from disclosure under the Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.410 through 192.505), Proposer shall complete and submit the Affidavit of Trade Secret (Attachment B) and a fully redacted version of its Proposal.

Proposer is cautioned that cost information generally is not considered a trade secret under Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.410 through 192.505) and identifying the Proposal, in whole, as exempt from disclosure is not acceptable. DAS PS advises each Proposer to consult with its own legal counsel regarding disclosure issues.

If Proposer fails to identify the portions of the Proposal that Proposer claims are exempt from disclosure, Proposer has waived any future claim of non-disclosure of that information.

3.2.4 Authorized Representative

A representative authorized to bind the Proposer shall sign the Proposal. Failure of the authorized representative to sign the Proposal may subject the Proposal to rejection by DAS PS.



3.3 ROUND 1 PROCUREMENT PROCESS

3.3.1 Public Notice

The RFP, including all Addenda and attachments, is published in the Oregon Procurement Information Network (ORPIN) at http://orpin.oregon.gov. RFP documents will not be mailed to prospective Proposers.

DAS PS shall advertise all Addenda on ORPIN. Prospective Proposer is solely responsible for checking ORPIN to determine whether or not any Addenda have been issued. Addenda are incorporated into the RFP by this reference.

3.3.2 Questions / Requests for Clarification

All inquiries, whether relating to the RFP process, administration, deadline or method of award, or to the intent or technical aspects of the RFP must:

Be delivered to the SPC via email or hard copy

Reference the RFP number

Identify Proposer’s name and contact information

Be sent by an authorized representative

Refer to the specific area of the RFP being questioned (i.e. page, section and paragraph number); and

Be received by the due date and time for Questions/Requests for Clarification identified in the Schedule

3.3.2.1Question and Answer Documents

DAS PS will post Question and Answer document(s) on ORPIN to respond to inquiries that DAS PS determines, in its sole discretion, do not affect changes to the RFP. Question and Answer documents provide clarifications and interpretations but do not change RFP requirements.

Potential Proposers should frequently check ORPIN to determine whether a Question and Answer document has been issued. DAS PS is not responsible for sending Question and Answer document(s) to any potential Proposer, whether requested or not.

3.3.3 Pre-Proposal Conference

A pre-Proposal conference will be held on June 7, 2017 at the date and time listed in the Schedule. Prospective Proposers’ participation in this conference is highly encouraged but not mandatory. The location of the Pre-Proposal Conference is the General Services Building, Mt. Mazama Conference Room, at 1225 Ferry St. SE, Salem, OR 97301

Prospective Proposers that are not able to attend the Pre-Proposal Conference at the address listed above will have the option to call into the following number:

Telephone number: 1-888-363-4735

Access code: 8711464

Prospective Proposers who use the call-in option shall provide their name and the name of the company they are representing over the phone at the start of the Pre-Proposal

http://orpin.oregon.gov/



Conference. Prior to the conclusion of the Pre-Proposal Conference, each Prospective Proposer who utilizes the call-in option shall send the SPC an email at the email address listed on the Cover Page of this RFP stating that they were in attendance via the conference call-in option and provide their contact information.

The purpose of the pre-Proposal conference is to:

Provide additional description of the project;

Explain the RFP process; and

Answer any questions Proposers may have related to the project or the process.

Statements made at the pre-Proposal conference are not binding upon DAS PS or the Agency. Proposers may be asked to submit questions in Writing.

3.3.4 Solicitation Protests

3.3.4.1 Protests to RFP

Prospective Proposer may submit a written protest of anything contained in this RFP, including but not limited to, the RFP process, Specifications, Scope of Work, and the proposed Contract. This is prospective Proposer’s only opportunity to protest the provisions of the RFP, except for protests of Addenda or the terms and conditions of the proposed Contract, as provided below.

3.3.4.2 Protests to Addenda

Prospective Proposer may submit a written protest of anything contained in the respective Addendum. Protests to Addenda, if issued, must be submitted by the date/time specified in the respective Addendum, or they will not be considered. Protests of matters not added or modified by the respective Addendum will not be considered.

3.3.4.3 Protests must:

Be delivered to the SPC via email or hard copy


Identify prospective Proposer’s name and contact information


State the reason for the protest, including:

the grounds that demonstrate how the Procurement Process is contrary to law, Unnecessarily Restrictive, legally flawed, or improperly specifies a brand name; and

evidence or documentation that supports the grounds on which the protest is based

State the proposed changes to the RFP provisions or other relief sought

Protests to the RFP must be received by the due date and time identified in the Schedule

Protests to Addenda must be received by the due date identified in the respective Addendum



3.3.4.4 Protest Response

DAS PS will respond timely to all protests submitted by the due date and time listed in the Schedule. Protests that are not received timely or do not include the required information may not be considered.

3.3.5 Proposal Submission Options

Proposer is solely responsible for ensuring its Proposal is received by the SPC in accordance with the RFP requirements before Closing. DAS PS is not responsible for any delays in mail or by common carriers or by transmission errors or delays or mistaken delivery. Proposal submitted by any means not authorized will be rejected.

3.3.5.1 Submission through ORPIN

Submission through ORPIN is not allowed for this RFP.

3.3.5.2 Submission through Mail or Parcel Carrier

Proposal may be submitted through the mail or via parcel carrier, and must be clearly labeled and submitted in a sealed envelope, package or box. The outside of the sealed submission must clearly identify the Proposer’s name and the RFP number. It must be sent to the attention of the SPC at the address listed on the Cover Page.

