|The Chief Procurement Officer for General Services (CPO-GS) issues this Notice of Intent to Award. Pursuant to the Governmental Joint Purchasing Act, a chief procurement officer established in Section 10-20 of the Illinois Procurement Code may authorize the purchase of personal property, supplies, and services jointly with a governmental entity of this or another state or with a consortium of governmental entities of one or more other states. Subject to provisions of the joint purchasing solicitation, the appropriate chief procurement officer may designate the resulting contract as available to governmental units in Illinois. The CPO-GS authorized a purchase for cloud solutions with the NASPO ValuePoint, a consortium. NASPO ValuePoint is the cooperative purchasing arm of NASPO (the National Association of State Procurement Officials) and encourages, fosters and guides the nation’s most significant public contract cooperative. The resulting contracts are available to all governmental units in Illinois. Pursuant to the Governmental Joint Purchasing Act, "governmental unit" means " means State of Illinois, any State agency as defined in Section 1-15.100 of the Illinois Procurement Code, officers of the State of Illinois, any public authority which has the power to tax, or any other public entity created by statute. For agencies under the Office of the Governor, the terms and conditions negotiated by the CPO-GS shall apply. |
A request for proposals was issued by the State of Utah on behalf of NASPO ValuePoint participating states and their eligible end users under the following categories: Software as a Service (SaaS), Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), and Platform as a Service (PaaS).
Proposals were evaluated in accordance with Part 7 of the Utah Procurement Code by an Evaluation Committee comprised of representatives from the State of Utah, Tennessee, Colorado, Wisconsin, New Jersey, and Vermont. A representative from State Purchasing attended the evaluation committee meetings to ensure that the process outlined in the Procurement Code was followed but was not a voting member of the evaluation committee. Under Utah Code 63G-6a-702(2), the RFP process was used because criteria other than cost were considered important in determining which proposal provides the best value to the State. These other factors (other than cost) were highly significant in determining which vendor’s proposal provided the best value to the State. The following paragraphs describe each scoring category and explain and compare the scores assigned to each proposal by the State’s evaluation committee.
58 proposals were received through the State of Utah’s eProcurement system. The preliminary evaluation stage was conducted by the State of Utah to ensure compliance with the RFP minimum qualification.
In order to be eligible for an award, a proposal was required to score a minimum of 70% of the total technical points available. A total of 1325 points were available in this stage of the evaluation process for proposals that included IaaS, PaaS, or a combination of all three categories. The Lead State and the evaluation committee determined, based on the proposals received, that the Hosting and Provisioning category did not apply to offerors that only submitted SaaS solutions. As such, a total of 1275 points were available in this stage of the evaluation process for proposals that were specific to SaaS.
In the opinion of the evaluation committee, 38 proposals received technical scores that met or exceeded the minimum technical point requirements outlined in the RFP and moved on to cost evaluation. The offerors whose proposals met the minimum point threshold included:
• ATOS Inc
• CDW Govt.
• Century Link
• Cisco Sys
• Day 1 Solutions
• DLT Solutions
• Environmental Sys. Research (ESRI)
• Info Reliance
• Insight Public Sector
• Oracle America
• Strategic Communication
• TCC Software Solutions
• Vmware Inc
• Cherry Road
• A&T Systems
• EMC Corp.
• IMMX Group
• NTT Data Inc
• Collab9 Inc
• Contract Solutions
14 proposals, Vendors A – N, were rejected due to failure to meet the required minimum technical scoring threshold. The evaluation committee felt the rejected proposals lacked technical detail in several of the sub-categories and the proposals did not adequately demonstrate that their solutions offered met the minimum threshold for award. The evaluation committee determined that these proposals did not substantively address the topics identified in Solicitation #CH16012.
The 38 offerors that met the minimum score threshold, had their Cost Proposals evaluated as outlined in the Solicitation #CH16012. All 38 offerors provided a price schedule with a minimum discount from its Cloud Solutions and received 147.2 points.
Based on the justifications outlined above, the 38 offerors identified above provide the best value to the participating states and each is able to be awarded a contract by the lead state, Utah, subject to successful negotiations of the terms and conditions.
Illinois issues this Notice of Intent to Award for 20 of the 38 offerors who were able to be awarded a contract and who have successfully negotiated a contract with Utah. As Utah successfully negotiates additional contracts for the remaining 18 vendors, an addendum to this award notice will be published.