• No results found

SOFTWARE LICENSE SERVICES REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "SOFTWARE LICENSE SERVICES REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS"

Copied!
49
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

SOFTWARE LICENSE SERVICES

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Issued by OECM

OECM Request for Proposals Number: #2015-228 Request for Proposals Issued On: February 4, 2015

Proponent’s Proposal Submission Deadline: 2:00:00pm on March 4, 2015 Local Time in Toronto, Ontario, Canada

OECM shall not be obligated in any manner to any Proponent whatsoever until a written agreement has been duly executed with a Supplier.

OECM RFP Coordinator – Doris Poon, Sourcing Specialist (doris.poon@oecm.ca)

(2)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 1 – INTRODUCTION ... 5

1.1 Invitation to Proponents ... 5

1.2 Ontario Broader Public Sector Procurement Directive ... 5

1.3 Overview of OECM ... 5

1.3.1 Other BPS Clients ... 6

1.4 Overview of OCCCIO ... 6

1.5 Overview of OCAS ... 7

1.6 School Board, College and University Information ... 7

1.7 Objective of this RFP ... 7

1.8 Agreements for Deliverables ... 8

1.9 Client-Supplier Agreements ... 8

1.10 Proponent Consortium Information ... 9

1.11 No Guarantee of Volume of Work or Exclusivity of Agreement ... 9

1.12 Rules of Interpretation ... 9

1.13 Definitions ... 10

PART 2 - THE DELIVERABLES ... 13

2.1 Background ... 13

2.2 Scope of Services ... 13

2.3 Proponent’s Accreditation ... 13

2.3.1 Authorized VAR Letter ... 14

2.4 Description of Services ... 14

2.4.1 Administration Support ... 14

2.4.2 Technical Support ... 15

2.4.3 Customized Web Portal ... 15

2.4.4 Acquisition and Negotiation (where applicable) ... 15

2.5 Other Services ... 15

2.6 Invoicing ... 15

2.7 Payment Terms ... 16

2.8 Quick Quote Process ... 16

2.9 Agreement Management Support to OECM ... 16

2.9.1 Account Management Support ... 16

2.9.2 Reporting to OECM/OCAS ... 17

2.10 Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity ... 17

2.11 Licenses, Right to Use and Approvals ... 18

2.12 Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act ... 18

2.13 Pricing Methodology ... 18

2.14 Optional Pricing Refresh ... 18

2.15 OECM Cost Recovery Fee (“CRF”) ... 19

PART 3 - EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS ... 20

3.1 Stages of Proposal Evaluation ... 20

3.2 Stage I – Review of Mandatory Requirements (Pass/Fail) ... 20

3.2.1 Form of Offer - Appendix B (Mandatory Form) ... 20

3.2.2 Rate Bid Form – Appendix C (Mandatory Form) ... 21

3.2.3 Consortium Information – Appendix F (Mandatory Form) ... 21

3.2.4 Authorized VAR Letter from Microsoft as LSP – Appendix G (Mandatory Form) ... 22

3.3 Stage II – Rated Requirements (30 Points) ... 22

3.4 Stage III – Pricing (70 Points) ... 23

3.4.1 Pricing Evaluation ... 23

3.5 Stage IV – Cumulative Score ... 24

3.6 Stage V - Tie Break Process ... 24

3.7 Execution of Agreement with Preferred Proponent ... 24

3.8 Agreement Launch and Marketing ... 25

PART 4 - TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE RFP PROCESS ... 26

4.1 General Information and Instructions ... 26

(3)

4.1.2 Proponent Information Session ... 26

4.1.3 Proponents to Follow Instructions ... 27

4.1.4 Proposals in English ... 27

4.1.5 OECM’s Information in RFP Only an Estimate ... 27

4.1.6 Proponent’s Costs ... 27

4.2 Communication after RFP Issuance ... 27

4.2.1 RFP Coordinator Contact Information ... 27

4.2.2 Proponents to Review RFP ... 27

4.2.3 Proponent to Notify ... 28

4.2.4 All New Information to Proponents by way of Addenda ... 28

4.3 Proposal Submission Requirements ... 29

4.3.1 General ... 29

4.3.2 Proposal Submission Requirements ... 29

4.3.3 Other Proposal Considerations ... 30

4.3.4 Proposal Receipt by OECM ... 30

4.3.5 Withdrawal of Proposal ... 31

4.3.6 Amendment of Proposal ... 31

4.3.7 Completeness of Proposal ... 31

4.3.8 Proposals Retained by OECM ... 31

4.3.9 Proposal Irrevocability ... 31

4.3.10 Acceptance of RFP ... 31

4.3.11 Amendments to RFP ... 31

4.3.12 Proposals will not be Opened Publicly ... 31

4.3.13 Clarification of Proposals ... 31

4.3.14 Verification of Information ... 32

4.3.15 Proposal Acceptance ... 32

4.3.16 RFP Incorporated into Proposal ... 32

4.3.17 Exclusivity of Contract ... 32

4.3.18 Substantial Compliance ... 32

4.3.19 No Publicity or Promotion ... 32

4.4 Execution of Agreement, Notification and Debriefing ... 32

4.4.1 Selection of Proponents ... 32

4.4.2 Failure to Agree to Form of Agreement ... 33

4.4.3 Notification to Other Proponents of Outcome of RFP Process ... 33

4.4.4 Debriefing ... 33

4.4.5 Bid Dispute Resolution ... 33

4.5 Prohibited Communications, Confidential Information and FIPPA ... 33

4.5.1 Confidential Information of OECM... 33

4.5.2 Confidential Information of the Proponent ... 34

4.5.3 Proponent’s Submission ... 34

4.5.4 Personal Information ... 34

4.5.5 Non-Disclosure Agreement ... 34

4.5.6 Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act ... 34

4.5.7 Competition Act ... 35

4.5.8 Trade Agreements ... 35

4.5.9 Intellectual Property ... 35

4.6 Reserved Rights and Governing Law of OECM ... 35

4.6.1 General ... 35

4.6.2 Rights of OECM – Preferred Proponent ... 36

4.6.3 No Liability ... 37

4.6.4 Assignment ... 37

4.6.5 Entire RFP ... 37

4.6.6 Priority of Documents ... 37

4.6.7 Governing Law ... 37

APPENDIX A – FORM OF AGREEMENT ... 38

APPENDIX B – FORM OF OFFER ... 39

APPENDIX C – RATE BID FORM ... 42

APPENDIX D – REFERENCE FORM ... 43

APPENDIX E – RATED REQUIREMENTS ... 44

APPENDIX F – CONSORTIUM INFORMATION ... 45

(4)

APPENDIX H – NOTICE OF NO PROPOSAL SUBMISSION ... 47 APPENDIX I – OECM’S EDUCATION CLIENTS... 48

(5)

PART 1 – INTRODUCTION

1.1 Invitation to Proponents

This Request for Proposals (“RFP”) is an invitation to prospective Proponents to submit Proposals for the provision of Software Licenses (“Products”) and related services (“Services”) on an as-and-when-required basis to support the Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology (“Colleges”) and other OECM Clients, as further described in Part 2 – Deliverables (the “Deliverables”).

This RFP is issued by OECM, in partnership with:

• Ontario College Council of Chief Information Officers (“OCCCIO”); and • OCAS Application Services Inc. (“OCAS”).