3.3.5.3 Submission in Person

Proposal may be hand delivered, and must be clearly labeled and submitted in a sealed envelope, package or box. Proposal will be accepted, prior to Closing, during DAS PS’s normal Monday – Friday business hours of 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Pacific Time, except during State of Oregon holidays and other times when PS is closed. The outside of the sealed submission must clearly identify the Proposer’s name and the RFP number. It must be delivered to the attention of the SPC at the address listed on the Cover Page.

3.3.6 Proposal Modification or Withdrawal

Any Proposer who wishes to make modifications to a Proposal already received by DAS PS shall submit its modification in one of the manners listed in the Proposal Submission Options section and must denote the specific change(s) to the Proposal submission.

If a Proposer wishes to withdraw a submitted Proposal, it shall do so prior to Closing. The Proposer shall submit a Written notice Signed by an authorized representative of its intent to withdraw its Proposal in accordance with OAR 125-247-0440. The notice must include the RFP number and be submitted to the SPC.

3.3.7 Proposal Due

Proposal and all required submittal items must be received by the SPC on or before Closing. Proposal received after the Closing will not be accepted. All Proposal modifications or withdrawals must be completed prior to Closing.

Proposals received after Closing are considered LATE and will NOT be accepted for evaluation. Late Proposals will be returned to the respective Proposer or destroyed.

3.3.8 Proposal Rejection

DAS PS may reject a Proposal for any of the following reasons:



Proposer fails to substantially comply with all prescribed RFP procedures and requirements, including but not limited to the requirement that Proposer’s authorized representative sign the Proposal in ink.

Proposer fails to meet the responsibility requirements of ORS 279B.110.

Proposer makes any contact regarding this RFP with State representatives such as State employees or officials other than the SPC or those the SPC authorizes, or inappropriate contact with the SPC.

Proposer attempts to inappropriately influence a member of the Evaluation Committee.

Proposer fails to provide the Proposer’s Authorized Representative’s signature on all attachments requiring the Proposer’s Authorized Representative’s signature.

3.3.9 Opening of Proposal

There will be no public Opening of Proposals. Proposals received will not be available for inspection until after the evaluation process has been completed and the Notice of Intent to Award is issued pursuant to OAR 125-247-0630. However, DAS PS will record and make available the identity of all Proposers after Opening.

3.4 ROUND 1 PROPOSAL CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

Proposers shall submit their Proposals based on the type of Solution (e.g. COTS or SaaS) they are offering. Proposers who offer and would like DAS PS to evaluate both types of Solutions must submit a separate Proposal for each type of Solution.

NOTE: Proposal Order of Content

To ensure each Proposal receives the same orderly review, Proposals are required to be formatted in the order as they appear in and are identified in this Section 3.4 unless expressly noted otherwise. If a Proposal is not formatted in accordance with the format of this Section 3.4 (inclusive of all Subsections) or as expressly noted otherwise, Proposal may be considered non-Responsive.

Proposal must address each of the items listed in this Section and all other requirements set forth in this RFP. Proposer shall describe the Services to be performed. A Proposal that merely offers to provide the Services as stated in this RFP will be considered non-Responsive to this RFP and will not be considered further.

3.4.1 Proposal Cover Letter (Pass/Fail)

Proposer to provide a one page signed cover letter summarizing their intent to bid on this RFP and provide a brief summary of their firm.

3.4.2 Executive Summary (Pass/Fail, NTE Three Pages)

Briefly describe how the proposed services address the affirmative requirements as described in Section 3.4.2. These requirements form the basis for a comprehensive yet succinct Executive Summary, not to exceed three pages, that summaries the proposed services, its distinctive features, and how it will fulfill the Agency’s requirements.



3.4.3 Fiscal Responsibility (Pass/Fail, NTE One Page)

Briefly describe how Proposer conducts business in a fiscally responsible manner and how Proposer will remain financially solvent during the proposed Contract period.

3.4.4 Affidavit of Trade Secret (Pass/Fail – Attachment B)

The Proposer shall complete and submit the Affidavit of Trade Secret (Attachment B)

3.4.5 Proposal Certification Sheet (Pass/Fail – Attachment C)

Proposer shall complete and submit the Proposal Certification Sheet (Attachment C) pursuant to which Proposer certifies, among other things, that all contents of the Proposal, including any other forms or documentation, are truthful and accurate.

3.4.6 Proposer Information Sheet (Pass/Fail – Attachment D)

The Proposer shall complete and submit the Proposer Information Sheet (Attachment D).

Note: The resume information in Attachment D will be scored in Round 2.

3.4.7 Proposal Checklist (Pass/Fail – Attachment E)

Proposers are to use the Attachment E checklist in completing their proposal and submit the checklist in this section

3.4.8 Certified Firm Outreach Plan (Pass/Fail – Attachment F)

3.4.9 Certificate of Tax Compliance/Tax Affidavit (Pass/Fail – Attachment G)

The Proposer shall complete and submit the Certificate of Tax Compliance (Attachment G).

Failure to demonstrate compliance with Oregon Tax Laws may result in a finding of non-responsibility.

