This presentation is being provided for educational
purposes only
Please refer to the RFP for specific
instructions
If there are any inconsistencies, the RFP and
Amendments shall take precedence over this
presentation
Best Value Model
Pre-Proposal Information
Cold Beverage Service
RFP # FG 140304 JB
20+ Years of Experience
Univ. of
Alberta
Simon
Fraser
Univ.
United States 65 clients
Univ. of
Manitoba
Dalhousie
Univ.
6+ years
Infrastructure
€1.8B plus €1B
Congo
PPP
Tongji University
Brunsfield
Complete Supply Chain
Fulbright Scholarship- RMIT
University of Botswana Teaching IMT
BV tests
PBSRG platform
Information
Technology
networking
help desk services
data centers
eProcurement
hardware
COTS software
ERP systems
Facility
Management
maintenance
custodial
landscaping
conveyance
security service pest control
building systems
industrial moving
waste management
energy management
Health Insurance/
Medical Services
Manufacturing
Business / Municipal /
University Services
Construction / Design /
Engineering
material recycling
dining
bookstores
multi-media rights
furniture
fitness equipment
online education
document management
property management
audiovisual
communications systems
emergency response systems
laundry
large gc
infrastructure
municipal
laboratory
education
hospital
financial
large specialty
small gc
renovation
repair
maintenance
roofing
demolition
development
supply chain
DBB
CMAR
DB
IDIQ
JOC
Low Bid
IPD
What Percent of RFP’s
Are 100% Accurate?
5
Who Should Know
More About
Performing/Installing
the Services Required?
6
It Is More Important For The
Vendor To Know What To Do
Than It Is For Client To Know
What The Vendor Should Do
7
Impact of Minimum Requirements
High
Low
High
Low
Vendor 1
Vendor 2
Vendor 1
Vendor 2
Vendor 3
Vendor 4
Vendor 3
Vendor 4
Low
High
Low
High
Potential Problems
Owners
Vendors
“The lowest possible quality
that I want”
“The highest possible value
that you will get”
High
High
Maximum
Minimum
Low
Low
What is Best-Value?
• Win-Win
• Client:
– Outsource to experts
– Less management and resources
• Vendor
– Control of project/service
– Ability to increase profit by maximizing
their efficiency
– Higher performance
10
Factors For Success
• Fair
(state/follow rules)
• Open
(open to all with experience)
• Impartial and Transparent (minimize evaluator bias /
provide debriefing)
• Efficient
(minimize efforts)
• Award based on value
11
Best Value Model
12
Best Value Model
13
Best Value Goals
Goal 1:
Differentiate
Expertise of Vendors
through Cost,
Capability, and Value
Goal 2:
Both parties have
clear expectations of
project before
contract is awarded.
Goal 3:
Measure
performance off of
the expectations that
are set with Award.
14
Attachment C – Project Plan
Proposal Summary
•a brief chronological roadmap
1 Page Template
Project Assumptions
•a brief summary of the major
assumptions
Roles, Responsibilities, Expectations
•brief summary of the expectations
and responsibilities that the Offeror
has of the University or University
personnel.
Clarification Period Schedule
•a high level Clarification schedule
15
NOT GOING TO CHANGE…
•
•
•
•
•
•
Specifications
Terms and Conditions
Insurance & Bonding
Contract
Delivery System
Pricing / Financials
Overlays on top of these…
16
Best Value Process
Filter 2
Filter 3
Filter 4
Filter 5
Proposal
Evaluations
Interview
Key Personnel
Prioritization
(Identify
Best Value)
Cost
Reasonableness
Check
Pre-Award &
Clarification
Evaluation Criteria
- Price / Cost / Fee
- Project Duration
- Risk Assessment
- Value Added
- Past Performance
Information (PPI)
Short List
prior to
Interviews
(if necessary)
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
Total Evaluation
Scores are
determined
Logic check to
confirm Selection of
the potential Best
Value Proponent
Project Execution
Risk Reporting &
Close Out Rating
Contract Award
Filter 1
Pre Award Activities
- Training
- Kickoff Meeting
- Planning &
Clarifying
- Summary Meeting
Project Execution
- Weekly Risk Report
- Director Report
- Performance Meas.
- Close Out Ratings
Copyright Arizona State Univ. 2013
Best Value Model - Selection
18
Selection Objective
Selection based upon Proponent Expertise
How to differentiate expertise?
