|
|
|
How does
MiCTA define "Request For Proposal"? |
|
|
|
How is
MiCTA's RFP different than my organization's? |
|
|
|
What are
the advantages of a collaborative RFP approach? |
|
|
|
What are
the benefits of using MiCTA agreements? |
|
|
|
What participation
commitment is a member required to provide? |
|
|
|
Why should
MiCTA take on our bidding requirements? |
|
|
|
Won't the
collaborative RFP take control away from my purchasing
department? |
|
|
|
Can I use
MiCTA's contract pricing as a negotiation tool with our
own preferred vendors? |
|
|
|
What does
MiCTA do that my purchasing department isn't already doing? |
|
|
|
What does
MiCTA's basic RFP process entail? |
|
|
|
Are members
required to participate in an RFP initiative in order
to use the resulting agreements? |
|
| An RFP is a written solicitation,
issued on behalf of the MiCTA membership, encouraging
vendors to submit competitive proposals on products and/or
services based on aggregated demand, requirements, and
specifications, which reflect the needs of the membership
as a whole. The RFP document contains vendor response
requirements, terms / conditions, standards, and specifications
that are either required, preferred, or optional. |
|
| |
|
|
|
Aggregation
of Demand: MiCTA’s RFP aggregates the demand
of member organizations. This demand provides more potential
purchasing volume than any one individual institution
or organization has to offer a vendor. The higher the
sales potential, the more attention vendors will give
an RFP/Q.. |
| |
|
|
|
Member
Contributions: Members are encouraged to contribute
in the development and evaluation of the RFP. Members
can lend their expertise by drafting sections of the RFP,
evaluating vendor responses, contacting references, conducting
financial verifications, etc. Member contributions are
strictly voluntary, and at the discretion of the Member
and their institution / organization. |
| |
|
|
|
Competition:
Time is money! Therefore, vendors historically devote
more time, effort, resources, and are more competitive
when responding to RFP’s with high sales volume
potential. In addition, manufacturers and corporations
will authorize deeper discounts or “special program
pricing” when competing for high sales volume projects. |
| |
|
|
|
Contract
Usage: Members, who commit support for the resulting
agreements prior to the RFP’s release, strengthen
the RFP by providing a minimum sales volume that vendors
can use to secure more competitive discounts. Additionally,
continued use of MiCTA Agreements further strengthen MiCTA’s
position to negotiate deeper discounts during contract
extension or rebid situations for like products and services. |
|
| |
|
|
|
Participation:
Members determine which RFP initiative they will participate
in, and the level of participation by either 1) working
on entire process from beginning to end, 2) working on-site
with either the Development or Evaluation committee, 3)
submitting product and technical specifications or RFP
requirements, 4) working on off-site processes like references,
financials and product testing, or 5) choosing not to
get involved in the current project. Members are not required
to participate in the RFP process in order to take advantage
of the resulting agreements. |
| |
|
|
|
Project
Scope: Each RFP encompasses the core requirements
of the entire MiCTA membership, but also allows flexibility
for individual Member purchasing requirements to be met.
An RFP can be a detailed configuration list of products
and services required that allows a one-to-one evaluation,
or an open solution approach where the vendor recommends
products and services based on the specifications provided.
Both RFP formats allow each proposed solution to be subjectively
evaluated on its own merits. |
| |
|
|
Expertise:
Members, from the various organizations and institutions
with an interest in an RFP initiative, are recruited to
lend their product/technical, business, and procurement
knowledge and expertise. The RFP Development Committee
ensures the requirements and specifications of the membership
as a whole are addressed, and the Evaluation Committee
ensures a fair and ethical process by following good procurement
processes and procedures. |
| |
|
|
|
Industry
Standards: Development Committee members work together
to determine base industry standards that will ensure
interoperability of products and/or services in-house
as well as between off-site locations. Adhering to industry
standards is becoming even more important as sister organizations
join forces to run cooperative programs between individual
Member locations. Therefore, industry standards are frequently
called out as requirements in the RFP document. |
| |
|
|
|
Standardization:
Members electing to standardize on brands, models or system
configurations will have few, if any, upgrade or interoperability
issues in-house or between other Member organizations
/ institutions. Members, working closely with vendors
and manufacturers, accomplish standardization by completing
MiCTA’s intense product testing process, which generates
a white paper report documenting test results. This paper
is posted to MiCTA’s web site for Members to use
when making their procurement decisions. |
| |
|
|
|
Product
Testing: The RFP provides the opportunity to run
objective product testing scenarios with the proposed
products and/or services. Testing can consist of anything
from a one-day off-site to a 2-6 week in-house process.