3.4.10 Spreadsheet Requirements (1050 Points of Round 1 Score – Attachment H)

Using the Attachment H spreadsheet provided in this RFP, Proposer shall submit responses to spreadsheet requirements following the instructions listed in Tab 1 (Instructions) in the Spreadsheet Requirements:

Note: Proposers should take great care in reviewing these spreadsheet requirements, and making a decision to submit 1, 2, or 3 in any requirement (mandatory or desirable). A submission of 1, 2, or 3 in any requirement will make that requirement “Mandatory” in the resulting Contract.

3.4.11 Narrative Requirements (785 Points of Round 1 Score – Attachment I)

Proposers shall provide an answer per each question following the instructions listed in Attachment I, Narrative Requirements.

3.4.12 Interim Project Plan (Implementation Plan) (395 Points of Round 1 Score – Attachment J and K)

Proposers shall submit an Interim Project Plan for deployment of their PFMS Solution using the instructions and format in Attachment J (Interim Project Plan).



Proposers shall also submit an updated Microsoft Excel (Schedule) using the MS Excel template in Attachment K.

3.4.13 Cost Proposal (395 Points of Round 1 Score – Attachment L).

Proposer shall submit an all-inclusive Cost Proposal (Attachment L) that itemizes the total costs of the PFMS Solution for 10 years. In determining costs, Proposer should assume that there will be approximately four end users who will have a need to use the Solution simultaneously. Itemized costs must include all one-time and recurring costs, as described in the Cost Proposal. The Cost Proposal is divided into three sections:

Section One involves the subscription/license fees necessary to deploy the PFMS Solution as described in the Proposer response to this RFP

Section Two involves the subscription/license fees necessary to maintain/upgrade the PFMS Solution for a 10 year period

Section Three involves the additional project costs necessary to deploy the PFMS Solution (Deliverables)

Proposer shall also identify Change Order Fees and fully loaded hourly billing rates of all proposed team members (by role). Unless expressly agreed to in writing, Agency will not pay for travel or travel related expenses. Accordingly, the hourly rates must include all salary, overhead, profit, travel, and other related expenses. The Cost Proposal (Attachment L) must be submitted in a separate envelope and on a separate USB or CD as indicated in Section 3.2.1. DAS PS reserves the right to negotiate costs and the Maximum Not-To-Exceed amount of the final Contract.

3.4.13.1 Cost Proposal Scoring

DAS PS will review the Proposer’s detailed Cost Proposal (Attachment L) to ensure all of the information requested in this Section is included. Only those sections identified in Section 3.4.12 above will be subject to Scoring and such scoring will be based on the total score for this Section. Points will be allocated using the formula cited below:

(“L” divided by “X”) times “A” = “B”

A = Total Possible Points L = Lowest Cost Proposal of Proposer solution type (proposed Cost Proposal) X = Cost Proposal Being Compared (proposed Cost Proposal) B = Awarded Score Example: A = 200 points, L = $50, X = $100, then B = 100 points



DAS PS will negotiate the final Cost(s) under the Contract with the successful Proposer in accordance with Section 4.4 of this RFP.

3.4.14 Additional Attachments for Proposer Review (For Reference Only - Not Scored)

3.4.14.1 Attachment A: Sample Contract and Sample Statement of work

This is the Sample Contract and Sample Phase I and Phase II Statement of Work for the PFMS Solution.

3.4.14.2 Attachment M: Firm/PM/Lead Tech Reference Form

Proposers who advance to Round 2 will have their references contacted, as described in Section 3.8.3 and 3.8.5 and in Attachment M.

3.4.14.3 Attachment N: The Parking Database As-Is Document

This Document contains a detailed description of the Parking Database to be replaced by the PFMS Solution.

3.4.14.4 Attachment O: The Parking Database ERD (Schema)

This document contains the ERD and tables contained within the Parking Database.

3.4.14.5 Attachment P: SFMA Interface Instructions

This document contains instructions concerning the interfaces and a small interface from State Payroll to the Parking Database.

3.4.14.6 Attachment Q: SFMA Interface Record Layout

This document is the Header and Detail record layout of the Parking Database to SFMA Interface.

3.4.15 Public Record/Confidential or Proprietary Information

All Proposals are public record and are subject to public inspection after DAS PS issues the Notice of the Intent to Award. If a Proposer believes that any portion of its Proposal contains any information that is a trade secret under ORS Chapter 192.501(2) or otherwise is exempt from disclosure under the Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.410 through 192.505), Proposer shall complete and submit the Affidavit of Trade Secret (Attachment B) and a fully redacted version of its Proposal.

Proposer is cautioned that cost information generally is not considered a trade secret under Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.410 through 192.505) and identifying the Proposal, in whole, as exempt from disclosure is not acceptable. DAS PS advises each Proposer to consult with its own legal counsel regarding disclosure issues.

If Proposer fails to identify the portions of the Proposal that Proposer claims are exempt from disclosure, Proposer has waived any future claim of non-disclosure of that information.

3.5 ROUND 1 EVALUATION PROCESS

3.5.1 Responsiveness and Responsibility Determination

Proposals received prior to Closing will be reviewed for Responsiveness to all RFP requirements including compliance with Minimum Requirements section and Proposal



Content Requirements section. If the Proposal is unclear, the SPC may request clarification from Proposer. However, clarifications may not be used to rehabilitate a non-Responsive Proposal. If the SPC finds the Proposal non-Responsive, the Proposal may be rejected, however, DAS PS may waive mistakes in accordance with OAR 125-247-0470.