 Ability to understand the project & plan your approach
 Identify & mitigate risks to the project
 Add value to optimize project
 Cost Competitive
Evaluation Criteria
Weight Committee Numerical
Rating
Value
Submission Form
Pass
Fail
Interview
300
Financial: (Fixed Fee)
200
Financial: (gross sales)
100
Risk Assessment Plan
150
Value Assessment Plan
100
Team Qualifications
50
Past Performance Info
100
TOTAL 1000
20
Best Value Process
Filter 2
Filter 3
Filter 4
Filter 5
Proposal
Evaluations
Interview
Key Personnel
Prioritization
(Identify
Best Value)
Cost
Reasonableness
Check
Pre-Award &
Clarification
Evaluation Criteria
- Price / Cost / Fee
- Project Duration
- Risk Assessment
- Value Added
- Past Performance
Information (PPI)
Short List
prior to
Interviews
(if necessary)
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
Total Evaluation
Scores are
determined
Logic check to
confirm Selection of
the potential Best
Value Proponent
Project Execution
Risk Reporting &
Close Out Rating
Contract Award
Filter 1
Pre Award Activities
- Training
- Kickoff Meeting
- Planning &
Clarifying
- Summary Meeting
Project Execution
- Weekly Risk Report
- Director Report
- Performance Meas.
- Close Out Ratings
Copyright Arizona State Univ. 2013
Evaluated Submittals
Allows Proponents to differentiate themselves based upon their ability to
identify and minimize risks to the project.
Value
Added
= additional
expertise
beyond
requirements
Simple, concise, actionable plans
Format of Submittals
 In order to minimize any bias, the Submittals must NOT contain
any names that can be used to identify who the proponent is (such
as proponent name, personnel names, project names, etc).
 Template are provided and must be used. Proponents are NOT
allowed to re-create, re-format, or modify the templates.
 The plans should not contain marketing material.
 The Risk Assessment must NOT exceed 2 pages.
 The Value Added must NOT exceed 1 page
 The Team Qualification must NOT exceed 1 page
23
23
Risk Assessment Plan
Value
Added
= additional
expertise
beyond
requirements
24
Risk Assessment
Template
1 Page - Controllable Risks
1 Page – Non-Controllable Risks
2 pages Total
25
2 Plans in the Risk Assessment
• Assessment of Controllable Risks: risks, activities, or tasks that
are controllable by Proposer, or by entities/individuals that are
contracted to by Proposer. This includes things that are part of the
technical scope of what Proposer is being hired to do. Project risk
that other vendors have due to lack of experience and expertise
• Assessment of Non-Controllable Risks: risks, activities, or
tasks that are not controllable by Proposer. This may include risks
that are controlled by Agency, Agency’s representatives, or
completely uncontrollable. Although these risks may not be
controlled by Proposer, Proposer must identify a strategy that can be
followed or used to mitigate these risks.
26
Risk Assessment Example
Controllable Risk
• VENDOR 1
– RISK: Noise from our demolition may result in student/staff complaints
(since we will be doing demo in an in-operational library during finals
week).
– SOLUTION: We will work with the user to minimize the impact of noise
from demolition.
• VENDOR 2
– RISK: Noise from our demolition may result in student/staff complaints
(since we will be doing demo in an in-operational library during finals
week).
– SOLUTION: To minimize this risk, we have planned to demolition
during off hours and weekends. We will also install rubber sheets on
the floors to diminish noise and vibrations. Both solutions can be
performed within your budget.
27
Risk Assessment Example
Controllable Risk
RISK:
A poor roofing system can result in roof leaks, which may
inconvenience building occupants, increase complaints, increase
maintenance, damage building contents, and be a source of mold issues.
Vendor A Solution:
• To minimize this risk, our proposed roofing system has been installed on
over 400 roofs and has had an average roof age of 18 years, in which 99% of
the roofs don’t leak and 100% of the end clients are satisfied.
Vendor B Solution:
• To minimize this risk, we are proposing a thermally-welded roofing system
that has a tensile strength of 2,130 PSI, elongation of 300%, tear strength of
312lbs, has been tested for 10,000, and has a cold brittleness of -30°C.
28
Risk Assessment Example
Non-Controllable Risk
• VENDOR 1
– RISK: The local water company must have the water turned on by
June in order for us to properly water the newly installed recreational
fields (or the grass will die).
– SOLUTION: We will coordinate and plan our schedule with the water
company as soon as the award is made to make sure that we get water
to the site to irrigate the fields.
• VENDOR 2
– RISK: The local water company must have the water turned on by
June in order for us to water the newly installed fields (or the grass will
die). On past projects, the water company has failed to meet the
schedule 90% of the time.