Members are encouraged to lend their technical expertise
to this process in order to put products / services through
a full battery of testing scenarios. Upon completion of
the testing process, the team consolidates their test
results in a white paper report. The white papers include
details of the comprehensive testing process, product
/ service quality comparison, component interoperability
and ease of installation / operation rating, and documentation
of the quality of technical support services requested
during the process. White paper reports are posted to
the MiCTA web site, and password protected for Member
use only. This service provides valuable information to
Members who may not have the time or facilities to product
test prior to making a purchasing decision. |
| |
|
|
|
Comprehensive
RFP Evaluations: MiCTA’s RFP evaluation and
analysis is a multi-phase scoring process. Evaluators
subjectively score responses based on the weighted criteria
as published in the RFP. The consolidated weighted score
percentage becomes the vendor’s “total cost
value” ratio. The cost value ratio is applied to
each vendor’s cost proposal, which assists in determining
the Endorsed (best value) or Approved (very good value)
award recommendations. |
|
| |
|
|
Time
/ Resource Savings: Member organizations / institutions
using MiCTA agreements realize in-house cost savings in
time and personnel resources, as well as product / service
cost savings. Resources saved can then be dedicated to
high profile projects that are unique to the organization
/ institution and has the potential of generating greater
institutional cost savings. Additionally, Members are
afforded an immediate comfort level with MiCTA selected
vendors due to the extensive evaluation, analysis, and
verification process conducted prior to awarding an RFP. |
| |
|
|
Choices:
MiCTA is all about offering choices whenever possible
to the membership. Therefore, the evaluation process recommends
Endorsed (best value) and Approved (very good value) vendors
who supply the same products, services, or categories
of products / services. Members can select from various
agreements that best meet their individual requirements
based on products and services offered, geographical coverage,
maintenance / support services, etc. Members can even
compare just bottom line costs between Endorsed and Approved
vendors whenever cost is the sole deciding factor or the
organization requires three price quotes to approve a
purchase. Multiple agreements for the same products and
services not only provide Members with options, but it
also motivates vendors to remain competitive during the
term of the agreement. |
| |
|
|
Living
Document: Successful vendors are required to treat
resulting MiCTA Agreements as living documents, committed
to pass along price decreases upon occurrence, and offer
new technology upon market release or product testing
by MiCTA. A yearly contract review provides vendors an
opportunity to offer additional incentives, products and
services, as well as better pricing based on MiCTA purchasing
volumes. Therefore, MiCTA pricing will always reflect
current market changes. Additionally, Members will have
an avenue to pursue leading edge technology to test and/or
purchase. |
| |
|
|
Contract
Strength: The strength and value of any contract
is determined by end-user usage volume. Therefore, MiCTA
Members are encouraged to support the RFP process and
successful vendors by using MiCTA programs for their procurement
needs. Members supporting MiCTA agreements generate interest
among the various manufacturers and industries, which
often initiates lower price offerings year after year.
When working from a position of strength, MiCTA Members
have the power to move technology in directions that is
most beneficial to all end-users rather than being most
expedient for the manufacturers. |
| |
|
|
Winners:
Almost everyone is faced with doing more with less --
time, resources, and personnel. MiCTA offers Members an
opportunity to actually accomplish more with less by encouraging
participation in MiCTA sponsored RFPs, and utilization
of resulting agreements to benefit their organization
/ institution. Not only will the Member look like a winner,
but their organization / institution will also be a winner
due to the efforts of MiCTA Members doing good things
for the entire membership. |
|
| Member participation
in the RFP process is invaluable, lends credibility to
the process, and provides an element of involvement for
the entire membership. Members are not required to participate
in any RFP initiative, but strongly encouraged to do so
in order to take ownership of the process and potential
outcomes. MiCTA covers the cost of meeting rooms, continental
breakfast, lunch, afternoon breakout sessions and required
office supplies, and Member volunteers are responsible
for their transportation to/from the meeting site, accommodations,
and dinner. The cost to participate in one MiCTA RFP initiative
is less than most Members expend processing one RFP for
commodity-type products and services. Additionally, all
Members reap the rewards of “best value” (Endorsed)
and “very good value” (Approved)
agreements with vendors who have proven capability to
deliver -- whether or not the Member elected to participate
in the RFP process. Often Member organizations will opt
to publish their own RFP only to find MiCTA programs provide
better value than they were able to obtain on an individual
basis. Often these Members close their RFP, and take advantage
of the MiCTA programs. The RFP process and resulting agreements
are made available to all Members at no additional charge. |
|
| Consolidating
requirements of many organizations / institutions into
one RFP offers vendors a larger sales volume potential,
which in turn generates more competitive price points,
incremental volume discounts, and “pot sweeteners”
not offered to individual or small volume solicitations.