In accordance with OAR 137-047-0261(6)(a)(A), DAS PS may establish a Competitive Range of all Proposers who have made a good faith effort in submitting a Proposal in response to this RFP for the purpose of correcting deficiencies in Proposals for determining responsiveness during Round 1.

At any time prior to award, DAS PS may reject a Proposer found to be not Responsible.

3.5.2 Evaluation Criteria

Proposals meeting the requirements outlined in the Proposal Content Requirements Section 3.4 will be evaluated by an Evaluation Committee. Evaluators will assign a score for each evaluation criterion listed above.

DAS PS will have five (5) Evaluators; however DAS PS reserves the right to increase or decrease the number of evaluators.

The SPC may request further clarification to assist the Evaluation Committee in gaining a better understanding of Proposals. A response to a clarification request must be to clarify or explain portions of the already submitted Proposal and may not contain new information not included in the original Proposal.

3.6 ROUND 1 NEXT STEP DETERMINATION

DAS PS may determine Apparent Successful Proposer at the conclusion of Round 1 evaluation, or DAS PS may conduct additional rounds of competition if in the best interest of the State. Additional rounds of competition may consist of, but will not be limited to:

Establishing a Competitive Range

Presentations/Demonstrations/Additional Submittal Items

Interviews

Best and Final Offers

3.7 ROUND 1 COMPETITIVE RANGE

3.7.1 Competitive Range Determination

DAS PS, in its sole discretion, may select the top two (2) highest scoring Proposals after initially scoring and ranking the Proposals received. If DAS PS proceeds with Round 2, the top two (2) highest scoring Round 1 Proposals will advance to Round 2. However, if there is a natural break in the scores, DAS PS, in its sole discretion, may increase or decrease the number of Proposers advancing to Round 2.

DAS PS will post a notice in ORPIN of the Competitive Range Determination for Round 1, which will include notice, if DAS PS determines it will conduct a Round 2 evaluation, of Proposers advancing to Round 2. DAS PS will also include in any such notice any evaluation criteria that may be used and submittal requirements that may be required in Round 2 procurement process that is in addition to those listed in Sections 3.9 and 3.10 below.

3.7.2 Competitive Range Protest



Proposers excluded from Round 2 may submit a Written protest of Competitive Range. Protests must:

Be emailed to the SPC;

Reference the RFP number;

Identify Proposer’s name and contact information;


State the reason for the protest;

Be received by the due date and time identified in the Notice of Competitive Range; and

DAS PS will address all protests within a reasonable time and will issue a Written decision to the respective Proposer. Protests that do not include the required information may not be considered by DAS PS.

3.8 ROUND 2 PROCUREMENT PROCESS –DEMONSTRATIONS/RESUMES/REFERENCES

Round 2 Overview: Proposers progressing to Round 2 (2625 points possible) will be invited to participate in a Proposer demonstration, described below. The Proposer Firm/Key Person’s resumes and references will also be scored. At the end of Round 2, the Proposer score from Round 1 will be added to the Round 2 score for the Proposer’s total score.

NOTE: Proposer’s Firm and Key Persons Resumes and References are to be submitted with the Proposer’s original RFP submission. Failure to provide the Proposer’s Firm and Key Persons Resumes and References may subject the Proposal to rejection by DAS PS.

3.8.1 Demonstration ( 1825 Points of Round 2 Score )

Proposers progressing to Round 2 will be invited to participate in Proposer demonstrations. The demonstrations may be in person at a location determined by DAS PS. Invited Proposers shall have the Project Manager and the Technical Lead identified in Section 3.1.1 above present at the Round 2 Demonstrations. Further details will be provided prior to the scheduling of the demonstrations and will be included with the Notice of Competitive Range.

In addition to more detailed specifics regarding the Demonstration, Proposers advancing to Round 2 will receive a data set from the Parking Database, to be used for the purpose of the Demonstration, using Oregon-based data. The demonstrations are scheduled to be held August 22 through 24, in Salem Oregon, and will be reviewed by the Evaluation Team and FPS Subject Matter Experts.

Invited Proposers shall have their Project Manager and the Technical Lead (if identified in Section 3.8.4 below) present at the Round 2 Demonstrations. Further details will be provided prior to the scheduling of the demonstrations and will be sent to the Round 2 candidates after the Notice of Competitive Range is sent.

3.8.2 Proposer Firm Resume (260 Points of Round 2 Score)

Proposer firms are to provide a resume and contact information, to be used as part of the Round 2 Interview/Resume and References process.

The Proposer Firm resume shall include the following



1. Additional information (below) relating to the above projects (used to verify minimum qualifications in Attachment D).

2. Up to two (2) additional projects can be inserted into the Proposer Firm resume, including:

3. Type of company and subject area for which the project was completed. 4. Actual length of the project as compared to the originally planned length. 5. The amount of the original project (cost) award, 6. List of software technologies used (Development tools, database, end-user

tools including version and platform). 7. Size of the team provided by the Contractor. 8. Preference will be given to projects involving the government sector. 9. Preference will be given to projects using the same toolset as proposed for the

PFMS Solution.

In addition, the Proposer shall provide the names/roles/job descriptions of the PFMS Solution Team members to be assigned to the PFMS Solution Deployment. For this section specific team members do not need to be identified.