The initial focus of this RFP is to select a License Solution Partner (“LSP”) accredited Supplier who will fulfill the requirements established under a Microsoft Framework Agreement (i.e. Campus-Wide Arrangement), between the College sector and Microsoft. OCAS will be the signatory to this Microsoft Framework Agreement, on behalf of the Ontario College sector through the OCCCIO. Details of the Microsoft Framework Agreement will be shared with the awarded Supplier.

In addition, the selected Supplier will provide a wide variety of software Products (i.e. other than Microsoft for Colleges) and Services for a Client or Client-group through:

• Campus-Wide Arrangement or volume contracts with other Software House to be developed in the future; and/or

• Individual purchase of other software Products.

All current and future potential Clients of OECM may utilize the resulting Agreement. 1.2 Ontario Broader Public Sector Procurement Directive

OECM Clients, as applicable, are obligated to adhere to the Ontario Broader Public Sector (“BPS”) Procurement Directive effective April 1, 2011 issued by the Ontario Management Board of Cabinet.

The directive sets out rules for designated BPS organizations on the purchase of goods and services using public funds.

The purpose of the directive is:

• To ensure that goods and services, including construction, consulting services, and information technology are acquired by BPS organizations through a process that is open, fair, and transparent; • To outline responsibilities of BPS organizations throughout each stage of the procurement process; and • To ensure that procurement processes are managed consistently throughout the BPS. The directive

applies to all School Boards, Colleges and Universities in Ontario; and

The goal of the BPS supply chain code of ethics is to ensure an ethical, professional and accountable BPS supply chain in Ontario through:

i. Personal Integrity and Professionalism. ii. Accountability and Transparency.

iii. Compliance and Continuous Improvement.

Visit the following website for the complete BPS Procurement Directive document - http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/bpssupplychain/documents/bps_procurement_directive.html.

1.3 Overview of OECM

OECM, incorporated in 2006, is a non-for-profit/non-share corporation that leads collaborative strategic sourcing initiatives to lower costs and increase efficiencies for publicly assisted Ontario School Boards, Colleges and Universities as well as other BPS organizations.

(6)

Working in collaboration with Clients, OECM:

• Establishes, promotes and manages non-mandatory agreements for services commonly used throughout their Client community;

• Supports Client’s access and use of OECM agreements through analysis, reporting and the development of tools, guides, and other materials;

• Actively promotes adherence to the Ontario BPS Procurement Directive in all phases of the sourcing and agreement lifecycle;

As of December 2014, OECM had three-hundred and ten (310) Clients using one (1) or more OECM agreements:

• One-hundred and fourteen (114) School Boards, Colleges and Universities; and • One-hundred and seventy-one (171) other BPS organizations.

Participation in OECM agreements has been steadily growing as illustrated in the table below, clearly demonstrating that the education sector and other BPS organizations are achieving value and savings by using OECM agreements.

Year over Year Spend Growth %

2011 over 2010 158%

2012 over 2011 60%

2013 over 2012 50%

2014 over 2013 41%

For more information about OECM, please visit www.oecm.ca. 1.3.1 Other BPS Clients

One hundred and seventy-one (171) other BPS Clients are currently using one (1) or more OECM agreements are as follows:

Type Number of Organizations

Developmental 25

Agencies 44

Municipalities 59

Libraries 19

Hospitals and Health Care 24

Total 171

The above information is as of December 2014. 1.4 Overview of OCCCIO

The Ontario College Council of Chief Information Officers (OCCCIO) was established to further the strategic and operational goals and objectives of Chief Information Officers and other IT leaders of each of the twenty-four (24) College members.

The mission of the OCCCIO is to enhance its members’ ability to strategically and effectively lead information technology support for Ontario Colleges. It is a member run organization that provides a forum for information technology use supporting teaching, learning, administration and research leading to the

(7)

achievement of the mission of Ontario Colleges. This council operates on behalf of the membership based on funding from each member (fees).

For more information about OCCCIO, please visit https://www.othree.ca/pcp/occcio . 1.5 Overview of OCAS

The Ontario College Application Service (OCAS Application Services Inc.) is a non-profit corporation created by Ontario’s twenty-four public colleges to provide services in three areas:

Online applications-to-college through www.ontariocolleges.ca. Roughly 200,000 applicants apply to college each year through the applicant portal. The online application system has points of integrations with every college, university and high school in Ontario. The core application process undergoes a cyclical annual process which results in a significant business activity peak from December to mid-February of each year for which OCAS must ensure there is adequate resources to guarantee acceptable performance.

Data warehouse services through the College System Data Warehouse. OCAS collects, houses and exposes data collections to college users through a secure interface;

Marketing the value of a college education. OCAS provides online and event-based marketing of the value of a college education, and supports the college system marketing campaigns.

OCAS is governed by a Board

of Directors comprising four college presidents, a college vice-president of student services, and

the OCAS CEO.

For more information about OCAS, please visit http://www.ocas.ca/home.html . 1.6 School Board, College and University Information

OECM supports collaborative sourcing initiatives for one-hundred-and-eighteen (118) SCU’s. The approximate number of SCU’s and students:

SCUs # of SCU’s

Approximate Number of:

Faculty & Administration Students

School Boards 72 129,002 2,015,423

Colleges 24 26,750 220,743

Universities 22 Not available 458,251

Total: 118 155,752 2,694,417

Refer to the following websites for more information: • http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/educationFacts.html • https://www.ocls.ca/FTEs

• http://www.ocul.on.ca/node/21 1.7 Objective of this RFP

The primary objective of this RFP is to procure Services for OECM/OCAS Clients to satisfy their needs as described in Part 2 – The Deliverables.

The purpose of this RFP process is to select a high-quality Supplier that will:

• Fulfill the requirements under the Framework Agreement, established between the College sector and Microsoft;

(8)

• Assist Clients by improving the visibility and intelligence around software agreements, enabling strategic management of licenses;

• Effectively administer and support Clients, demonstrating value for money; • Be responsive to Clients and proactively deliver quality Service; and

• Reduce the costs of competitive procurement processes associated with the provision of Products and Services.

1.8 Agreements for Deliverables

It is the intention of OECM to enter into two (2) Master Agreements (“Agreements”) with one (1) Preferred Proponent (a single Preferred Proponent for both Agreements), based on the terms and conditions set out in Appendix A of this RFP, for the provision of the Deliverables to Clients who execute a Client Supplier Agreement (“CSA”), as follows:

1. Agreement A-1 (General Use): OECM to enter into one (1) Master Agreement for the provision of Deliverables for all OECM Clients. Colleges will also receive Deliverables (other than Deliverables covered by the Microsoft Framework Agreement) under Agreement A-1 (General Use); and, 2. Agreement A-2 (For Ontario Colleges’ Microsoft Framework Agreement): OECM and OCAS to

jointly enter into one (1) Master Agreement for the provision of Deliverables under a Microsoft Framework Agreement with the College sector.

Future Campus-Wide Arrangements may be incorporated in the future into Agreement A-1 where applicable. The Term of the Agreements are intended to be for a period of three (3) years, with an option in favour of OECM (Agreement A-1) and OECM/OCAS (Agreement A-2), to extend the Term of either or both of the Agreements on the same terms and conditions for one (1) additional period of up to two (2) years.

