**IMPORTANT NOTICE**
- The format of this RFP has been simplified.
- Only the following pages require signatures:
- Exhibit A – Bid Response Packet, Bidder Information and Acceptancepage
- Must be signed by Bidder
- Exhibit A – Bid Response Packet, SLEB Partnering Information Sheet
- Must be signed by Bidder
- Must be signed by SLEB Partnerif subcontracting to a SLEB
Please read EXHIBIT A – Bid Response Packet carefully,INCOMPLETE BIDS WILL BE REJECTED. Alameda County will not accept submissions or documentation after the bid response due date.
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL No. 901142
for
Utility Users Tax Audit Services
For complete information regarding this project, see RFPposted ator contact the County representative listed below. Thank you for your interest!Contact Person:Nicholas Roberts, Contract Specialist I
Phone Number: (510) 208-9616
E-mail Address:
RESPONSE DUE
by
2:00 p.m.
on
September 24, 2013
at
Alameda County, GSA–Purchasing
1401 Lakeside Drive, Suite 907
Oakland, CA 94612
Alameda County is committed to reducing environmental impacts across our entire supply chain.
If printing this document, please print only what you need, print double-sided, and use recycled-content paper.
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
REQUEST FORPROPOSALNo.901142
SPECIFICATIONS, TERMS & CONDITIONS
for
Utility Users Tax Audit Services
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I.STATEMENT OF WORK
A.INTENT
B.BACKGROUND
C.SCOPE
D.BIDDER QUALIFICATIONS
E.SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
F.DELIVERABLES / REPORTS
II.CALENDAR OF EVENTS
G.NETWORKING / BIDDERS CONFERENCES
III.COUNTY PROCEDURES, TERMS, AND CONDITIONS
H.EVALUATION CRITERIA / SELECTION COMMITTEE
I.CONTRACT EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT
J.NOTICE OF RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD
K.TERM / TERMINATION / RENEWAL
L.QUANTITIES
M.PRICING
N.AWARD
O.METHOD OF ORDERING
P.INVOICING
Q.ACCOUNT MANAGER / SUPPORT STAFF
IV.INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
R.COUNTY CONTACTS
S.SUBMITTAL OF BIDS
T.RESPONSE FORMAT
ATTACHMENTS
EXHIBIT A -BID RESPONSE PACKET
EXHIBIT B - INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
EXHIBIT C - VENDOR BID LIST
Specifications, Terms & Conditions
for Utility Users Tax Audit Services
I.STATEMENT OF WORK
A.INTENT
The intent of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to search for qualified vendors who are able to provide Alameda County with auditing, monitoring, and consulting services to recover unrealized tax revenues for the County.
The County intends to award a three-year contract (with option to renew) to the bidder(s) selected as the most responsible bidder(s) whose response conforms to the RFP and meets the County’s requirements.
It is the intent of these specifications, terms and conditions to procure the most environmentally preferable products with equivalent or higher performance and at equal or lower cost than traditional products. Specific requirements from the County’s Sustainability Program that are related to this Bid are included in the appropriate Bid sections.
B.BACKGROUND
Alameda County collects the utility users tax imposed on users of utility services in the unincorporated area of the County. Utility service providers collect the tax and remit it to the County through its Business License Tax Office located in Hayward, California. To assure that service providers adhere to the duties in accordance with the County ordinance, and discover unrealized utility users tax revenue, a contractor conducts regular audits of service providers’ filed returns and remittance of the tax collected. The contractor also meets with County staff to provide regular updates. These updates primarily involve: audit progress/findings; pending legislation or litigation expected to impact utility users tax collections; guidance on nexus issues; assistance with utility users exemption status verification.
C.SCOPE
The awarded contractor shall perform audits, report findings, andprovide clarification regarding audit requests to individuals, businesses, and utility companies. The contractor must be experienced in dealing with nexus and exemption status issues that often arise when collecting utility users tax. The vendor must also have the ability to keep up with changing legislation,andwith pending litigation expected to affect the ability to collect these taxes. The contrator shall make recommendations to County staff to improve collections. The contractor shall generatespecial reports as requested.
Services provided shall include methods to maintain the highest level of compliance with the County’s Utility Users Tax Ordinance Chapter 2.12, which can be found at:
D.BIDDER QUALIFICATIONS
1.BIDDER Minimum Qualifications
a.Bidder shall be regularly and continuously engaged in the business of providing tax audit management for city, county or state agencies for at least five (5) years.
b.Bidder shall have at least three (3) years of experience in performing revenue recovery audit services forother municipalities and/or governmental agencies.
c.Bidder shall possess all permits, licenses and professional credentials necessary to supply product and perform services as specified under this RFP.
