Transcription
CalSAWSStatewide Portal/Mobile ApplicationRequest for Proposal 2019-01Vendor Selection ReportApril 20, 2020Volume 1: TransmittalLetter & Business Proposal
CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Application Vendor Selection ReportDOCUMENT HISTORYThis document is controlled through the Document Management Process. To verify thatthe document is the latest version, please contact the Procurement Project Manager.DATEDOCUMENT VERSIONREVISION DESCRIPTIONAUTHORApril 20, 2020CalSAWSt Portal/Mobile Vendor Selection ReportPage i
CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Application Vendor Selection ReportTable of Contents1EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 11.1 EVALUATION PROCESS RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATION . 22EVALUATION METHODOLOGY AND PROCESS . 62.1 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY . 62.2 EVALUATION STEPS . 62.3 PREPARE FOR EVALUATION . 72.4 BUSINESS PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS . 72.4.1 Review Proposals for Compliance with Submission Requirements . 72.4.2 Evaluate Business Proposals . 72.5 PRICE PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS . 152.5.1 Review Price Proposals for Compliance with Submission Requirements152.5.2 Evaluate Price Proposals . 152.6 CALCULATE FINAL SCORES . 162.7 EVALUATION TEAMS . 163RESULTS, RATIONALE AND FINAL RECOMMENDATION . 183.1 BUSINESS PROPOSAL SCORING JUSTIFICATION . 183.1.1 Business Proposals . 183.1.2 Price Proposals . 183.2 BUSINESS PROPOSAL RANKING AND SCORING JUSTIFICATION . 183.2.1 Firm Qualifications Justification Summary . 213.2.2 Approach to Portal/Mobile Services Justification Summary . 223.2.3 Portal/Mobile Solution Justification Summary . 243.2.4 Staff Approach and Qualifications Justification Summary . 253.2.5 Oral Presentations and Key Staff Interviews Justification Summary . 263.3 PRICE PROPOSAL SCORING JUSTIFICATION. 283.4 FINAL SELECTION AND RECOMMENDATION . 30Table 1 - Evaluation Results and Recommended Vendor . 3Table 2 -DD&I Phase 1 and Phase 2 Price and Normalized Price Points . 4Table 3 -Requirements Summary . 5Table 4 - Evaluation Methodology . 6Table 5 – Business Proposal Scores Summary.19Table 6 – Requirements Summary, DXC and Deloitte .20Table 7 – Requirements Summary, Accenture and Alluma .20Table 8 Firm Qualifications Ranks and Scoring Summaries .22CalSAWSt Portal/Mobile Vendor Selection ReportPage ii
CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Application Vendor Selection ReportTable 9 – Approach to Portal/Mobile Services Ranks and Scores .24Table 10 – Portal/Mobile Solution Ranks and Scores.25Table 11 -Staffing Approach and Qualification Ranks and Scores .26Table 12 - Oral Presentation and Key Staff Interview Score Summaries .27Table 13 – DD&I Phase 1 Price Summary .29Table 14 – BAFO Variance to Lowest Price .29Table 15 – BAFO Variance to Selected Vendor Price.29Table 16 – Business Proposal and Price Proposal Summary .31CalSAWSt Portal/Mobile Vendor Selection ReportPage iii
CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Application Vendor Selection Report1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYOn November 4, 2019 the California Statewide Automated Welfare System (CalSAWS)Consortium, acting for the benefit of the 58 California Counties, released a Request forProposal (RFP) to solicit proposals from qualified Vendors to develop a StatewidePortal/Mobile Application (Portal/Mobile App) to serve the residents of all CaliforniaCounties and integrate seamlessly with the CalSAWS system.This procurement solicited services, including project management support, to performactivities required to design, develop, and implement the Portal/Mobile infrastructureand application solution. The RFP established a base contract period of 14 months,beginning August 2020 and continuing through go-live in September 2021, followed bya one-year Maintenance and Operations period (M&O), beginning in September 2021and continuing through August 2022. The Consortium may, at its discretion anddepending on Contractor performance during Phase 1, approve Phase 2 for OptionalEnhancements. The Consortium may also exercise up to two (2) optional one-yearoptions to extend the M&O period.In conjunction with the RFP development, the Consortium designated a ProcurementManager to lead the procurement process and established a Portal/Mobile ProposalEvaluation Team consisting of the following Consortium staff:1. Regional Manager2. Lead Business Analyst3. Business Analyst4. Information Technology Manager5. Cloud ManagerThe Business Proposal Evaluation Team also consisted of a Principal Information SystemAnalyst from Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services (DPSS).The following two State representatives participated as part of the Business ProposalEvaluation Team:1. California Department of Social Services (CDSS) Deputy Director, Research,Automation and Data Division2. Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) Assistant Division Chief, Medi-CalEligibility DivisionThe Price Proposal Evaluation Team consisted of a CalSAWS Project ManagementOffice representative from Los Angeles County.Based upon 155 Bidder questions, the Consortium provided updates to theprocurement schedule and RFP attachments, and, in consultation with legal counsel,issued three formal RFP addenda.The Consortium received five letters of intent to respond. Proposals were submitted onJanuary 22, 2020 by the following five vendors in the order of proposal receipt:CalSAWSt Portal/Mobile Vendor Selection ReportPage 1
CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Application Vendor Selection Report1. DXC Technology2. Deloitte Consulting LLP3. Accenture LLP4. Alluma5. AgreeYa Solutions Inc.The AgreeYa Solutions proposal was disqualified during the initial proposal evaluationdue to lack of minimum corporate experience. The four remaining proposals wereevaluated and scored in accordance with the established business and costevaluation criteria defined in the RFP. Price Proposals were not opened until theevaluation of the Business Proposals was complete.The Consortium exercised its right to issue a Best and Final Offer (BAFO), which wasreleased on March 30, 2020. The purpose of the BAFO was to facilitate price reductions.Three bidders provided BAFO responses by the required due date and time of April 1,2020, 3:00 PM Pacific Time.1.1 EVALUATION PROCESS RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONThe Business and Price Proposal Evaluation Teams recommend Deloitte Consulting LLP(Deloitte) as the apparently successful vendor to deliver the CalSAWS Portal/MobileApplication Services. The combined Evaluation Team determined that Deloitte providesthe overall best value taking requirements, evaluation criteria, and price intoconsideration. This recommendation is based on the overall vendor scores as depictedin the following table:CalSAWSt Portal/Mobile Vendor Selection ReportPage 2
CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Application Vendor Selection ReportTable 1 - Evaluation Results and Recommended s Proposal12345Firm QualificationsApproachSolutionStaff Approach and QualificationsOral Presentations and Key Staff I nterv 010.0015.007.882.503.755.005.004.50Business Proposal Raw Scores70.041.8868.0044.1320.75Business Proposal Normalized .065.9284.1071.7842.16Price Proposal67OverallWeightDD&I Phase 1DD&I Phase 2Price Proposal ScoresBusiness Proposal Price Proposal Total30.0%25.0%5.0%100.0%Table 2 below provides a summary of the proposed Design, Development and Implementation (DD&I) Phase 1 andDD&I Phase 2 price and normalized price points.CalSAWSt Portal/Mobile Vendor Selection ReportPage 3
CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Application Vendor Selection ReportTable 2 -DD&I Phase 1 and Phase 2 Price and Normalized Price PointsPrice ScoreVendorDXCDeloitteAccentureAllumaLowest PriceMaximum Price PointsDD&I Phase 1 Price 4,479,133.00 6,224,681.00 3,421,438.00 5,695,564.00 3,421,438.00DD&I Phase 2 Price 976,787.00 5,900,000.00 1,543,067.00 417,641.00 CalSAWSt Portal/Mobile Vendor Selection Report417,641.0025Total Price Phase 1and Phase 2 5,455,920.00 12,124,681.00 4,964,505.00 6,113,205.00 5Phase 1Phase 2Price Points Price Points19.102.1413.740.3525.001.3515.025.0030Total PricePoints21.2314.1026.3520.024,964,505.00Page 4
CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Application Vendor Selection ReportThe following general observations were made based on these results: Deloitte had the highest scoring Business Proposal. Accenture had the secondhighest scoring Business Proposal. Alluma had the lowest scoring BusinessProposal. BAFO responses resulted in decreased costs from Deloitte, DXC and Alluma.Accenture did not submit a BAFO and thus held firm on their initial Price Proposal. The difference from the highest to the lowest total price for DD&I Phases 1 and 2was 7,160,176. Deloitte had the highest Price Proposal and received the lowest Price Proposalscore for DD&I Phases 1 and 2. Accenture provided the lowest Price Proposal forDD&I Phase 1 and received the highest Price Proposal score for that phase.Alluma had the lowest Price Proposal for DD&I Phase 2 and received the highestscore for Phase 2.Table 3 summarizes the total business requirements that were exceeded, met, partiallymet/not met and for which there was no response by proposing vendors.Table 3 -Requirements SummaryRequirements SummaryRequirementsScoreRequirement ExceededRequirement Met32Response Exists: Requirementpartially met or not al Not ApplicableRequirementsTotal Requirements Count1441313313313313Net Requirements Count312309309312Total Requirements ScoreAdjusted Requirements ScoreAverage Requirements WSt Portal/Mobile Vendor Selection ReportPage 5
CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Application Vendor Selection Report2EVALUATION METHODOLOGY AND PROCESSThe Consortium Evaluation Team analyzed each Business Proposal and Price Proposal inaccordance with the procurement and evaluation provisions of the RFP, as describedin the CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Proposal Evaluation Guide and as summarized below.2.1 EVALUATION METHODOLOGYThe overall evaluation methodology, including the relative value of the businessproposal and cost proposal, is reflected in the table below.Table 4 - Evaluation siness ProposalFirm Qualifications5%Approach to Statewide Portal/Mobile AppServices15%Statewide Portal/Mobile App Solution20%Staffing Approach and Staff Qualifications20%Oral Presentations and Key Staff Interviews10%Price Proposal1. Phase 1 DD&I25%2. Phase 2 Optional 0%7030%30100%1002.2 EVALUATION STEPSThe proposal evaluation process is comprised of the following steps. The process foreach of these steps is described in further detail in subsequent sections.Step 1 – Prepare for EvaluationStep 2 – Business Proposal Evaluation Process Part 1: Initial Review for Compliance with Submission RequirementsPart 2: Evaluation and Scoring of Business ProposalsStep 3 – Price Proposal Evaluation Process Part 1: Initial Review for Compliance with Submission Requirements Part 2: Evaluation and Scoring of Price ProposalsCalSAWSt Portal/Mobile Vendor Selection ReportPage 6
CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Application Vendor Selection ReportStep 4 – Calculate Final ScoresStep 5 – Final Selection Recommendation2.3 PREPARE FOR EVALUATIONThe key aspects of preparing for evaluation included: Getting t
Proposal (RFP) to solicit proposals from qualified Vendors to develop a Statewide Portal/Mobile Application (Portal/Mobile App) to serve the residents of all California Counties and integrate seamlessly with the CalSAWS system. This procurement solicited services, including project management support, to