Have you ever had an RFP/Q receive fewer responses than
required for a competitive bid, with costs nowhere near
the price points you were expecting? Vendors standard
responses in these situations is either “I don’t
have time to cost out such small quantities.”, or
“Company policy is to respond to projects that have
more potential sales volume.” With MiCTA’s
RFP’s, vendors realize the potential sales volume
as well as the recognition value of being awarded a MiCTA
agreement. Additionally, Members who elect to participate
in a MiCTA RFP initiative also assume part ownership of
the results of the project. |
|
| Absolutely
not. MiCTA’s goal is to harness the purchasing power
of all Members in an effort to drive the market price
down while contracting for high quality products and services.
Member participation in the extensive RFP process allows
them to take ownership of the process and resulting agreements.
Neither MiCTA nor MSC has an interest in replacing purchasing
departments, and prefers to form strong working partnerships
with Members to provide the entire membership with “best
value” and “very good value” solutions
at the most competitive costs. MiCTA extends an open invitation
to all purchasing professionals to certify the process
by participating in the RFP development and/or evaluation. |
|
| All MiCTA Agreement
pricing is considered confidential, and for “ Member
Eyes Only ”. That being said, Members using this
type of negotiation tactic serve to weaken the MiCTA organization
as a whole, and jeopardize the cost savings of those organizations
that support the process and utilize the MiCTA agreements.
Therefore, Members are encouraged to participate and support
the RFP process rather than undermine the foundation of
the organization that serves so many so well. |
|
| MiCTA maintains
a structured competitive bid process as do most purchasing
departments. Where we differ is organizations are often
required to accept “low bid prices” without
factoring in the value of services before and after the
sale, company stability, references, etc.. In addition
to the bid process, MiCTA brings to the table: |
| |
|
|
Vast resources in the technology,
business, and purchasing fields to tap for technical expertise,
industry experience, and business and finance skills |
| |
|
|
Product testing services
including coordination of vendors and Members, development
of white paper results, and publishing test results to
assist Member making purchasing decisions |
| |
|
|
Staff and resources dedicated
to coordinating and/or providing in-depth project research,
extensive proposal analysis, hosting vendor presentations
and/or product demonstrations, and sophisticated negotiation
skills |
| |
|
|
Competitive negotiation
process that evaluates all aspects of the vendor’s
response to determine best offers, and then actively negotiates
for additional discounts and/or incentives to benefit
the membership |
| |
| All services
are provided to Members at no additional charge, which
frees up the Member’s resources to devote to high
profile projects that are unique to their organization
/ institution and have the potential to generate significant
costs savings. |
|
| MiCTA’s
RFP and evaluation process is designed to reflect solicitation
and evaluation requirements of all Member organizations
and institutions. The RFP process and estimated timeline
minimally entails the following: |
| |
|
|
RFP Preparation: Approximately
4 – 8 Weeks |
| Includes solicitation
of member requirements and specifications, participation
in the development of the RFP, survey of the membership
to determine project support, research of product and
technical specifications, preparation of draft outline
of specifications submitted, meeting with the Development
Committee to prepare the final product / technical specifications
and edit the RFP, and development of a vendor distribution
list. |
| |
|
|
Release RFP to Vendors
& Post Documents to Web Site – Minimum of 28
days |
| Includes sending
an RFP release notice all vendors on the distribution
lists, posting the RFP to the MiCTA web site, placing
an ad in a national publication when applicable, holding
a pre-proposal conference when applicable, , and addressing
vendor inquiries and posting responses to the web site. |
| |
|
|
Evaluation
Preparation – On-going
process until RFP closing date |
| Includes solicitation
of the membership for volunteers to participate in the
evaluation process, scheduling the Evaluation Retreat,
preparing a list of potential vendors from the Intent
To Respond forms, stamping in of vendor responses, notifying
vendors of late responses, and preparing bids and office
equipment / supplies for shipment to the retreat site. |
| |
|
|
Evaluation Process:
3 – 4 Weeks |
|
|
|
Initial
Response Review – Approx. 2 - 7 days based on number
of respondents
Includes a review of each vendor response to check off