3.8.3 Proposer Firm References (140 Points of Round 2 Score)

For Proposer Firms advancing to Round Two, the Evaluation Team will contact one reference each for the top two projects identified in Attachment D for a ten minute interview. If the primary contact is not available, the secondary contact will be contacted. The references will be mailed a copy of Attachment M (Firm and Key Persons Reference Check Form), to allow them to prepare for the interview. DAS and the Evaluation Team anticipates conducting these interviews August 25 through August 29. Proposers must contact their potential references, to determine their availability during this time period for an interview before submitting them as a reference. DAS and the Evaluation Team may conduct other reference checks with entities whose identity has not been provided by Proposer, but of whom DAS has knowledge. DAS may also use the results of reference checks to obtain additional information or verify any information needed.

3.8.4 Key Persons Resumes (260 Points of Round 2 Score)

For this RFP, the State requires the following two person/roles from the Proposer’s firm to be designated as Key Persons. (Please refer to the Sample Contract as to the roles and responsibilities of Key Persons). 1. Project Manager 2. Technical Lead The Key Person minimum qualifications are listed below:



Key Persons Minimum Qualifications

D6

Key Person Name/ Role:

Requirement

3.1.2

Firm Project Manager Experienced and disciplined technical Project Manager with excellent verbal and written communication skills to drive the Proposer’s project team and work with the PFMS Solution deployment. Proposed Project Managers shall have:

Two (2) years professional experience in completing parking deployment projects of a similar size and complexity as the State of Oregon.

Note: Preference will be given to a Project Manager having direct experience with the Proposer firm, using the Proposer’s system and methodology.

Note: Preference will be given for Project Manager having a PMP certification through PMI. (Provide PMI Certification number).

Firm Technical Lead Experienced and disciplined Technical Lead with excellent verbal, written communication, and technical skills to lead the Proposer’s technical team through the PFMS Solution deployment. Proposed Technical Leads shall have:

Two (2) years professional experience in completing parking deployment projects of a similar size and complexity as the State of Oregon.

Note: Preference will be given to a Technical Lead having direct experience with the Proposer firm, using the Proposer’s system and methodology.

The Key Person resumes shall include the following:

1. Additional information relating to the above projects (used to verify minimum qualifications).

2. Provide up to three (3) projects, and include a primary contact and alternate contact for the top 2 projects), including the table below for the top two projects. These will be used for reference checks.

3. Within the Key Person resume, Include the following for each project: a. Type of company and subject area for which the project was completed.



b. Actual length of the project as compared to the originally planned length. c. The amount of the original project (cost) award, d. Key person role in the project, and FTE (percentage) worked on the project. e. List of software technologies used (Development tools, database, end-user

tools including version and platform).

4. Preference will be given to projects involving the government sector. 5. Preference will be given to projects using the same toolset as proposed for the PFMS

Solution.

Key Person Reference

Project Title:

Location:

Brief Project Description and Key Person’s Role: Include scope, size contract award for deployment. Preferences will be given for government projects.

Contract #: Contract Start (Mo/Yr):

Contract Complete (Mo/Yr):

Client Name: (Insert primary client contact information here) Title: Email: Ph #:

Client Name: (Insert alternate client contact information here) Title: Email: Ph #:

Primary Client Role:

Alternate Client Role

Note: The State understands that it is difficult for firms to propose specific personnel, if the procurement and time to start deployment is unknown). The State has the funding, and has built a specific and realistic timeframe, and Phase I work can start as soon as the Phase 1 SOW is executed, the State anticipates the Successful Proposer will be selected, the contract negotiated and in place by November 1, 2017. If there is an unforeseen delay, the State would allow these individuals to be released to another project, but the Proposer would still need to provide individuals with the same minimum qualifications as listed in Minimum Qualifications table above. Therefore the State is asking that Proposers propose specific persons (and include their specific resumes and references). If a Proposer does not have a person (or persons) available at this time, they may bid a generic person, but they will receive a 50% deduction in points for each generic proposal, and zero points for references.



Preference will be given to persons having direct experience with the Proposer firm and who have used the Proposer’s technical solution in previous engagements.

3.8.5 Key Person’s References (140 Points of Round 2 Score)

For the Key Persons of the Proposer firms advancing to Round Two, the Evaluation Team will contact one reference each for the top two projects identified in the Key Person’s resume. These references will be contacted by DAS for a ten minute interview. If the primary contact is not available, the secondary contact will be contacted. The references will be mailed a copy of Attachment M (Reference Check form), to allow them to prepare for the interview. DAS and the Evaluation Team anticipates conducting these interviews August 25 through August 29. Proposers and Key Persons must contact their potential references, to determine their availability during this time period for an interview before submitting them as a reference. DAS PS and the Evaluation Team may conduct other reference checks with entities whose identity has not been provided by Proposer, but of whom DAS PS has knowledge. DAS PS may also use the results of reference checks to obtain additional information or verify any information needed.

3.9 ROUND 2 EVALUATION PROCESS

3.9.1 Responsiveness Determination

Proposers being interviewed will be evaluated by a committee as described below:

3.9.2 Evaluation Criteria

Round 2 Proposers will be independently evaluated during the presentation/interview process by the members of the Evaluation Committee. Evaluators will assign a score for each evaluation criterion listed below in this section. If additional criteria will be evaluated, details about such criteria will be provided in the Notice of Competitive Range and in the interview letter, if applicable. Any such additional criteria will be scored along with the criteria listed below in this section.

The average score will be calculated by totaling the points awarded by each Evaluation Committee member and divided by the number of Evaluation Committee members for each criterion.