Should the awarded Supplier lose its accreditation as Microsoft LSP during the Term of the Agreement, OECM and OCAS reserve the right to:

• Enter into another Agreement with the second highest ranking Proponent and thereafter, in descending order of highest ranking Proponent, for the remainder of the Term; and/or

• Begin a new competitive process mid-Term.

Clients participating in the Agreements will execute a CSA with the Supplier as attached in Appendix A. The Supplier and Client, when executing a CSA, may mutually agree to additional terms and conditions (e.g. Client’s business hours, reporting, invoice formatting, payment terms, security clearance checks, ensuring the additional terms and conditions are not in any way inconsistent with the Form of Agreements agreed to by OECM, OCAS where applicable, and the Supplier.

It is anticipated that the Agreements will be executed on or about March 2015. The Agreements must be signed before the provision of any Deliverables commences. The Agreements with the awarded Supplier will be managed by OECM.

1.9 Client-Supplier Agreements

To encourage the use of the Agreement resulting from this RFP, OECM (OCAS, as applicable) and the Supplier will work together to engage Clients in this sourcing initiative.

The Supplier will actively promote the Agreement to Clients by:

• Conducting sales and marketing activities directly to onboard Clients; • Executing CSAs with interested Clients;

• Providing excellent customer and technical service;

• Gather and maintain Client and market intelligence, including contact information; • Providing a well-defined implementation plan with applicable Client involvement; and

(9)

• Identifying improvement opportunities.

OECM, along with OCCCIO and OCAS where applicable, will promote the use of the Agreement with Clients by:

• Using online communication tools to inform and educate; • Holding information sessions and/or webinars, as required; • Attending, where appropriate, Client events;

• Facilitating CSA execution;

• Providing effective business relationship management; • Facilitating issue resolution; and

• Marketing improvement opportunities. 1.10 Proponent Consortium Information

Where a consortium is responding to this RFP, the following shall apply:

• One (1) of the members of the consortium shall identify itself as the Proponent and shall complete, sign, and submit with its Proposal the Form of Offer (Appendix B) on behalf of the consortium;

• The Proponent must also complete, sign and submit the Consortium Information (Appendix F) listing all other consortium members and what each will supply; and

• The Proponent shall assume full responsibility and liability for the work and actions of all consortium members with respect to the obligations to be assumed pursuant to this RFP.

1.11 No Guarantee of Volume of Work or Exclusivity of Agreement

The information contained in the RFP constitutes an estimate and is supplied solely as a guideline to the Proponent. Such information is not guaranteed, represented, or warranted to be accurate, nor is it necessarily comprehensive or exhaustive.

Nothing in this RFP is intended to relieve the Proponent from forming its own opinions and conclusions with respect to the matters addressed in this RFP. Transaction activity described is an estimate only and may not be relied on by the Proponents. Estimates are intended to be used by OECM for the purpose of evaluating the Proposals.

The Agreement executed with the Supplier may not be an exclusive Agreement for the provision of the Deliverables. Clients may contract with others for the same or similar Deliverables to those described in this RFP.

1.12 Rules of Interpretation

This RFP shall be interpreted according to the following provisions, unless the context requires a different meaning:

• Unless the context otherwise requires, wherever used herein the plural includes the singular, the singular includes the plural, and each of the masculine and feminine includes the other gender;

• Words in the RFP shall bear their natural meaning;

• References containing terms such as “includes” and “including”, whether or not used with the words “without limitation” or “but not limited to”, shall not be deemed limited by the specific enumeration of items but shall, in all cases, be deemed to be without limitation and construed and interpreted to mean “includes without limitation” and “including without limitation”;

(10)

• In construing the RFP, general words introduced or followed by the word “other” or “including” or “in particular” shall not be given a restrictive meaning because they are followed or preceded (as the case may be) by particular examples intended to fall within the meaning of the general words;

• Unless otherwise indicated, time periods will be strictly applied; and • The following terminology applies in the RFP:

o Whenever the terms “must” or “shall” are used in relation to OECM or the Proponent, such terms shall be construed and interpreted as synonymous and shall be construed to read “OECM shall” or the “Proponent shall”, as the case may be.

o The term “should” relates to a requirement that OECM would like the Proponent to address in its Proposal.

o The term “will” describes a procedure that is intended to be followed. 1.13 Definitions

Unless otherwise specified in this RFP, capitalized words and phrases have the meaning set out in the Form of Agreement attached as Appendix A to this RFP.

“Agreement” or “Master Agreement” means the formal agreement to be made between the Supplier and OECM based on the template attached as Appendix A, together with all schedules and appendices attached thereto and all other documents incorporated by reference therein, as amended from time to time by agreement between OECM and the Supplier;

“Applicable Law” means any common law requirement and all applicable and enforceable statutes, regulations, directives, policies, administrative interpretations, orders, by-laws, rules, guidelines, approvals and other legal requirements of any government and/or regulatory authority in effect from time to time; “Business Continuity Plan” means the documents created by the Proponent which describes how the Proponent will maintain continuity of its operations and its commitment and ability to provide to the Clients the Deliverables identified as time critical during an event of force majeure, or other emergency, disaster or disruption;

“Business Day” means Monday to Friday between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., except when such a day is a public holiday, as defined in the Employment Standards Act (Ontario), or as otherwise agreed to by the parties in writing;

“Broader Public Sector” or “BPS” means all Municipalities, Academic Institutions, School Boards, Health Care Providers and Major Transfer Payment Recipients in the Province as set out in the Ontario Broader

Public Sector Accountability Act, 2010. Please see http://www.doingbusiness.mgs.gov.on.ca/mbs/psb/psb.nsf/EN/bpsdef.html for more details of these organizations;

“Campus-Wide Arrangement” means an enterprise software license arrangement that is a centrally negotiated program, designed to offer ease of access and volume-based or educational discounts to a combination of faculty, staff and students (e.g. Microsoft Framework Agreement for the College sector); “Client” means publicly assisted School Boards, Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology (“Colleges”, Universities, and Ontario Broader Public Sector organizations including Publicly Funded Organizations (“PFOs”) and Not For Profit Organizations (“NFPs”) that may acquire the Deliverables under the resulting Agreement;

“Client Supplier Agreement” or “CSA” means the agreement in the form of Schedule 2 of the Form of Agreement to be entered into between the Supplier and a Client setting out specific Deliverables required by the Client. The Supplier must provide OECM with a copy of all executed CSAs;

“Confidential Information” means confidential information of OECM and or any Client (other than confidential information which is disclosed to the Preferred Proponent in the normal course of the RFP)

(11)

where the confidential information is relevant to the Deliverables required by this RFP, its pricing or the evaluation process;

“Conflict of Interest” means any situation or circumstance where, in relation to the performance of its obligations under the Agreement, the Proponent’s other commitments, relationships or financial interests (i) could or could be seen to exercise an improper influence over the objective, unbiased, and impartial exercise of its independent judgement; or (ii) could or could be seen to compromise, impair, or be incompatible with the effective performance of its obligations under the Agreement;

“Cost Recovery Fee” or “CRF” means a fee, which contributes to the recovery of OECM’s operating costs as a not-for-profit/non share corporation, which is based on the before tax amount invoiced by the Supplier to Clients for Deliverables acquired through OECM’s competitively sourced agreements. The cost recovery fee, for all executed CSAs, must be remitted by the Supplier to OECM on a quarterly basis;

“Deliverables” means the Products and Services identified in this RFP to be delivered or provided by the Preferred Proponent in accordance with the requirements set out in this RFP during the Term of the Agreement;