all required elements of the RFP, send vendors either
a Deficiency Report for missing elements, insert a copy
of DR response in vendor’s proposal, and develop
evaluation forms for scoring vendors |
| |
| |
|
|
|
RFP
Retreat – Evaluation – Approximately 1- 2
weeks
Includes discussing and distributing a common evaluation
form to the committee, conducting the read and scoring
of each vendor response, consolidating vendor scores and
evaluator comments, sending vendors a Clarification Report,
sharing the vendor CR responses with the evaluation team,
and coordinating the following processes: |
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
1. |
|
Financial
Verification –
review of all financial statements, Annual Reports, Dun
and Bradstreet or Credit Bureau reports, contact bank
officials and auditors, review Accounting Practices letter,
etc. |
| |
| |
|
|
|
2. |
|
Subcontractors
Verification –
review all subcontractors that will provide products or
services direct to the membership, and contact all subcontractor
current and past customer references |
| |
| |
|
|
|
3. |
|
Customer
References –
contact all vendor’s current and past customer references |
| |
| |
|
|
|
4. |
|
Benchmark
Cost Proposal –
distribute any required benchmark cost proposals to vendors
in order to conduct a side-by-side cost comparison between
vendors– distribute any required benchmark cost
proposals to vendors in order to conduct a side-by-side
cost comparison between vendors |
| |
| |
|
|
|
5. |
|
Presentation
/ Demonstration –
schedule vendor presentations / demonstrations
or conference call with selected vendors as required by
the committee |
| |
| |
|
|
|
6. |
|
Product
Testing –
schedule any required product testing, develop evaluation
form for the process, coordinate the testing process,
and prepare a white paper report of the results |
| |
| |
|
|
|
7. |
|
Best and
Final Offer –
Notify vendors of the opportunity to submit a BAFO, submit
responses to the committee for evaluation, update any
pricing options, contract terms, etc. |
| |
| |
|
|
|
All evaluation processes
tie directly to the Evaluation Criteria and Weight Values
defined in the RFP. Vendor scores for each evaluation
process is entered into the Evaluation Criteria consolidated
scoring sheet, which will determine the vendor’s
final cost value ratio. This ratio is then applied to
the vendors cost proposal to determine the best overall
value and very good overall value proposals. |
| |
|
|
Recommend RFP Awards:
Approximately 2 – 4 days |
|
Includes a committee review
of the consolidated scoring sheet, evaluator comments
and cost proposals for each vendor, discussion of each
vendor, motions for recommendation of Endorsed (best value)
and Approved (very good value) awards, committee vote
for each motion, and preparation of the award recommendation
to forward to the respective Boards for review and approval |
| |
|
|
Project Wrap-Up –
1 – 2 Weeks |
|
Includes preparation of
a project Web page, process paper, evaluation criteria
and weight value chart, Endorsed / Approved vendor award
summaries, updated Daily Activity Report, RFP outline,
individual vendor award announcements, etc. |
| |
|
|
Vendor Award Notification
and Negotiations – Varies based on vendors |
|
Includes a congratulatory
e-mail notifying the vendor of their award, identifies
the MSC negotiator, requests to schedule the first interaction,
and attaches a copy of the MSC Master Agreement |
| |
| |
|
1. |
|
Negotiations continue between
MSC and the vendors until mutually agreeable contract
terms and conditions are approved by both parties |
| |
| |
|
2. |
|
Vendors not receiving an
award are sent a “thank you for participating”
notice |
| |
|
|
Contract Execution
and Member Notification: Approximately 5 – 7 days |
|
Includes submitting the
final contract to the vendor for signature and executing
the returned agreement, an award announcement is posted
to the MiCTA web site and Members notified via e-mail |
| |
|
|
Project Wrap-Up: Posting
- Upon award announcement |
|
Includes posting a project
web page, process report, evaluation criteria, individual
vendor award summaries, RFP outline, updated Daily Activity
Report, etc. |
| |
No. Members are encouraged
to support their organization by utilizing the resulting
Endorsed and Approved agreements whether or not they have
participated in the RFP process.
Participation in any RFP initiative is not a Member requirement,
and is strictly voluntary. Participation can be as simple
as submitting a project recommendation, e-mailing specific
product / service requirements or specifications, participating
in the development and editing of the RFP’s technical
specifications, or on-site evaluation of vendor responses.
MSC’s staff encourages and welcomes Member participation
all facets of the RFP process. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