E.SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
Contractor will identify utility service providers that have failed to collect the utility users tax, or to remit collected taxes to the County. The contractor will identify improper collection of taxes, refusals to collect taxes; incorrect assertions of no physical presence in unincorporated area of the County, or improper exemption of utility users. Contractor will make recommendations for collection of taxes from service providers and assist County staff with developing and applying recommended collection methods.
1.Process: Contractor will review the County’s Utility Users Tax for tax reporting errors in accordance with legislation as described in Title 2: Revenue and Finance, in the Alameda County General Ordinance Code.
2.Revenue Flow: Contractor will screen revenue sources for tax reporting errors.
3.Accuracy: Contractor shall determine the accuracy of the tax remittance. Contractor shall calculate the billable tax due,plus penalties and interest for the specific tax being audited.
4.Internal Corrections: Contractor shall identify and distinguish between:
a.Unreported taxes;
b.Under-reported taxes; and
c.Improperly reported taxes.
5.Projections: Contractor shall assist the County by providing tax projections. Contractor shall assist the County as soon as practical by forecasting the potential impact on collection of the specific County tax, due to legislative changes or precedent setting litigation.
6.Advice: The Contractor shall meet with County staff face-to-face quarterly, and by conference call monthly, to provide audit progress/findings; pending legislation or litigation expected to impact utility users tax collections; guidance on nexus issues; assistance with utility users exemption status verification and other issues impacting collection revenues.
7.Audit Standards: Contractor accountants shall use sound professional judgment in determining the standards that apply to each specific audit. Any determination that standard guidelines do not apply to an audit shall be reported in supporting documents. Situations may occur in which government auditors are not able to follow an applicable standard and are not able to withdraw from the audit. In those situations, the Contractor shall disclose in the Scope section of their report:
a.That an applicable standard was not followed;
b.The reasons why the standard was not followed; and,
c.How that missing standard is expected to affect the audit.
8.Quality Control: Contractor shall make external quality control review report available to auditors using their work, to appropriate oversight bodies, and to the public.
9.Implementation: Contractor shall implement their processes to include a first month review due February 3, 2014 and a first quarterly report due April 18, 2014.
F.DELIVERABLES/REPORTS
1.Reports: Contractor shall generate special reports for the County as required. Such reports may include, but are not limited to, the following:
a.Analysis of tax activity by category or service provider type;
b.Preparation of custom reports organized by the County defined parameters on major utility provider with substantial remittance increase and decline comparisons, report shall identify reason for changes;
c.Preparation of quarterly reports that identify changes in service providers by major providers and/or categories.
2.All written reports submitted to the County shall include a section entitled Scope at the beginning, which shall include a title, brief description, and note any unusual properties or exceptions that pertain to that specific report.
3.Quarterly reports shall demonstrate that any new Utility Users Tax is based upon a building that has been billed for utility services at least four (4) months without paying the required Utility Users Tax. This report shall include:
a.The name of the building owner;
b.The complete address and phone number of the building;
c.Estimate of all taxes and penalties generated; and
d.Summary of all taxes and penalties paid by utilities serving the building.
II.CALENDAR OF EVENTS
EVENT / DATE/LOCATIONRequest Issued / August 8, 2013
Written Questions Due / by 5:00 p.m. on August 23, 2013
Networking/Bidders Conference #1 / August 22, 2013 @ 10:00 a.m. / at:Castro Valley Library
Canyon Room
3600 Norbridge Avenue
Castro Valley, CA 94546
Networking/Bidders Conference #2 / August 23, 2013 @ 2:00 p.m. / at:General Services Agency
Room 228, 2nd Floor
1401 Lakeside Drive
Oakland, CA 94612
Addendum Issued / September 10, 2013
Response Due / September 24, 2013 by 2:00 p.m.
Evaluation Period / September 24 – October 11, 2013
Vendor Interviews / October 10-11, 2013
Board Letter Recommending Award Issued / November 21, 2013
Board Consideration Award Date / December 3, 2013
Transition Start Date / December 4, 2013
Contract Start Date / January 1, 2014
Note:Award and start dates are approximate.
G.NETWORKING / BIDDERS CONFERENCES
Networking/bidders conferences will be held to:
1.Provide an opportunity for Small Local Emerging Businesses (SLEBs) and large firms to network and develop subcontracting relationships in order to participate in the contract(s) that may result from this RFP.
2.Provide an opportunity for bidders to ask specific questions about the project and requestRFP clarification.
3.Provide the County with an opportunity to receive feedback regarding the project and RFP.
All questions will be addressed, and the list of attendees will be included, in an RFPAddendum following the networking/bidders conferences.