DAS PS may request clarification to gain a better understanding of Proposals. A response to a clarification must clarify or explain portions of the already submitted Proposal and may not contain new information not included in the original Proposal.

3.9.2.1 Demonstration/Resumes/References 2625 points

Each Proposer in the Competitive Range for Round 2 will be required to participate in a demonstration/resume/reference process of not more than four (4) hours in



length. DAS PS shall conduct the demonstration/resume/references as indicated in the interview notification letter of the time and date of the interview and the all of the following will apply:

All Evaluation Committee members will be responsible for evaluating the quality of demonstration, resumes, and references.

Further evaluation criteria details will be provided to those Competitive Range Proposers offered interview/demonstrations and will be included with the notification of time and date of the interview.

The interview/demonstration notification letter may include specific questions that will require answers during the interview/demonstration process. These questions may also have scoring criteria associated with them.

Demonstrations shall include, but not necessarily limited to: o Vendor Introduction – brief summary of Proposer’s firm and proposed Solution o Overview of proposed Solution, project plan, time line, and Proposer’s expectations

of FPS and State staff/project team

o Live demonstration of proposed Solution, tools, optional features, etc.

o Questions and Answers during the demonstration regarding previous experience with projects similar to this PFMS Project, implementation, services, on-going support, and other questions the Evaluation Committee determines relevant and appropriate to the RFP and Proposer’s Proposal.

o Demonstrations are to be presented by the Proposer’s Project Manager and Technical Lead.

NOTE: Proposer’s are to limit their marketing discussion to 10 minutes to ensure sufficient time for the demonstration.

3.10 ROUND 2 NEXT STEP DETERMINATION

DAS PS may determine Apparent Successful Proposer at the conclusion of Round 2 evaluation, or DAS PS may conduct additional rounds of evaluation if in the best interest of the State. Additional rounds of evaluation will be added via Addendum of this RFP, may consist of, but will not be limited to:

Best and Final Offer

3.11 PREFERENCES

3.11.1 RESERVED

3.11.2 Reciprocal Preference



For evaluation purposes per OAR 125-246-0310, DAS PS shall add a percent increase to each out-of-state Proposer's Proposal price that is equal to the percent preference, if any, given to a Resident Offeror of the Proposer's state.

3.11.3 Recycled Materials

In comparing Goods from two or more Proposers, if at least one Proposer offers Goods manufactured with Recycled Materials, and at least 1 Proposer does not, DAS PS will select the Proposer offering Goods manufactured from Recycled Materials if each of the conditions specified in ORS 279A.125 (2) exists following any adjustments made to the price of the Goods according to any applicable reciprocal preference.

3.11.4 Tiebreakers

Oregon Supplies: If DAS PS receives Proposals identical in price, fitness, availability and quality and chooses to award a Contract, DAS PS shall award the Contract in accordance with the procedures outlined in OAR 125-246-0300.

3.12 POINT AND SCORE CALCULATIONS

Scores are the values assigned by each evaluator based on the total number of available points for each criterion. Points are the total possible value for each section as listed in the table below.

The SPC will average all scores for each evaluation criterion. The average score will be calculated by totaling the points awarded by each Evaluation Committee member and divided by the number of Evaluation Committee members for each criterion.

Cost points are calculated as stated in the Cost Evaluation section.

Points possible are as follows:

POINTS POSSIBLE

ROUND 1 SCORED CRITERIA

3.4.8 System Requirements (Spreadsheet)

1050

3.4.9 Narrative Requirements

785

3.4.10 Interim Project Plan

395

3.4.11 Cost Proposal

395

ROUND 1 - TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS

2625

http://www.oregon.gov/DAS/EGS/ps/Pages/reciprocal.aspx



ROUND 2 SCORED CRITERIA

3.8.1 Demonstration

1825

3.8.2 Proposer Firm Resume

260

3.8.3 Proposer Firm References

140

3.8.4 Key Person’s Resume

260

3.8.5

Key Person’s References

140

ROUND 2 - TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS

2625

ADDITIONAL ROUNDS POINT POSSIBLE TBD

To be determined (TBD) TBD

3.13 RANKING OF PROPOSERS

SPC will rank all Proposers advancing through each round of evaluation. The SPC will total the final average score (calculated by totaling the points awarded by each Evaluation Committee member and dividing by the number of members) from all rounds of competition, together with references, and final cost. After each applicable preference has been applied, SPC will determine rank order for each respective Proposal and Proposer, with the highest score receiving the highest rank, and successive rank order determined by the next highest score.

SPC will rank all Proposers advancing through each round of evaluation. The SPC will total the points from each round of evaluation and cost to determine ranking.

NOTE: Round 1 scores will be carried forward and combined with Round 2 scores to determine the final ranking.



SECTION 4: AWARD AND NEGOTIATION

4.1 AWARD NOTIFICATION PROCESS

4.1.1 Award Consideration

DAS PS, if it awards a Contract, shall award a Contract to the highest ranking Responsible Proposer(s) based upon the scoring methodology and process described in Section 3. DAS PS may award less than the full Scope defined in this RFP.

4.1.2 Intent to Award Notice

DAS PS will notify all Proposers in Writing that DAS PS intends to award a Contract to the selected Proposer(s) subject to successful negotiation of any negotiable provisions.