“Eligible Proposal” means a Proposal that meets or exceeds a prescribed requirement, allowing it to proceed to the next stage of evaluation;

“FIPPA” means the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.31, and all regulations adopted thereunder, in each case, as amended or replaced from time to time;

“License Solution Partner” or “License Solution Provider or “LSP” means the level of Microsoft Corporation VAR accreditation by required of the Supplier to fulfill the requirements established under the Microsoft Framework Agreement;

“OECM” means the Ontario Education Collaborative Marketplace;

“OECM’s Deadline for Issuing Final Addenda” means the date and time set out in Section 4.1.1 of this RFP as may be amended from time to time in accordance with the terms of this RFP;

“Products” means the software licenses to be provided through the Supplier, under the Agreement, and includes everything that is necessary to be supplied, done, or delivered by the Supplier;

“Personal Information” has the meaning set out in the Agreement;

“Preferred Proponent” means the Proponent that OECM has identified as the highest scoring Proponent in accordance with the evaluation process set out in this RFP;

“Proponent” means an entity that submits a Proposal in response to this RFP and, as the context may suggest refers to a potential Proponent;

“Proponent’s Proposal Submission Deadline” means the Proposal submission date and time as set out in Section 4.1.1 and may be amended from time to time in accordance with the terms of this RFP;

“Proposal” means all of the documentation and information submitted by a Proponent in response to the RFP;

“Rates” means the prices for the Deliverables as set out in the Proponent’s submitted Appendix C; “Rate Bid Form” means the form contained in Appendix C of this RFP;

“Request for Proposals” or “RFP” means this Request for Proposals #2015-228 issued by OECM for the provision of Software License Services, including all amendments or addenda thereto;

“RFP Coordinator” means the individual identified on the front cover and in Section 4.2.1 of this RFP; “Software House” means the entity that develops commercial off-the-shelf software (e.g. Microsoft);

(12)

“Services” means all the services, and work to be provided or performed by the Supplier, under the Agreement, and includes everything that is necessary to be supplied, done, or delivered by the Supplier; “Subcontractor” includes the Supplier’s subcontractors or third party service providers or its respective directors, officers, agents, employees or independent contractors, who shall fall within the meaning of Supplier for the purposes of the Agreement;

“Supplier” means a Preferred Proponent who has assumed full liability and responsibility for the provision of Deliverables to a Client pursuant to an Agreement;

“Term” has the meaning set out in Section 1.9;

“Value-Added Reseller” or “VAR” means a vendor that takes an existing product or service, incorporates its own value through added benefits and resells it as a new product or service;

“Unfair Advantage” means any conduct, direct or indirect, by a Proponent that may result in gaining an unfair advantage over other Proponents, including but not limited to (i) possessing, or having access to, information in the preparation of its Proposal that is confidential to OECM and which is not available to other Proponents, (ii) communicating with any person with a view to influencing, or being conferred preferred treatment in, the RFP process, or (iii) engaging in conduct that compromises or could be seen to compromise the integrity of the RFP process and result in any unfairness; and

“Zones” means the OECM geographical boundaries within the Province of Ontario as identified in Appendix I, where applicable.

(13)

PART 2 - THE DELIVERABLES

2.1 Background

A College Client generally facilitates its own acquisition and management of software licenses, with the exception of Microsoft. Presently, OCAS is the owner of the current Microsoft enterprise campus agreement (i.e. Framework Agreement) on behalf of the College sector, managed by Acrodex as the value added reseller (“VAR”), with an annual spend of approximately five point seven million dollars ($5.7 M). This reseller agreement in managing the College’s Microsoft campus agreement will expire in May 30, 2015. As an example, the following is a list of software Products most commonly required by College Clients, but not limited to:

• Adobe Systems; • Corel; • Ellucian; • ESRI; • Faronics; • Nuance Communications; • Oracle; • Symantec; • TextHelp Systems; • VMware; and

• Learning Management Systems (“LMS”) software, such as Blackboard, Desire 2 Learn, Respondus).

NOTE: Other Clients may purchase a wide variety of other software Products commonly required within its own sector as the above example only accounts for the College sector.

2.2 Scope of Services

OECM, in partnership with OCCCIO and OCAS, issued this RFP to invite prospective Proponents to submit a Proposal for the provision of Software License Services to:

a) Fulfill Supplier (i.e. VAR) requirements established under a Microsoft Framework Agreement (i.e. Campus-Wide Arrangement) between the College sector and Microsoft, owned by OCAS; and

b) Provide a broad range of software Products for Client or Client-group (in addition to the Microsoft Products to be delivered to Colleges pursuant to the Microsoft Framework Agreement) including, but not limited to:

• Campus-Wide Arrangements or volume-based arrangements with Software House to be developed in the future; and/or

• Individual purchases of other software Products. For example:

• Colleges may use the Supplier for an Adobe Campus-Wide Arrangement;

• A group of Universities may use the Supplier for a separate Microsoft Framework Agreement; and

• A School Board may use the Supplier for an ad hoc purchase of anti-virus software. 2.3 Proponent’s Accreditation

A Proponent’s level of accreditation is critical in ensuring Clients receive a consistent delivery of quality Service, particularly for high spend and high impact Products. In addition, certain Campus-Wide

(14)

Arrangements will demand the highest level of accredited VAR qualified to fulfill the stated responsibilities and conditions.

The Supplier will be expected to be in current possession and have repeatedly retained the following VAR accreditation for a minimum of the past three (3) years for:

The Proponent must be a Microsoft authorized Licensing Solutions Partner (“LSP”); and • Should be an authorized VAR for a wide range of other software Products.

o The Proponent should also be an authorized VAR for an extensive list of software Products, such as those listed under Section 2.1 and should be in current, good standing with each listed Software Houses for a minimum of the past three (3) years.

2.3.1 Authorized VAR Letter

The Proponent must submit within its Proposal, an authorized VAR letter issued by Microsoft confirming the Proponent’s LSP accreditation and good standing. Please refer to Appendix G – Authorized VAR Letter for more information.

Additionally, the Proponent should outline a list of other software Products it is authorized to act as a VAR under Appendix E. The Proponent’s ability to offer a breadth of software Products and the level of accreditations it possesses will be evaluated and scored during the evaluation process.

2.4 Description of Services

The Supplier will be expected to onboard each College Client onto CSA (under Agreement A-2) and enroll them onto the new Microsoft Framework Agreement as quickly as possible post award to ensure that the Client experiences minimal or no disruption to its operations in the delivery of Products and related Services, particularly on or about the expiry date of the current Microsoft Framework Agreement (i.e. May 30, 2015), should a transition in the Supplier resulting from this RFP.

Following software asset management principles, the Proponent shall provide the following Service Deliverables to Client, but not limited to:

• Administrative support; • Technical support;

• Web portal customized for Client to access information related to Products and Services; and • Acquisition and negotiation, where applicable.

All listed Service Deliverables from 2.4.1 to 2.4.4 are to be included in the Rates proposed in Appendix C. Any proposed Services that are not included as part of the Service Rate must be stated in the Proposal response.