Potential bidders are strongly encouraged to attend networking/bidders conferences in order to further facilitate subcontracting relationships. Vendors who attend a networking/bidders conference will be added to the Vendor Bid List. Failure to participate in a networking/bidders conference will in no way relieve the Contractor from furnishing goods and/or services required in accordance with these specifications, terms and conditions. Attendance at a networking/bidders conference is highly recommended but is not mandatory.
III.COUNTY PROCEDURES, TERMS, AND CONDITIONS
H.EVALUATION CRITERIA / SELECTION COMMITTEE
All proposals will be evaluated by a County Selection Committee (CSC). The County Selection Committee may be composed of County staff and other parties that may have expertise or experience in Tax Audit and Consulting Services. The CSC will score and recommend a Contractor in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in this RFP. The evaluation of the proposals shall be within the sole judgment and discretion of the CSC.
All contact during the evaluation phase shall be through the GSA–Purchasing Department only. Bidders shall neither contact nor lobby evaluators during the evaluation process. Attempts by Bidder to contact and/or influence members of the CSC may result in disqualification of Bidder.
The CSC will evaluate each proposal meeting the qualification requirements set forth in this RFP. Bidders should bear in mind that any proposal that is unrealistic in terms of the technical or schedule commitments, or unrealistically high or low in cost, will be deemed reflective of an inherent lack of technical competence or indicative of a failure to comprehend the complexity and risk of the County’s requirements as set forth in this RFP.
Bidders are advised that in the evaluation of cost it will be assumed that the unit price quoted is correct in the case of a discrepancy between the unit price and an extension.
As a result of this RFP, the County intends to award a contract to the responsible bidder(s) whose response conforms to the RFP and whose bid presents the greatest value to the County, all evaluation criteria considered. The combined weight of the evaluation criteria is greater in importance than cost in determining the greatest value to the County. The goal is to award a contract to the bidder(s) that proposes the County the best quality as determined by the combined weight of the evaluation criteria. The County may award a contract of higher qualitative competence over the lowest priced response.
The basic information that each section should contain is specified below, these specifications should be considered as minimum requirements. Much of the material needed to present a comprehensive proposal can be placed into one of the sections listed. However, other criteria may be added to further support the evaluation process whenever such additional criteria are deemed appropriate in considering the nature of the goods and/or services being solicited.
Each of the Evaluation Criteria below will be used in ranking and determining the quality of bidders’ proposals. Proposals will be evaluated according to each Evaluation Criteria, and scored on the zero to five-point scale outlined below. The scores for all Evaluation Criteria will then be added, according to their assigned weight (below), to arrive at a weighted score for each proposal. A proposal with a high weighted total will be deemed of higher quality than a proposal with a lesser-weighted total. The final maximum score for any project is five hundred fifty (550) points, including the possible fifty (50) pointsfor local and small, local and emerging, or local preference points (maximum 10% of final score).
The evaluation process may include a two-stage approach including an initial evaluation of the written proposal and preliminary scoring to develop a short list of bidders that will continue to the final stage of oral presentation and interview and reference checks. The preliminary scoring will be based on the total points, excluding points allocated to references, oral presentation and interview.
If the two-stage approach is used, the three (3) bidders receiving the highest preliminary scores and with at least 200 points will be invited to an oral presentation and interview. Only the bidders meeting the short list criteria will proceed to the next stage. All other bidders will be deemed eliminated from the process. All bidders will be notified of the short list participants; however, the preliminary scores at that time will not be communicated to bidders.
The zero to five-point scale range is defined as follows:
0 / Not Acceptable / Non-responsive, fails to meet RFP specification. The approach has no probability of success. If a mandatory requirement this score will result in disqualification of proposal.1 / Poor / Below average, falls short of expectations, is substandard to that which is the average or expected norm, has a low probability of success in achieving objectives per RFP.
2 / Fair / Has a reasonable probability of success, however, some objectives may not be met.
3 / Average / Acceptable, achieves all objectives in a reasonable fashion per RFP specification. This will be the baseline score for each item with adjustments based on interpretation of proposal by Evaluation Committee members.
4 / Above Average / Good / Very good probability of success, better than that which is average or expected as the norm. Achieves all objectives per RFP requirements and expectations.
5 / Excellent / Exceptional / Exceeds expectations, very innovative, clearly superior to that which is average or expected as the norm. Excellent probability of success and in achieving all objectives and meeting RFP specification.
The Evaluation Criteria and their respective weights are as follows:
Evaluation Criteria / WeightA. / Completeness of Response:
Responses to this RFP must be complete. Responses that do not include the proposal content requirements identified within this RFP and subsequent Addenda and do not address each of the items listed below will be considered incomplete, be rated a Fail in the Evaluation Criteria and will receive no further consideration.