– SOLUTION: To minimize this risk, we will coordinate our schedule with
the water company as soon as we are awarded the project. If they fail
to meet our schedule, we will setup and connect temporary waterlines
to the nearby fire hydrants and we will also have water trucks on-site to
irrigate the fields.
29
Risk Assessment Example
Controllable Risk
•
RISK: Major risk items typically associated with transit implementations revolve around
change management and business process impact. New technology implementations create
change for the users. Change often causes issues with technology adoption. Requirements
and scope creep also creates challenges. Systems may have thought a certain technology
or component was incorporated in the RFP and/or needs assessment process that is not
included in the actual scope of work or contract. Communication is also an area that can be
a challenge.
•
SOLUTION: A clearly defined scope of work and communication of the scope at the
beginning of the project minimizes scope creep. If there is a discrepancy, scope or
requirements can be discussed early on in the process versus at the end of the process.
Communication is the key to successful implementations. Change management and business
process re-engineering for organizations can be minimized at the technology and
management levels. Management can get early buy-in at the “grass roots” level and include
them in the technology planning process. The Team focuses on providing very configurable
and flexible tools to minimize process re-engineering tasks. The Team focuses on
automating existing business processes and providing additional tools to improve those
processes that need to be improved such as data management….
Value Added Plan
Value
Added
= additional
expertise
beyond
requirements
31
Value Add Plan
• Opportunity to identify any value added options or ideas that
may benefit the Owner and Agency.
• This may include ideas or suggestions on alternatives in
implantation strategies, timelines, project scope, equipment,
goals, financing, etc.
• All value added ideas must be logical and/or based on
verifiable performance metrics.
• Value added ideas must NOT be included in the cost
proposal. Prior to award, the Owner will determine if the
value added items will be accepted or rejected.
Understand the need better than the University can
specify
Value Assessment
Template
1 page max.
33
Example: Value Added Items
• Reroofing this building will not stop all water leaks. The majority of
the leaks are caused by cracks in the parapet walls, broken/missing
glass, and poor caulking. For an additional $10K and 3 weeks in
schedule we can replace and repair all of these items.
34
Example: Value Added Items
• You can save 20% in your cost if you substitute the
T-3 lighting system for the T-2. The T-3 lights are
newer state-of-the-art systems that are known
industry wide as the best systems.
• If we can alter the hours of operation at Site B, we
can increase revenue overall revenue by 5%. This
may be an inconvenience for a small number of
people (less than 50 students) during this time
period, but the revenue gain is considerable.
Example: Value Added Items
•
Idea: Purchase “Concurrent Licenses” instead of “Named Licenses”
•
Why: In a “Named Licensing” model, you must purchase a license
for every user and only that particular user can access the software.
If that named user is in meetings, on vacation, or not using the
system, the license cannot be utilized. In a “Concurrent Licensing”
model, the system loans out the licenses to users as they log in. If a
user is inactive, the server releases the license and allocates the
license to the next user.
•
Expected Benefit: The advantage of the concurrent licenses is
that the Agency will not have to purchase licenses that are not
being used, which can result in approximately 20%-30% savings in
cost.
36
Team Qualifications
Value
Added
= additional
expertise
beyond
requirements
Team Qualifications
Template
1 page max.
38
Things to Avoid
• Marketing Information:
– Our company is known worldwide as a leader in online education.
– We will use our long history to make sure the project is a success.
– We will use state-of-the-art process to make it a success.
• Transferring risk back to client:
– We will work with the owner to resolve issues
– We will have team meetings / partnering meeting with the owner
• General risks and/or general solutions:
– We will plan ahead to coordinate activities
– We will plan ahead to get classes scheduled and created
• Overly Technical data:
– The system we propose has 200% increase in PRX bandwidth
modularity.
39
Submittal Requirements
Submittal Document
Maximum Page Length
Risk Assessment
Two (2) pages
Value Add
One (1) page
Team Qualifications
One (1) page
• Must NOT contain ANY identifying information (names, company names,
project names, product names, etc.)
• Must use the provided template (can submit as many risks as fit within the
page limits of each submittal)
• List Risks and Value Added in order of priority
40
Cost Proposal
41
Cost Proposal
42
Cost Proposal
43
Cost Proposal
44
Past Performance Information
Collected For:
 Key Personnel
 The Offeror (Firm)– 5 maximum
 Key Account Manager – 5 maximum
The Proponent picks their own references
The Proponent collects all surveys
Close out ratings at the end of the contract will be
used to update PPI scores going forward at U of M
45
PPI Survey / Questionnaire
46
PPI Process
Past Client Evaluates and Returns
Past
Client
Vendor
Proponent
Vendor
Setup and send
Survey Forms
•
The Proponent is responsible for sending out a survey questionnaire to each of
their past clients.
