MEMORANDUMJune 13, 2011

TO:Seleana Samuel, Acting Division Director

Commodities Division

DTMB, Purchasing Operations

FROM:Kristen Robel, Buyer

Commodities Division

DTMB, Purchasing Operations

SUBJECT: Evaluation Summary for ITB No. 071I1300136Roadside and Slope Mowing, Taylor TSC–Department of Transportation

Statement of Work

This request is to establish a contract for roadside and slope mowing around the Taylor Transportation Service Center (TSC) for the Michigan Department of Transportation.

Background Information

A contract is needed to provide roadside and slope mowing along the state trunk line roadways at the lowest possible cost to the State.

Buyer and Agency Review

The following Buyer and the Agency reviewed the proposals:

NameDepartment

Kristen RobelDTMB, Purchasing Operations

Terry HarrisMichigan Department of Transportation

Bidders

Purchasing Operations posted the ITB on the Bid4Michigan Website for 28 days. Four companies submitted a timely proposal for evaluation.

Bidder: / City, State:
1. B & B Landscaping / Fenton, Michigan
2. Fontenot Landscape Services LLC / Livonia, Michigan
3. U.S. Lawns of Livonia / Southgate, Michigan
4. Payne Landscaping / Detroit, Michigan

Evaluation Summary

ITB No. 071I1300136

Roadside and Slope Mowing, Taylor TSC

Page 2

Selection Criteria/Evaluation

Purchasing Operations and the Michigan Department of Transportation reviewed each submitted proposal. B & B Landscaping and Fontenot submitted a bid on every location, U.S. Lawns of Livonia bid on Location 3 and Payne Landscaping bid on Location 2.

Per Section 1.2.2 “Administrative Procedures,” mowing equipment listed in each proposal was evaluated. Fontenot Landscape Services, Payne Landscaping and U.S. Lawns of Livonia were determined to have sufficient equipment for each route they bid on. It was determined that B & B Landscaping had sufficient equipment to mow all of Location 1, select routes in Location 2 (slope mowing from M-102 to Paul and West Outer Drive to South I-94, slope mowing from Rosa Parks to Conant and litter pick-up from Rosa Parks to Conant), Location 3, Location 4, and Location 5. All bidders then were determined to have passed the evaluation process.

Purchasing Operations then conducted second round pricing for this Invitation to Bid. Fontenot Landscape Services and Paynet Landscaping submitted revised pricing. Based on price and equipment, the following bidders are hereby recommended for award: B & B Landscaping is recommended for Location 1, the three routes they qualified for in Location 2, Location 4 and Location 5. Fontenot Landscape Services LLC is recommended for award on Location 2, and U.S. Lawns of Livonia is recommended for award on Location 5.

Price Comparison
Bidder: / Original Bid Amount / Revised Bid Amount
1. B & B Landscaping / $ 1,272,491.70 / No revised bid amount
2. Fontenot Landscape Services LLC / $ 3,189,770.40 / $2,915,892.24
3. U.S. Lawns of Livonia / $ 116,532.00 / No revised bid amount
3. Payne Landscaping / $ 1,864,428.00 / $1,632,144.00

Award Recommendation

The Buyer and Agency was responsible for interpreting all information submitted, determining the quality of each vendor’s response to the requested information, and determining whether the information submitted demonstrated the bidder’s ability to sufficiently service the State. Based on all of the information discussed above, the following biddersare recommended for award:

B &B Landscaping

Fontenot Landscape Services LLC

U.S. Lawns of Livonia

The total estimated contract value is $2,277,509.70. The agency estimate was $2,143,980.29.

Evaluation Summary

ITB No. 071I1300136

Roadside and Slope Mowing, Taylor TSC

Page 3

Was a JEC utilized?

Yes.No.

How was pricing submitted?

One Step.Multiple Step (pricing separately sealed).

How was pricing factored into the award decision?

Best Value/Lowest PriceBest Value/Combination of Score and Price

Evaluation Summary

ITB No. 071I1300136

Roadside and Slope Mowing, Taylor TSC

Page 4

Signatures:

SignatureDate

SignatureDate

Reviewed and approved by Buyer Manager _____

Reviewed and approved by Division Director _____

Reviewed and approved by Director _____