Responses that are rated a Fail and are not considered may be picked up at the delivery location within 14 calendar days of contract award and/or the completion of the competitive process. / Pass/Fail
B. / Financial Stability (See Exhibit A – Bid Response Packet) / Pass/Fail
C. / Debarment and Suspension:
Bidders, its principal and named subcontractors are not identified on the list of Federally debarred, suspended or other excluded parties located at / Pass/Fail
D. / Cost:
The points for Cost will be computed by dividing the amount of the lowest responsive bid received by each bidder’s total proposed cost.
While not reflected in the Cost evaluation points, an evaluation may also be made of:
- Reasonableness (i.e., does the proposed pricing accurately reflect the bidder’s effort to meet requirements and objectives?);
- Realism (i.e., is the proposed cost appropriate to the nature of the products and services to be provided?); and
- Affordability (i.e., the ability of the County to finance services).
While not reflected in the Cost evaluation points, an evaluation may also be made of (a) reasonableness (i.e., does the proposed pricing accurately reflect the bidder’s effort to meet requirements and objectives?); (b) realism (i.e., is the proposed cost appropriate to the nature of the products and services to be provided?); and (c) affordability (i.e., the ability of the County to finance the equipment/ system and services). Consideration of price in terms of overall affordability may be controlling in circumstances where two or more proposals are otherwise adjudged to be equal, or when a superior proposal is at a price that the County cannot afford. / 20 Points
E. / Implementation Plan and Schedule:
An evaluation will be made of the likelihood that Bidder’s implementation plan and schedule will meet the County’s schedule. Additional credit will be given for the identification and planning for mitigation of schedule risks which Bidder believes may adversely affect any portion of the County’s schedule. / 5 Points
F. / Relevant Experience:
Proposals will be evaluated against the RFP specifications and the questions below:
- Do the individuals assigned to the project have experience on similar projects?
- Are résumés complete and do they demonstrate backgrounds that would be desirable for individuals engaged in the work the project requires?
- How extensive is the applicable education and experience of the personnel designated to work on the project?
G. / References (See Exhibit A – Bid Response Packet) / 10 Points
H. / Overall Proposal: / 5 Points
I. / Oral Presentation and Interview:
The oral presentation by each bidder shall not exceed sixty (60) minutes in length. The oral interview will consist of standard questions asked of each of the bidders and specific questions regarding the specific proposal. The proposals may then be re-evaluated and re-scored based on the oral presentation and interview. / 15 Points
J. / Understanding of the Project:
Proposals will be evaluated against the RFP specifications and the questions below:
- Has proposer demonstrated a thorough understanding of the purpose and scope of the project? (2 Points)
- How well has proposer identified techniques, processes, or specific technology that has worked with other government agencies, and or any potential problems in transferring these methods to the County?(2 Points)
- Has proposer thoroughly described the process or technique by which they will identify, target and correct tax reporting errors? (2 Points)
- Has proposer demonstrated their availability to participate in monthly conference call meetings and quarterly face-to-face meetings with tax administrators to provide audit progress/findings?(2 Points)
- Has proposer presented reports, letters, or programs that demonstrate their ability to collect from non- compliant utility providers? (2 Points)
- Has proposer clearly identified the process by which they will distinguish between: unreported taxes, under-reported taxes, and improperly reported taxes? (2 Points)
- Has proposer provided a mathematical model and explanation for the utility users tax that demonstrates accuracy in calculating interest and penalties? (2 Points)
- Has proposer demonstrated the ability to forecast potential impact pending legislative changes or precedent setting litigation may have on the ability to collect? (2 Points)
- Has proposer provided a recent satisfactory/compliant external control review report? (2 Points)
- Has proposer demonstrated through their timeline that they are able to produce a first month review, due February 3, 2014, and first quarterly report due, April 18, 2014?(2 Points)
K. / Methodology:
Proposals will be evaluated against the RFP specifications and the questions below:
- Does the methodology depict a logical approach to fulfilling the requirements of the RFP? (5 Points)
- Does the methodology match and contribute to achieving the objectives set out in the RFP? (5 Points)
SMALL LOCAL EMERGING BUSINESS PREFERENCE
Local Preference: Points equaling five percent (5%) of bidder’s total score, for the above Evaluation Criteria, will be added. This will be the bidder’s final score for purposes of award evaluation. / Five Percent (5%)
Small and Local or Emerging and Local Preference: Points equaling five percent (5%) of bidders total score, for the above Evaluation Criteria, will be added. This will be the bidder’s final score for purposes of award evaluation. / Five Percent (5%)
I.CONTRACT EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT
During the initial sixty (60) day period of any contract, which may be awarded to Contractor, the CSC and/or other persons designated by the County will meet with the Contractor to evaluate the tax audit servicesperformance and to identify any issues or potential problems.