AgdaPkt 2008-09-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

78 Page 31 4.4 Cost Evaluation Proposer's were required to provide detailed pricing information by completing the Cost Proposal Forms provided in the RFP Attachments (Le., RFP Attachment 3 contains the Collection Services RFP Cost Proposal Forms). Details of the cost information provided by each proposer are included as Appendix C - Comprehensive Cost Proposal Summary. The summary was used to readily compare the four proposers' costs to evaluate their "competiveness." The firms' cost competitiveness relative to each other was determined using a formulaic approach. The final proposed costs for servicing both Districts are summarized in Table 8 - Cost Summary for Combined Districts below. This table is followed by: a discussion of the competitiveness and reasonableness of the cost proposals; a brief analysis of the major cost areas including annual costs, capital/start-up and core services; and, a discussion of the projected rate impact. OperatillgCostsC)f Cor!J $~rvi(;etl Single-family Dwellings Multi-family Dwellings and Commercial Member Agency Facilities $23.785.426 $18.895,025 $821.584 $43,502,035 $49.717,944 $25,333,687 $18,346,070 $790,690 $44,470,447 $61.433,400 Collection Capital Startup Cost Total Capital and Startup Cost $52,735,230 $317,000 $53,052.230 $78,910,864 $56,346,295 $2,172,248 $58.518.543 $63,782.666 4.4.1 Cost Proposal Competitiveness and Reasonableness In addition to evaluating cost competitiveness, the Evaluation Committee also considered the reasonableness of the costs presented. In determining the reasonableness of companies' proposed costs, the equipment selection, labor, and operating assumptions were considered and compared against industry standards and each of the other proposals. During the proposal analysis, there were numerous rounds of questions and cost proposal form revisions conducted between the SBWMA and the proposers. The goal of this process was to obtain complete and accurate information that would facilitate a comparative analysis of the four proposals. At the conclusion of the cost proposal analysis, the SBWMA was able to standardize the technical and cost proposal information submitted by the four firms. The cost proposal accounted for 33.3% of the total evaluation points achievable by each proposer as denoted in Table 1 - Evaluation SBWMA Collection Services RFP Selection Committee Report: Evaluation and Scoring of Proposals Page 20 of 31 August 21, 2008