2.4.1 Administration Support

Administration support is a critical role of a Supplier, including but not limited to:

• Easy access to a responsive account representative (or a team of personnel led by a representative) assigned to the Client to support its needs;

• Enroll Clients with customized requirements and consolidate into a PO in a timely fashion; • Issuing invoices to various Clients under a Campus-Wide Arrangement and reconciling payment; • Fulfill other reseller responsibilities required by a Software House;

• Provide Client account setup and ensure seamless transition;

• Establishing an ongoing communications program with the Client (e.g. new Services available) • Attending quarterly business reviews with Clients or other meetings, as requested; and • Providing reports to Clients, as required.

(15)

The Supplier’s team must be responsive to the needs of the Clients (i.e. next Business Day response), provide requested information and documentation in a timely manner and issue resolution;

2.4.2 Technical Support

The supplier will provide the following technical support Services to Clients and/or, where applicable, act as a liaison between the Software House and the Client in ensuring quality and on-time technical support Services are received by the Clients upon request:

• Easy access for day-to-day technical support (i.e. by toll free telephone number, email, voicemail, and fax);

• Notify Clients of Product upgrades available in a timely fashion;

• Support Client technology teams in resolving Product or Service failures; • Ensure minimal disruption to the Client and provide support in a timely manner; • Establish and track software quality metrics, upon request; and

• Guide Client technology team members on monitoring, maintenance and best practices on Product. 2.4.3 Customized Web Portal

The Proponent shall provide a customized and login-secured web portal allowing OECM and its Clients access to Product information such as, but not limited to: purchased, active usage, serial numbers, physical locations, expirations or renewal details, and other agreement information such as pricing. This web portal shall be customized with a number of hierarchies to allow for parent and various child-level accessed data. The tool should also have flexible reporting capabilities.

2.4.4 Acquisition and Negotiation (where applicable)

When required, the Supplier shall assist a Client or a group of Clients in the acquisition of a Product and potentially leverage on any existing volume discount arrangements the Supplier may have with a Software House. The Supplier’s acquisition process may vary depending on the Product required and will often include, but not limited to:

• Evaluate options between similar off-the-shelf Product and make recommendation to Client; • Develop an acquisition plan;

• Conduct a competitive process; • Selection and negotiation; and • Contract finalization.

2.5 Other Services

During the Term of the Agreement, a Client may request other Software License related Services including but not limited to the following:

• Customizing or configure software Product; • Additional training; and

• Assessment Services.

During the Term, new Services and/or features may be available as a result of technology advancement, the Supplier shall keep Clients and OECM informed and make these Services and/or features available to Clients.

(16)

The Supplier shall submit to the Client invoices after Services have been provided. The invoices will be in either paper or electronic format, as detailed in the Client’s CSA. The invoice shall be itemized and contain, at a minimum, the following information:

• Invoice number; • Client’s organization;

• Client’s contact person who placed orders; • Itemized Service type;

• Service description;

• Period of Services provided; • Unit Rate per Service charged; and

• Extended total (Unit price x Quantity, excluding taxes). 2.7 Payment Terms

The Client’s standard payment terms are net thirty (30) days. Different payment terms (e.g. prepay) may be agreed to when executing CSAs.

Note – Client’s payment terms will not be in effect until the Supplier provides an accurate invoice. 2.8 Quick Quote Process

With the exception of any Campus-Wide Arrangement standardized offerings, Clients will have two (2) options when purchasing Services from the Agreements resulting from this RFP:

• Purchase required Services directly from a Supplier based on the available Services using the minimum percentage discount off set out in the Agreement (i.e. without using a Quick Quote process); or

• Issue a Quick Quote to obtain the Services, solutions and / or better Rates based on unique or specific requirements including but not limited to the following:

o Committed usage;

o Project based requirements; and o Managed solution.

If a Quick Quote is issued, the Client or OECM will invite the Supplier, via email, to submit a quote for the specific Services, volume and/or requirements at that specific time. The Supplier shall respond, setting out the following at a minimum:

• Net Rates; and

• Response to any unique requirements (e.g. migration Services), if applicable.

Responses to Quick Quotes will be assessed based on a variety of factors such as, but not limited to: • Lowest Rate;

• Proposed Solution; • Project timeline; and • Service availability.

2.9 Agreement Management Support to OECM 2.9.1 Account Management Support

OECM will oversee the Agreement and the Supplier shall provide appropriate agreement management support including, but not limited to:

(17)

• Working and acting in an ethical manner demonstrating integrity, professionalism, accountability, transparency and continuous improvement, including respecting the Clients mandatory requirement to fulfill their supply chain code of ethics as set out in the BPS Procurement Directive;

• Promoting the Agreement as set out in Section 1.8 of this RFP within the Client community;

• Attending quarterly business review meetings with OECM to review SLA performance metrics, CSAs, Deliverables, sales, issue management, opportunities for improvement, and other appropriate business activities;

• Managing issue resolution in a timely manner (with escalation processes to resolve outstanding issues); • Monitoring, managing and reporting pricing, savings and service quality (including customer support); • Conducting comparative analysis (e.g. saving analysis to Clients) and surveys regularly during the Term

of the Agreement to ensure customer satisfaction and support Client’s strategic directions; and

• Submission of Service sales report, any ad hoc reports and the applicable Cost Recovery Fee (“CRF”) on time.

2.9.2 Reporting to OECM/OCAS

The Supplier shall be responsible for providing monthly sales reports to OECM. Similarly, OCAS will also require similar reporting as it pertains to the Microsoft Framework Agreement for the College sector. The reporting shall include, at minimum, the following fields of information:

• Client’s organization name; • Client contact;

• Invoice date; • Invoice number;

• Itemized software Product and Service description; • Period of Services provided;

• Unit Rate per Service charged;

• Extended total (Unit price x Quantity, excluding taxes); and • Cost Recovery Fee, where applicable (i.e. subtotal, HST and total);

In addition the Supplier shall be responsible for providing monthly reports detailing agreement activities including but not limited to the following:

• Client-Supplier Agreement status (e.g. executed in the previous month, pending execution); • SLA report including service availability, major outages and other SLA violations;

• Service utilization rate; and

• Quick Quote report including the following information: o Quick Quote references;

o Client’s organization name; o Client contact;

o Nature of the Quick Quote (e.g. committed volume, project based requirements); o Value of the Quick Quote; and

o Quick Quote status (e.g. submitted to Client, due date to Client);

The Supplier shall be responsible for any other ad hoc reports requested by OECM. 2.10 Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity

The Supplier shall have a well-defined disaster recovery and business continuity programs including processes, policies, and procedures related to preparing for recovery or continuation of Services.

(18)

OECM and its clients may require the Supplier to provide information and /or elements about the Suppliers disaster recovery and business continuity plan.

2.11 Licenses, Right to Use and Approvals

The Supplier shall obtain all licences, right to use and approvals required in connection with the supply of the Services. The costs of obtaining such licences, right to use and approvals shall be the responsibility of, and shall be paid for by, the Supplier.

Where a Supplier is required by Applicable Laws to hold or obtain any such licence, right to use and approval to carry on an activity contemplated in its Proposal or in the Agreement, neither acceptance of the Proposal nor execution of the Agreement by OECM shall be considered an approval by OECM for the Supplier to carry on such activity without the requisite licence, right to use or approval.

2.12 Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act

OECM and its Clients are committed to the highest possible standards for accessibility. The Supplier must be capable to recommend and deliver, as appropriate for each Deliverable, accessible and inclusive Services consistent with the Ontario Human Rights Code (OHRC), the Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2001 (ODA) and Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA) and its regulations in order to achieve accessibility for Ontarians with disabilities.

