MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
“Expecting Excellence Every Day”
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 23, 2011
TO: File
FROM: Lisa Lehnert, Buyer
Procurement
SUBJECT: Award Recommendation for 472R1306815 Supply Chain Transformation
GENERAL:
The Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC), Michigan State Industries (MSI) issued this Request for Proposal (RFP) to obtain bids from qualified vendors for Supply Chain Transformation (SCT). The project is focused on completing the Food Service Strategy, Offender Transport Strategy, Fleet Strategy, MSI Laundry Strategy, development of a lowest total cost Prisoner Stores Strategy, development of select MSI manufacturing supply chains, Health Care Services and Prison Pharmacies, select Administrative Services, Quartermaster and Warehouse Operations and the formation of a statewide coordinated supply chain group.
The contract period is one (1) year, with four (4) additional one (1) year options to renew.
BIDDERS:
The RFP was posted on Bid4Michigan on February 4, 2011, and two (2) vendors responded by the due date of February 22, 2011.
1) Calyptus Consulting Group, Inc.
2) Integrated Strategies Incorporated
JOINT EVALUATION COMMITTEE:
The Joint Evaluation Committee (JEC) consisted of the following voting members:
1) Lisa Lehnert, Buyer
2) Michael Green, MSI Sales and Marketing Manager
3) Jay Ketcik, MSI Operations Manager
4) Laura Heinritz, Correctional Facilities Administration Classification Director
Advisor:
1) Lee McRoberts, Deputy Warden
EVALUATION PROCESS:
Bids were evaluated based upon the following factors:
Criteria / WeightStatement of Work (Article 1) / 30
Bidder Information (Section 4.011) / 5
Prior Experience (Section 4.012) / 30
Staffing (Section 1.031 & 4.013) / 30
Financial Stability (Section 4.011) / 5
3.23 Price Evaluation
Only those proposals receiving a score of 80 points or more in the technical proposal evaluation will have their pricing evaluated to be considered for award.
Evaluation Matrix:
Calyptus Consulting Group, Inc.
Criteria / Weight ReceivedStatement of Work (Article 1) / 22
Bidder Information (Section 4.011) / 5
Prior Experience (Section 4.012) / 23
Staffing (Section 1.031 & 4.013) / 22
Financial Stability (Section 4.011) / 5
Total Points Received / 77
Statement of Work – The bidder completed Article 1 of the RFP, however, the information provided in sections 1.011 and 1.022 was hard to follow at times. The bidder used many acronyms and changed the numbering sequence that was used by MDOC/MSI which made it difficult to follow.
The MDOC/MSI has a strong concern about the bidder’s ability to provide “hands on” training to staff located in correctional facilities located all over the state for a number of reasons. In Section 1.011, point e) “Provided hands on cross-functional leadership education and training to clients…”, the bidder’s response states that it has developed and conducted over 100 training courses for staff and that the course is available via eLearning. Due to the correctional environment, many staff members are located inside correctional facilities so they do not have access to computers nor Internet capability because of the security issues. The need for the on-site presence of the contractor is critical to the success of the contract for supply chain services. The urgency required to cut costs, improve efficiencies and utilize assets in the MDOC/MSI requires the contractor and staff to be present and available significantly during the course of the contract. The bidder is located out of state and in their proposal stated that “the work will require one staff member to be on-site at some point throughout the project work” and that 40-60% of the work will be performed in Massachusetts hence there is a concern that the bidder will lack the physical presence needed to develop and implement the Supply Chain Transformation. There is concern that the bidder will not be available to visit any of the 32 prison facilities, numerous warehouses and factories or other business offices under the jurisdiction of the MDOC/MSI.
The bidder was asked to demonstrate in Section 1.011 if the bidder had received quality leadership and/or innovation award(s) from at least one separate independent recognized quality leadership, business association, and/or business professional organization(s) as a leader in supply chain management, business quality leadership or innovation. The bidder’s response explains that one of their staff has “assisted” a firm in winning the Massachusetts Quality Award and that most of their staff are familiar with Baldridge guidelines. Per the response, it appears that the bidder has not received any awards.
Section 1.011, point i) states “Calyptus will ensure that all infrastructure components for the change are developed with stakeholder input, if possible.” All decisions must be approved by the stakeholders.
The bidder does highlight the use and need for setting benchmarks and metrics in order to achieve the objectives and goals that are to be established for the next supply chain contract.
Bidder Information – The bidder did provide the information required in Section 4.011.
Prior Experience – The vendor did provide three prior experiences as requested in Section 4.014. However, the vendor did not include the dates for the projects or the cost of each project. The bidder also failed to provide sufficient details on each experience to demonstrate the relevance of the experiences.