4.2 INTENT TO AWARD PROTEST

4.2.1 Protest Submission

An Affected Offeror shall have seven (7) calendar days from the date of the intent to award notice to file a Written protest.

A Proposer is an Affected Offeror only if the Proposer would be eligible for Contract award in the event the protest was successful and is protesting for one or more of the following reasons as specified in ORS 279B.410:

All higher ranked Proposals are non-Responsive.

DAS PS has failed to conduct an evaluation of Proposals in accordance with the criteria or process described in the RFP.

DAS PS abused its discretion in rejecting the protestor’s Proposal as non-Responsive

DAS PS’s evaluation of Proposals or determination of award otherwise violates ORS Chapter 279B or ORS Chapter 279A.

If Agency receives only one Proposal, Agency may dispense with the intent to award protest period and proceed with Contract Negotiations and award.

4.2.1.1 Protests must comply with all of the following:

Be delivered to the SPC via email, US Mail, or parcel carrier in hard copy;


Identify prospective Proposer’s name and contact information

Be signed by an authorized representative

Specify the grounds for the protest

Be received within 7 calendar days of the intent to award notice

4.2.2 Response to Protest

DAS PS will address all timely submitted protests within a reasonable time and will issue a Written decision to the respective Proposer. Protests that do not include the required information may not be considered by DAS PS.



4.3 APPARENT SUCCESSFUL PROPOSER SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

4.3.1 Insurance

Prior to execution of the Contract, the apparent successful Proposer shall secure and demonstrate to Agency proof of insurance coverage meeting the requirements identified in the RFP or as otherwise negotiated.

Failure to demonstrate coverage may result in Agency terminating Negotiations and commencing Negotiations with the next highest ranking Proposer. Proposer is encouraged to consult its insurance agent about the insurance requirements contained in Insurance Requirements, Exhibit C to Attachment A prior to Proposal submission

4.3.2 Taxpayer Identification Number

The apparent successful Proposer shall provide its Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) and backup withholding status on a completed W-9 form if either of the following applies:

When requested by DAS PS (normally in an intent to award notice), or

When the backup withholding status or any other information of Proposer has changed since the last submitted W-9 form, if any.

Agency will not make any payment until Agency has a properly completed W-9.

4.3.3 Certificate of Tax Compliance/Tax Affidavit

Prior to execution of the Contract, the apparent successful Proposer shall complete and submit the Certificate of Tax Compliance (Attachment G) to demonstrate compliance with Oregon Tax Laws.

Failure to demonstrate compliance may result in a finding of non-responsibility.

4.3.4 Business Registry

If selected for award, Proposer shall be duly authorized by the State of Oregon to transact business in the State of Oregon before executing the Contract. The selected Proposer shall submit a current Oregon Secretary of State business registry number, or an explanation if not applicable.

All Corporations and other business entities (domestic and foreign) must have a Registered Agent in Oregon. See requirements and exceptions regarding Registered Agents. For more information, see Oregon Business Guide, How to Start a Business in Oregon and Laws and Rules. The titles in this subsection are available at the following Internet site: http://www.filinginoregon.com/index.htm.

4.4 NEGOTIATION OF CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS

4.4.1 Negotiation

By submitting a Proposal, Proposer agrees to comply with the requirements of the RFP, including the terms and conditions of the Sample Contract (Attachment A), with the exception of those terms reserved for negotiation. Proposer shall review the attached Sample Contract and note exceptions. Unless Proposer notes exceptions in its Proposal, the State intends to enter into a Contract with the successful Proposer substantially in the form set forth in Sample Contract (Attachment A). It may be possible to negotiate some



provisions of the final Contract; however, many provisions cannot be changed. Proposer is cautioned that the State of Oregon believes modifications to the standard provisions constitute increased risk and increased cost to the State. Therefore, DAS PS will consider the Scope of requested exceptions in the evaluation of Proposals.

Any Proposal that is conditioned upon DAS PS’s acceptance of any other terms and conditions may be rejected. Any subsequent negotiated changes are subject to prior approval of the Oregon Department of Justice.

All items, except those listed below, may be negotiated between DAS PS and the apparent successful Proposer in compliance with Oregon State laws:

Choice of law

Choice of venue

Constitutional requirements

Debt limitation

In the event that the parties have not reached mutually agreeable terms within 30 calendar days, DAS PS may terminate Negotiations and commence Negotiations with the next highest ranking Proposer.

4.4.2 Contract Amendments

DAS PS reserves the right to amend the Contract resulting from this RFP. Parties may need to modify selected terms, conditions, price(s) and types of work under circumstances related to the subjects listed below. The subjects listed below are for illustrative purposes only and are not exhaustive.

The term of the Contract for additional periods;

Increase the quantity of Services;

Additional new Services within the scope of the Solicitation, if any, at the prices specified within the Contract or at a discount to these prices;

Increase the maximum, not-to-exceed compensation payable to Proposer to cover new Services or additional quantity of Services added to the Contract;

Delete Services;

Decrease the maximum, not-to-exceed compensation payable to Proposer; or

At its option and without further solicitation, DAS PS may extend the Contract to purchase time and services within the scope of this RFP for the purpose of completing any activities within the scope of this RFP.

In all cases, any and all amendments to the Contract must comply with OAR 137-047-0800.