In accordance with Ontario Regulation 429-07 made under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities

Act, 2005 (Accessibility Standards for Customer Service), Clients have established policies, practices and

procedures governing the provision of its services to persons with disabilities.

Suppliers are required to comply with the Client’s accessibility standards, policies, practices, and procedures, which may be in effect during the Term of the Agreement and which apply to the Deliverables to be provided by the Supplier.

The AODA may be found at http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_05a11_e.htm. 2.13 Pricing Methodology

Two (2) types of Rates shall be applicable to the Products and related Services in the Agreement resulting from this RFP:

o Fixed, maximum, net Rates on key Microsoft Products; and

o Minimum percentage discount off the suggested retail price published by Software House.

o The Supplier will work with OECM to revisit the minimum percentage discount off Rates as Product volume grows over the Term of the Agreement to, for instance, identify other Campus-Wide Arrangements and/or increase the minimum percentage discount off Rates.

2.14 Optional Pricing Refresh

The two (2) types of Rates proposed (as set out in Section 2.13) will remain firm and unchanged for the initial Term of the Agreement. Optional pricing (i.e. Rates) refresh will occur prior to initiation of the extension period. If exercised and accepted, the Rate adjustment will remain firm for the entire extension period. The Supplier shall provide a written notice to OECM requesting pricing refresh at least nine (9) months prior to the end of the initial Term.

Any pricing refresh request from a Supplier must be accompanied by appropriate documentation (i.e. technology changes, detailed calculations and individual Client impact analysis) to support any price adjustment.

As part of any review OECM will consider pricing adjustments that reflect changes in operation adjustments due to new or changed municipal, provincial, or federal regulations, by-laws, or ordinances. OECM may use a third party index (e.g. CPI) in its Rates review. OECM will not consider any fixed costs or overhead adjustments in its review. Supplier performance received under the Agreement will be considered when contemplating any proposed Rate increase.

(19)

Clients require a minimum of thirty (30) days prior notice on any Rate change. If for any reason, the Supplier and OECM cannot agree on the new Rates within the specified timeframe, the effective date of new Rates will be adjusted to allow for thirty (30) days prior notice to Clients.

If a pricing refresh is not requested the Rates will remain the same.

Decreases to any maximum, net Rates and increases to any minimum discount percentage of suggested retail price, shall be accepted at any time during the Term of the Agreement.

Agreements will be amended accordingly, if necessary. 2.15 OECM Cost Recovery Fee (“CRF”)

As a not-for-profit/non-share corporation, OECM recovers its operating costs from its agreements through CRF. CRF from the resulting Agreement and other OECM agreements are structured to support OECM’s financial model, while providing savings to Clients.

The Supplier shall pay to OECM the following CRF, calculated on the before tax amount invoiced by the Supplier to the Client for all Deliverables provided to the Client, except for Microsoft and Adobe software Products provided by the Supplier to Ontario Colleges, in respect of which there shall be no CRF:

Total Aggregate Agreement Value minus Microsoft and Adobe Spend from Ontario

Colleges CRF Percentage Up to $900,000.00 0.50% $900,000.01 to $2,000,000.00 1.00% $2,000,00.01 to $4,000,000.00 1.50% $4,000,000.01 and up 2.00%

The CRF may be reviewed and negotiated for future Campus-Wide Arrangements.

The CRF will be paid to OECM by the Supplier by the fifth (5th) Business Day following the end of each calendar quarter. HST is applicable on the CRF payments made to OECM:

• The first CRF shall be paid to OECM by July 8, 2015 and include any Client purchases made between the Agreement effective date and June 30, 2015; and

• The CRF shall be paid to OECM quarterly based on calendar quarter thereafter. Detailed reporting requirements are set out in Appendix A – Form of Agreement.

(20)

PART 3 - EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

3.1 Stages of Proposal Evaluation

OECM will conduct the evaluation of Proposals in the following five (5) stages:

Stages Evaluation

Scoring Methodology Maximum Points

(if applicable)

Minimum Threshold Requirement (if any)

Stage I Mandatory Requirements Pass/Fail Pass

Stage II Rated Requirements 30 15 (50%)

Stage III Pricing 70 Not Applicable

Stage IV Cumulative Score 100 Not Applicable

Stage V Tie Break No Point Allocation Not Applicable

3.2 Stage I – Review of Mandatory Requirements (Pass/Fail)

Stage I will consist of a review to determine which Proposals comply with all of the mandatory requirements. The Proponent must ensure that all mandatory requirements have been addressed satisfactorily in its Proposal, in order for the Proposal to proceed to Stage II of the evaluation process.

Any Proposal that is not considered, by OECM, to meet all mandatory requirements will fail this stage of the evaluation - be disqualified and not evaluated further.

A Proposal must include the following four (4) completed mandatory forms:

Appendix Title of Appendix

Appendix B Form of Offer

Appendix C Rate Bid Form

Appendix F Consortium Information (if applicable)

Appendix G Authorized VAR Letter from Microsoft as LSP

Other than inserting the information requested on the mandatory submission forms set out above, a Proponent may not make any changes to any of the forms. Any Proposal containing any such changes, whether on the face of the form or elsewhere in its Proposal, may be disqualified.

If a Proponent fails to insert any information required in Appendix B, or fails to sign Appendix B or Appendix F, OECM may provide such Proponent with an opportunity to rectify such deficiency within a period of two (2) Business Days from notification thereof. Proposals satisfying the mandatory requirements within such period will proceed to Stage II. Proposals failing to satisfy the mandatory requirements within such period will be disqualified and not evaluated further.

3.2.1 Form of Offer - Appendix B (Mandatory Form)

Each Proposal must include a Form of Offer (Appendix B) completed fully and signed by the Proponent. (a) Conflict of Interest

(21)

In addition to the other information and representations made by each Proponent in the Form of Offer, each Proponent must declare whether it has an actual or potential Conflict of Interest. If, at the sole and absolute discretion of OECM, the Proponent is found to be in a Conflict of Interest, OECM may, in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity, disqualify the Proposal submitted by the Proponent.

The Proponent, by submitting the Proposal, warrants that to its best knowledge and belief no actual or potential Conflict of Interest exists with respect to the submission of the Proposal or performance of the contemplated Agreement other than those disclosed in the Form of Offer. Where OECM discovers a Proponent’s failure to disclose all actual or potential Conflicts of Interest, OECM may disqualify the Proponent or terminate any Agreement awarded to that Proponent pursuant to this RFP process.

(b) Insurance

By signing the Form of Offer, the Proponent agrees, if selected, to carry appropriate insurance as outlined in Appendix A – Form of Agreement. The Preferred Proponent must provide proof of such insurance coverage in the form of a valid certificate of insurance prior to the execution of the Agreement by OECM.

(c) General

OECM, in addition to any other remedies it may have in law or in equity, shall have the right to rescind any Agreement awarded to a Proponent in the event that OECM determines that the Proponent made a misrepresentation or submitted any inaccurate or incomplete information in the Form of Offer.

Other than inserting the information requested and signing the Form of Offer, a Proponent may not make any changes to or qualify the Form of Offer in its Proposal. A Proposal that includes conditions, options, variations or contingent statements that are contrary to or inconsistent with the terms set out in the RFP may be disqualified. If a Proposal is not disqualified despite such changes or Proposals, the provisions of the Form of Offer as set out in this RFP will prevail over any such changes or Proposals in or to the Form of Offer provided in the Proposal.