•
The survey must be faxed/emailed back to the Proponent
•
The Proponent will submit all surveys to the Owner with their submittal.
47
Example Survey
(Firm and Individuals)
Proponent
Past Client
Proponent
Past Client
48
Best Value Process
Filter 2
Filter 3
Filter 4
Filter 5
Proposal
Evaluations
Interview
Key Personnel
Prioritization
(Identify
Best Value)
Cost
Reasonableness
Check
Pre-Award &
Clarification
Evaluation Criteria
- Price / Cost / Fee
- Project Capability
- Risk Assessment
- Value Added
- Past Performance
Information (PPI)
Short List
prior to
Interviews
(if necessary)
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
Total Evaluation
Scores are
determined
Logic check to
confirm Selection of
the potential Best
Value Proponent
Project Execution
Risk Reporting &
Close Out Rating
Contract Award
Filter 1
Pre Award Activities
- Training
- Kickoff Meeting
- Planning &
Clarifying
- Summary Meeting
Project Execution
- Weekly Risk Report
- Director Report
- Performance Meas.
- Close Out Ratings
Copyright Arizona State Univ. 2013
The Evaluation Process
Total
Score
Contracting
Contracting
Officer
Officer
Submittal
Proposal Form, $, &
Proposal Form
Other Documentation
(1 page)
Proposal
Form
Risk Plans
(1 page)
Evaluation Members
50
50
Shortlisting
• If necessary short listing will be conducted
prior to interviews (depending on the
number of Proponent)
• Interviews:
– Key Account Manager
Interview Format
• Q&A Interview, NOT a presentation
• Individuals will be interviewed separately.
• A standard set of questions will be generated and asked
to each individual.
• Typically interview times will last about 15-30 minutes
per individual
• No substitutions will be allowed.
52
Best Value Interviews:
Identifying Expertise
Examples of questions asked:
1.
Why were you selected for this project?
2.
How many similar projects have you worked on? Individually and as a Team?
3.
Describe a similar project you have developed/worked on to the current project.
4.
What is different about this project from other projects that you have worked for?
5.
Draw out the process for this project by major milestone activities.
1. Identify, prioritize, and how you will minimize the risks of this project.
2. What risks don’t you control? How will you minimize those risks?
3. What do you need from the client and when do you need it?
6.
How are you going to measure your performance during the project?
7.
Other questions regarding the RFP requirements
53
Best Value Process
Filter 2
Filter 3
Filter 4
Filter 5
Proposal
Evaluations
Interview
Key Personnel
Prioritization
(Identify
Best Value)
Cost
Reasonableness
Check
Pre-Award &
Clarification
Evaluation Criteria
- Price / Cost / Fee
- Project Capability
- Risk Assessment
- Value Added
- Past Performance
Information (PPI)
Short List
prior to
Interviews
(if necessary)
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
Total Evaluation
Scores are
determined
Logic check to
confirm Selection of
the potential Best
Value Proponent
Project Execution
Risk Reporting &
Close Out Rating
Contract Award
Filter 1
Pre Award Activities
- Training
- Kickoff Meeting
- Planning &
Clarifying
- Summary Meeting
Project Execution
- Weekly Risk Report
- Director Report
- Performance Meas.
- Close Out Ratings
Copyright Arizona State Univ. 2013
Simple Scoring Methodolgy
55
Dominance Check & Financial
Reasonableness
Best Value
Prioritization
Best-Value is the lowest price
Best-Value is within [5%] of
next highest ranked firm
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Best-Value can be justified
based on other factors
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Proceed to
Pre-Award
No
Yes
Go with Alternate
Proposal or Cancel
56
Attachment C – Project Plan
Proposal Summary
•a brief chronological roadmap
1 Page Template
Project Assumptions
•a brief summary of the major
assumptions
Roles, Responsibilities, Expectations
•brief summary of the expectations
and responsibilities that the Offeror
has of the University or University
personnel.