The bidder’s experiences indicate more instruction and evaluation than implementation of supply chain practices.
Staffing – The bidder did provide a chart of roles and responsibilities for their key staff members along with a chart listing the knowledge and skill sets of four of the key staff. However, in Section 4.013, it requires the resumes to include detailed, chronological work experience, which the bidder did not provide. Also, the bidder states that all of the staff have Masters Degrees, but did not include the education of four of the staff members on the resumes provided. The experience of the staff members seems to be specialized in procurement, contract management and strategic sourcing. Staffing that would meet significant areas of interest requested by the RFP such as change management and process engineering appears limited.
In Section 1.031, the bidder mentions that they expect to have one staff member on-site at some point throughout the project. Again, there is a concern that this will not be enough of a physical presence to accomplish the requirements of this RFP. The MDOC/MSI needs a “hands on” approach to develop and implement the new SCT throughout the entire state of Michigan.
Financial Stability – The bidder has been in business for 18 years and appears to be financial stable.
Integrated Strategies Incorporated
Criteria / Weight ReceivedStatement of Work (Article 1) / 28
Bidder Information (Section 4.011) / 5
Prior Experience (Section 4.012) / 30
Staffing (Sections 1.031 & 4.013) / 29
Financial Stability / 3
Total Points Received / 95
Statement of Work – The bidder completed Article 1 of the RFP. The RFP was compiled in a fashion that was easy to understand. The bidder supplied numerous exhibits that were labeled and easy to find.
The bidder holds the State of Michigan’s Quality Leadership Award at the Navigator Recognition Level. This award is for the State’s highest honor for outstanding quality and customer service. The bidder has received numerous other awards as well.
The bidder stated in Section 1.011 that they develop, offer and implement hands on cross functional supply chain training. The bidder authored their first cross-functional infrastructure approach in 1988, which has been utilized by dozens of companies across multiple industries. The bidder has created implementation tools and metrics specific for clients. The bidder will continue the SCT approach to include high level assessment of processes focused on customer service and business process improvements while furthering new opportunities for the current CQI teams. The bidder explained that they will use a sampling approach which consists of sampling representative facilities, processes and/or functions which will be physically visited and, working with MDOC staff, assessed for opportunities and the development of go forward recommendations. The sampling approach will then be used as the SCT concept is implemented to the appropriate MDOC/MSI locations. The bidder also conducts work sessions that allow MDOC/MSI staff to continually have an open and ongoing dialog with the bidder’s initiatives team. The bidder’s approach promotes a close working relationship between the bidder’s initiative team and the MDOC/MSI staff. The work sessions also provide frequent interaction between the bidder’s staff and the MDOC/MSI personnel.
Bidder Information – The bidder did provide the information required in Section 4.011.
Prior Experience – The vendor provided the three prior experiences as requested in Section 4.014. The bidder provided details of the experience along with the beginning and completion dates for the projects and the costs.
Staffing – The bidder provided resumes for all key staff members listed in the RFP. The resumes included experience, education and detailed, chronological employment history for all members, except for one. One resume was missing past employment history.
The bidder has obtained subcontractors that specialize in the areas that the MDOC/MSI is seeking to have assessed to locate efficiencies, if the bidder does not have the expertise in that particular area.
The bidder also stated that “team members should travel and/or operate out of client locations if their presence at that location creates client value beyond operating out of their home offices (i.e. interviews, data collection, facilitating work sessions, etc.).” This allows a “hands on” approach that MDOC/MSI needs to complete the requirements of the RFP.
Financial Stability – The bidder has been in business for 20 years. The bidder did not provide their sales volumes by year for each of the last five (5) years as requested in Section 4.011. The bidder provided an “average” per year.
EVALUATION RESULTS:
EVALUATIONBidder: / Score:
Calyptus Consulting Group, Inc. / 77
Integrated Strategies Incorporated / 95
AWARD RECOMMENDATION:
Integrated Strategies Incorporated met the 80 point threshold, but Calyptus Consulting Group, Inc. did not.
The pricing was opened and reviewed for the vendor that met the 80 point threshold. After reviewing the pricing for the bidder that passed the technical proposal evaluation, the bid was awarded to Integrated Strategies Incorporated.
APPROVALS:
I agree with the synopsis as written this day, February 23, 2011.
______
Voting Member – Michael Green Date
______
Voting Member – Jay Ketcik Date
______
Voting Member – Laura Heinritz Date
______
JEC Chair – Lisa Lehnert Date