3.2.2 Rate Bid Form – Appendix C (Mandatory Form)

The Rate Bid Form completed by the Proponent in accordance with the instructions contained below and in Appendix C, provided that the following shall apply:

• The Proponent shall propose minimum percentage discount off list;

• All Rates shall be provided in Canadian funds and shall include all applicable customs duties, tariffs, overhead, materials, fuel, office support, profit, permits, licenses, labour, carriage, insurance, Workplace Safety Insurance Board costs, travel, and warranties;

• All Rates shall be quoted exclusive of the HST, or other similar taxes, each of which, if applicable, should be stated separately;

• All Rates quoted, unless otherwise instructed in this RFP, shall remain firm for the Term of the Agreement; and,

• In the event of any discrepancy in the Rates within a Proposal, the lowest Rate submitted shall prevail. The Proponent is deemed to confirm that it has prepared its Proposal with reference to all of the provisions of the RFP, that it has factored all of the provisions of the Agreement, if any, into its pricing assumptions, calculations and into its proposed Rates indicated on the Rate Bid Form.

A Proposal that includes conditional, optional, contingent or variable Rates that are not expressly requested in the Rate Bid Form may be disqualified.

3.2.3 Consortium Information – Appendix F (Mandatory Form)

Each Proposal must include a completed and signed Consortium Information (Appendix F) if applicable to the Proponent.

(22)

3.2.4 Authorized VAR Letter from Microsoft as LSP – Appendix G (Mandatory Form)

Each Proposal must include a letter issued and signed by Microsoft Canada stating the Proponent as an authorized VAR with LSP accreditation and in current, good standing. The letter shall attest that the Proponent has maintained its accreditation and good standing, at a minimum, for the past three (3) years. Please refer to Appendix G for more details.

3.3 Stage II – Rated Requirements (30 Points)

Stage II will consist of an evaluation and scoring of each Eligible Proposal on the basis of rated requirements.

The maximum points allocated for rated requirements are thirty (30) points. Sub-Point allocation and minimum thresholds (if any), for each rated requirement, are set out in Appendix E.

A minimum threshold of fifty percent (50%) must be achieved in order for the Proposal to receive a pass in this stage and proceed to Stage III of the evaluation process.

Each Proposal will be awarded points based on the Proponent’s response to the information contained in Appendix E of this RFP.

It is important that Proposals clearly provide all the necessary information so that a thorough assessment of the Proponent’s experience, qualifications, and capabilities can be made. Responses and substantiating documentation should be direct and grouped together in Appendix E to ensure the evaluation team is able to locate particular information.

In the case that contradictory information or information that contains conditional statements is provided with respect to a requirement, OECM will, in its sole and absolute discretion, determine whether the response complies with the requirements, and may seek clarification from the Proponent. The contradictory information may result in the Proposal receiving a low score for that particular rated requirement.

Proposals that do not respond to a particular rated requirement, are left blank or contain a response or N/A or not applicable will receive a zero (0) point score for that requirement. Where the evaluation team cannot reasonably find responses to a rated requirement, a zero (0) point score will be assessed for that rated requirement.

The response to each rated requirement in Appendix E should: • Be complete (bullet point format is acceptable);

Be limited to two (2) pages excluding appendices and exhibits; • Be concise and factual; and

• Demonstrate the Proponent's understanding of Clients’ business needs by providing answers validating its capabilities.

The following is an overview of the point allocation and minimum score requirements, if any, for the applicable rated requirement components of this RFP:

Rated Requirement Components Available Points

Minimum Threshold Required

(if applicable)

Proponent’s Overview, Experience and Capability 10 N/A

Service Deliverables 13 N/A

Customer Support and Account Management 7 N/A

TOTAL POINTS FOR RATED REQUIREMENTS: 30 Points 15 Points Detailed rated requirements, including sub-point allocations are set out in Appendix E.

(23)

A minimum threshold for rated requirements, as noted above, must be achieved for any Proponent to move onto the next evaluation stage.

3.4 Stage III – Pricing (70 Points)

A Proponent must include the Rate Bid Form (Appendix C) in a separate package, completed according to the instructions contained in the form.

The package containing Appendix C – Rate Bid Form will be only opened for Eligible Proposals that have successfully pass stage II – rated requirements.

The total available points for pricing are set out below:

Pricing Components Available Points

Core Products 65

Non-Core Products 5

TOTAL POINTS FOR PRICING: 70 Points

All Rates applicable to the Services proposed in this RFP or identified in the Proposal should be provided in the Proponent’s Rate Bid Form (Appendix C).

3.4.1 Pricing Evaluation

The evaluation and scoring of the pricing will occur in the following methodology: Core Products – evaluation and scoring of proposed maximum, net, fixed Rates:

The maximum, net Rate of each Product will be evaluated and scored using a relative formula (i.e. by dividing that Proponent’s rate into the lowest rate bid) for proposed Rates on the Rate Bid Form, then multiplied by the number of available sub-points.

The table below illustrates how points will be calculated for proposed core Products:

EXAMPLE: Education Desktop – Level B

Proposed Rates Calculation Resulting Points If Proponent 1 proposes the lowest total net

Rate of $55.00, that Proponent will receive 100% of the possible points. The sub-point allocation is 15.5 divided by 3 discount levels.

$55.00 ÷ $55.00 x (15.5 ÷ 3) 5.17

If Proponent 2 bids the second lowest total net

Rate of $75.00 it will receive 3.79 points. $55.00 ÷ $75.00 x (15.5 ÷ 3) 3.79

If Proponent 3 bids the third lowest total net

Rate of $100.00, it will receive 2.84 points. $55.00 ÷ $100.00 x (15.5 ÷ 3) 2.84

This process will repeat for all Products, per Discount Level, where applicable.

Non-Core Products – evaluation and scoring of proposed minimum discount percentage off suggested retail price:

(24)

The Proponent should propose a minimum discount percentage off suggested retail price for a list of its most common software Products - up to fifty-five Products (should be the same list as proposed in Appendix G). All proposed minimum discount percentage off suggested retail price will be averaged and then evaluated and scored by using a relative formula (i.e. by dividing that Proponent’s percentage into the highest percentage).

The table below illustrates how points will be calculated for non-core Products:

EXAMPLE: Non-Core Average Discount Percentage Rate

Proposed Rates Calculation Resulting Points If Proponent 1 proposes the highest

percentage of 68%, that Proponent will receive 100% of the possible points.

68 ÷ 68 x 5.00 5.00

If Proponent 2 proposes the second the highest percentage of 44%, it will receive 3.53 points.

44 ÷ 68 x 5.00 3.53

If Proponent 3 proposes the third the lowest

percentage of 25%, it will receive 1.84 points. 25 ÷ 68 x 5.00 1.84

When $0.00 is entered in any cell on the Rate Bid Form, it is deemed to mean that the particular Product is provided to Clients free of charge. Therefore when evaluating and scoring the proposed Rate, the Proponent will receive the maximum sub-point allocation. The remaining Proponents will be evaluated, also using a relative formula, based on the remaining percentage of available points. For example, in a hypothetical situation where five (5) Proposals were received and one (1) Proponent proposed $0.00, that particular Proponent will receive the maximum sub-point allocation, and the remaining four (4) Proponents will be evaluated based on eighty percent (80%) of the available sub-point allocation.