4.4.3 Negotiation and Best and Final Offers

The State reserves the right to accept no proposal or to accept any proposal, as submitted, with or without negotiation. A Responsible and responsive Proposer may be asked to negotiate with the State in developing a potential final contract. If the State determines that further negotiations are in its best interests, it may advise one or more responsible and responsive Proposer how such negotiations will be conducted, and upon completion of such



negotiations, may ask one or more of such Proposer to prepare and submit a best and final offer (BAFO) for consideration. The State may then select a Proposer based on this written proposal with or without further negotiations.

NOTE: A BAFO process is not a guaranteed event and is entirely at the discretion of DAS PS. It is strongly recommended that the Proposer consider its first proposal submission as its BAFO.

SECTION 5: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

5.1 CERTIFIED FIRM OUTREACH PLAN AND PARTICIPATION

Pursuant to Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) Chapter 200, and as a matter of commitment, DAS PS encourages the participation of minority, women, and emerging small business enterprises in all contracting opportunities. DAS PS also encourages joint ventures or subcontracting with minority, women, and emerging small business enterprises. For more information please visit: http://www.oregon4biz.com/How-We-Can-Help/COBID/

If the Contract results in subcontracting opportunities, the successful Proposer may be required to submit an updated Certified Firm Outreach Plan (Attachment F) prior to execution.

5.2 GOVERNING LAWS AND REGULATIONS

This RFP is governed by the laws of the State of Oregon. Venue for any administrative or judicial action relating to this RFP, evaluation and award is the Circuit Court of Marion County for the State of Oregon; provided, however, if a proceeding must be brought in a federal forum, then it must be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. In no event shall this Section be construed as (i) a waiver by the State of Oregon of any form of defense or immunity, whether sovereign immunity, governmental immunity, immunity based on the eleventh amendment to the Constitution of the United States or otherwise, to or from any Claim or (ii) consent by the State of Oregon to the jurisdiction of any court.

5.3 OWNERSHIP/PERMISSION TO USE MATERIALS

All Proposals submitted in response to this RFP become the Property of DAS PS. By submitting an Proposal in response to this RFP, Proposer grants the State a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free license for the rights to copy, distribute, display, prepare derivative works of and transmit the Proposal solely for the purpose of evaluating the Proposal, negotiating an Agreement, if awarded to Proposer, or as otherwise needed to administer the RFP process, and to fulfill obligations under Oregon Public Records Law (ORS 192.410 through 192.505). Proposals, including supporting materials, will not be returned to Proposer unless the Proposal is submitted late.

5.4 CANCELLATION OF RFP; REJECTION OF PROPOSALS; NO DAMAGES

Pursuant to ORS 279B.100, DAS PS may reject any or all Proposals in-whole or in-part, or may cancel this RFP at any time when the rejection or cancellation is in the best interest of the State or DAS PS, as determined by DAS PS. Neither the State nor DAS PS is liable to any Proposer for



any loss or expense caused by or resulting from the delay, suspension, or cancellation of the RFP, award, or rejection of any Proposal.

5.5 COST OF SUBMITTING A PROPOSAL

Proposer shall pay all the costs in submitting its Proposal, including, but not limited to, the costs to prepare and submit the Proposal, costs of samples and other supporting materials, costs to participate in demonstrations, or costs associated with protests.

5.6 STATEWIDE E-WASTE/RECOVERY POLICY

If applicable, Proposer shall include information in its Proposal that demonstrates compliance with the Statewide E-Waste/Recovery Policy effective July 1, 2012.

5.7 RECYCLABLE PRODUCTS

Proposer shall use recyclable products to the maximum extent economically feasible in the performance of the Services or Work set forth in this document and the subsequent Contract. (ORS 279B.025)

5.8 RESERVED

5.9 CHECKLIST DISCLAIMER

Any checklists that may be contained in this RFP are provided only as a courtesy to prospective Proposer. DAS PS makes no representation as to the completeness or accuracy of any Checklist. Prospective Proposer is solely responsible for reviewing and understanding the RFP and complying with all the requirements of this RFP, whether listed in a checklist or not. Neither the State nor DAS PS is liable for any claims, or subject to any defenses, asserted by Proposer based upon, resulting from, or related to, Proposer’s failure to comprehend all requirements of this RFP.

https://www.oregon.gov/das/Policies/107-009-0050.pdf



SECTION 6: LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT A SAMPLE CONTRACT WITH SOW

ATTACHMENT B AFFIDAVIT OF TRADE SECRET

ATTACHMENT C PROPOSAL CERTIFICATION SHEET

ATTACHMENT D PROPOSER INFORMATION SHEET

ATTACHMENT E PROPOSAL CHECKLIST

ATTACHMENT F CERTIFIED FIRM OUTREACH PLAN

ATTACHMENT G CERTIFICATE OF TAX COMPLIANCE/TAX AFFIDAVIT

ATTACHMENT H SPREADSHEET REQUIREMENTS

ATTACHMENT I NARRATIVE REQUIREMENTS

ATTACHMENT J INTERIM PROJECT PLAN

ATTACHMENT K INTERIM PROJECT PLAN SCHEDULE

ATTACHMENT L COST PROPOSAL

ATTACHMENT M FIRM/KEY PERSONS REFERENCE CHECK FORM

ATTACHMENT N PARKING DATABASE “AS-IS” DOCUMENT

ATTACHMENT O PARKING DATABASE ERD (SCHEMA)

ATTACHMENT P SFMA INTERFACE INSTRUCTIONS

ATTACHMENT Q SFMA INTERFACE LAYOUT