Clarification Period Schedule
•a high level Clarification schedule
57
Best Value Model
NOT Detailed
Detailed
58
Best Value Process
Filter 2
Filter 3
Filter 4
Filter 5
Proposal
Evaluations
Interview
Key Personnel
Prioritization
(Identify
Best Value)
Cost
Reasonableness
Check
Pre-Award &
Clarification
Evaluation Criteria
- Price / Cost / Fee
- Project Capability
- Risk Assessment
- Value Added
- Past Performance
Information (PPI)
Short List
prior to
Interviews
(if necessary)
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
Total Evaluation
Scores are
determined
Logic check to
confirm Selection of
the potential Best
Value Proponent
Project Execution
Risk Reporting &
Close Out Rating
Contract Award
Filter 1
Pre Award Activities
- Training
- Kickoff Meeting
- Planning &
Clarifying
- Summary Meeting
Project Execution
- Weekly Risk Report
- Director Report
- Performance Meas.
- Close Out Ratings
Copyright Arizona State Univ. 2013
Pre-Award Objectives
Period of time allotted before work begins for the Proponent to:
• Lay out & clarify their plan.
• Coordinate milestone schedule.
• Identify the risks that could cause the plan to deviate.
– FORMALLY DOCUMENT risk management plans.
– Identify what you don’t know & when you will know it.
– How will the plan could change based upon what you discover?
– Address all client concerns.
• Identify what you need from the client and have a plan for getting it
Outcome: completely aligned expectations
Pre Award Document
1. Financial Summary (financial details, how funding will work, etc)
2. Transition Plan & Schedule (showing major milestones, risky activities, client
actions, etc)
3. Project Risks/Concerns (all controllable risks/concerns, all non-controllable
risks/solutions)
4. Assumptions (all project assumptions with associated impacts, identify what you need from the client
and have a plan for obtaining it, roles and responsibilities of the client, etc )
5. Performance Metrics (how the vendor will monitor performance, document success, metrics
used, frequency, baseline for comparison, how will it assist the client, etc)
6. Scope of Work (plan of action, detailed work plan, how technical requirements will be met, baseline
expectations, implementation plan, transitional plan, staffing plan, communication plan, training plan, organization
change plan, what’s included, excluded, etc)
7. Contract (language, terms and conditions, etc)
61
Clarification / Preplanning Period
62
Keep Phase 2 In Mind During
Phase 1
63
Phase 2
•
•
•
•
•
•
Financial Summary
Project Plan
Project Risks/Concerns
Assumptions
Performance Metrics
Contract
64
Best Value System
65
Weekly Risk Report
•
Excel Spreadsheet that tracks risks and impacts
•
Client will setup and send to vendor once the Award is issued. ASU will
provide additional training.
•
The final project rating will be impacted by the accuracy and timely submittal
of the WRR
66
Best Value Review
•
•
•
•
•
•
Proposal ($)
Past Performance
Team Qualifications
Risk Assessment
Value Assessment
Interviews
• Pre-Planning &
Clarification
•
•
•
•
•
Award
Weekly Reporting
Post Award Metrics
Final Documentation
Update PPI
67
Suggestions
 Identify who your best people are (done through measurements)
 Have your best people sit down in a room and think about this project
 Adapt their comments/ideas into your Risk and Value Assessment Plans
 Correlate any suggestions/ideas/solutions to documented performance
 Minimize marketing (risk of reformatting, names, words, etc.)
 Follow all formatting requirements (no names, page limits)
 Be dominant
 Be simple, non-technical, and logical
 Picture what it takes to make the client very happy at the end
68
Anticipated Schedule
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Activity
Project Announcement
Pre-Proposal Conference & Site Walk
Deadline to Submit Questions/Inquiries
Proposal Due Date (4:00 PM Winnipeg Time)
Interviews
Clarification Period
Anticipated Date of Award
Transition Period
Start of Service
Date
03/04/14
03/18/14
03/20/14
04/01/14
04/07/14
04/10 to 05/08/2014
5/15/2014
05/16/14 -06/30/14
07/01/2014
69
Project Overview
1.2 PROJECT DETAILS AND DESIRED OUTCOMES
• The University is looking to secure services equal to, or better than, the level of
service currently provided. It is the University’s desire to have a fixed fee annual
contribution guaranteed commission-based structure. The University’s primary goals
of this RFP are to increase financial return to the University and to increase
satisfaction to the University and the students.
1.3 PROJECT TERM
• This contract will commence on July 1, 2014. The term of this contract is seven (7)
years.
1.4 CURRENT CONDITIONS
• Best efforts have been made to obtain accurate, detailed information on the current
conditions at the University, as detailed on Exhibit 2; however, Offerors should not
assume this information is 100% complete or accurate.
70
Questions?
71