Cells that are left blank or cells with an entry of N/A or Not Applicable in any cells of the Rate Bid Form is deemed to mean that the particular Product is not supplied by the Proponent. Therefore when evaluating and scoring the Rates, the Proponent shall receive a score of zero (0) point.

The resulting scores from core Rates and non-core Rates will be totaled. 3.5 Stage IV – Cumulative Score

At the conclusion of Stage IV, the scores from Stages II, III and IV will be totaled and, subject to the express and implied rights of OECM, the highest scoring Proponent will be become the Preferred Proponent and be invited to enter into the Form of Agreement, attached in Appendix A.

Reference checks will be performed to confirm or clarify information provided within the Proposal. The reference checks themselves will not be scored, however, OECM may adjust rated requirements scores related to the information obtained during the reference check.

3.6 Stage V - Tie Break Process

At this stage, where two (2) or more of the highest scoring Proposals achieve a tie score on completion of the evaluation process, OECM shall break the tie by selecting the Proposal with the highest score in Stage III – Pricing as the Preferred Proponent.

3.7 Execution of Agreement with Preferred Proponent

Subject to the requirements of this Section, OECM expects that the Agreement will be executed substantially in the form in which it appears in this RFP within fifteen (15) days after notification of award.

(25)

Once the Agreement has been fully executed, Clients may execute the CSA with the Supplier.

For certainty, OECM makes no commitment to the Preferred Proponent that the Agreement will be executed. The Preferred Proponent acknowledges that the commencement of any discussions does not obligate OECM to execute the Agreement.

OECM shall, at all times, be entitled to exercise its right under Section 4.6. 3.8 Agreement Launch and Marketing

OECM will promote the use of the Agreement with Clients as set out in Section 1.10. During the post award period, the Supplier will be expected to meet with OECM, as-and-when-required, to discuss an effective collaborative Agreement launch approach.

OECM will work closely with the Supplier and requests that, where available, communications and marketing experts join discussions to achieve the desired outcome. During this period, OECM may request the following information:

• Supplier profile and logo; • Supplier contact information; and

• Access to training materials (e.g. webinars).

(26)

PART 4 - TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE RFP PROCESS

4.1 General Information and Instructions 4.1.1 RFP Timetable

The following is a summary of the key dates for this RFP process:

RFP Timetable

Event Date

OECM’s Issue Date of RFP: February 4, 2015

Proponent’s Information Session: 2:00pm February 9, 2015 Proponent’s Deadline for Questions: 2:00pm February 12, 2015 OECM’s Deadline for Issuing Addenda: February 17, 2015 Proponent’s Deadline for Questions Pertaining to

Issued Addenda only: 2:00pm February 19, 2015

OECM’s Deadline for Issuing Final Addenda: February 26, 2015 Proponent’s Proposal Submission Deadline: 2:00pm March 4, 2015

Anticipated Agreement Execution: March, 2015

Agreement Start Date: March, 2015

Note – all times specified in this RFP timetable are local times in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

OECM may amend any timeline, including the Proponent’s Proposal Submission Deadline, without liability, cost, or penalty, and within its sole discretion.

In the event of any change in the Proponent’s Proposal Submission Deadline, the Proponents may thereafter be subject to the extended timeline.

4.1.2 Proponent Information Session

A Proponent may, but are not required to, participate in the Proponent Information Session, which will take place at the time set out in Section 4.1.1.

A Proponent wishing to participate should register, noting its full legal name and the names of the representatives by emailing the RFP Coordinator prior to 12:00pm on February 10, 2015. Access to the teleconference and any applicable information will be emailed to the registered Proponents.

The Proponent Information Session may provide an opportunity for Proponents to enhance its understanding of this RFP.

The Proponent Information Session is not an opportunity for Proponent’s to direct questions about the RFP document – Proponents must submit questions to the RFP Coordinator as set out in Section 4.2.1 below. Any changes to the Proponent Information Session meeting date will be issued in an addendum on MERX and Biddingo.

(27)

Information provided during this session will be posted on MERX and Biddingo. 4.1.3 Proponents to Follow Instructions

Proponents should structure its Proposals in accordance with the instructions in this RFP. Where information is requested in this RFP, any response made in a Proposal should reference the applicable section numbers of this RFP where that request was made.

4.1.4 Proposals in English

All submissions of Proposal are to be in English only. Any Proposals received by OECM that are not entirely in the English language may be disqualified.

4.1.5 OECM’s Information in RFP Only an Estimate

OECM makes no representation, warranty or guarantee as to the accuracy of the information contained in this RFP or issued by way of addenda. Any data contained in this RFP or provided by way of addenda are estimates only and are for the sole purpose of indicating to Proponents the general size of the work.

It is the Proponent's responsibility to avail itself of all the necessary information to prepare a Proposal in response to this RFP.

4.1.6 Proponent’s Costs

Proponents shall bear all costs and expenses incurred relating to any aspect of its participation in this RFP process, including all costs and expenses relating to the Proponent’s participation in:

• The preparation, presentation and submission of its Proposal;

• The Proponent’s attendance at any meeting in relation to the RFP process, including any presentation and or interview;

• The conduct of any due diligence on its part, including any information gathering activity;

• The preparation of the Proponent’s own questions prior to the Proponent’s Proposal Submission Deadline; and

• Any discussion and/or finalization, if any, in respect of the Form of Agreement. 4.2 Communication after RFP Issuance

4.2.1 RFP Coordinator Contact Information

All communications regarding any aspect of this RFP must be emailed to the following RFP Coordinator: Name: Doris Poon

Title: Sourcing Specialist Email: doris.poon@oecm.ca

Proponents that fail to comply with the requirement to direct all communications to the RFP Coordinator may be disqualified from this RFP process. Without limiting the generality of this provision, Proponents shall not communicate with or attempt to communicate with the following as it relates to this RFP:

• Any employee or agent of OECM (other than the RFP Coordinator);

• Any member of OECM’s governing body (such as Board of Directors, or advisors);

• Any employee, consultant or agent of the OECM’s Clients, including working group members; • Any elected official of any level of government, including any advisor to any elected official; and, • Any member of the Consortium (such as Board of Governors, Board of Directors, or advisors). 4.2.2 Proponents to Review RFP

References

Related documents

PTI: Pure Technical Inefficiency, TSE: Time Shift Effect, EE: Environmental Effects. Figure 5.2: Decomposition of technical

The corona radiata consists of one or more layers of follicular cells that surround the zona pellucida, the polar body, and the secondary oocyte.. The corona radiata is dispersed

The center will focus more time and energy on supporting substance abuse prevention activities in individual congregations and faith- based organizations, and on helping faith-based

PREREQUISITE(S): ALL CORE BUSINESS & SPECIALIZATION COURSES This course provides students with the opportunity to apply the theories, knowledge, and skills developed in

Service jacks equipped with internal load-limiting devices shall be pumped against a measured load with the lift arm in the horizontal position until the load-limiting device

Observations represent the following genes and corresponding processes: a nosZ genes with associated modeled processes heterotrophic and autotrophic denitrification, combined; b

One area of more profound eastern influence on the practice of Greek religion at the time can only be touched upon: the construction of large altars for

(A) Using a transwell system, primary human brain microvascular endothelial cells (BMECs) were infected with different strains of ZIKV: Honduras (ZIKV-H), Puerto Rico (ZIKV-PR),