REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS


Fleet Management Services

Issued:  April 4, 2017
Due: April 26, 2017



KEARNS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT


 
 
KEARNS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
 -RFP-

TO PROVIDE FLEET MANAGEMENT SERVICES

GENERAL

The Kearns Improvement District -KID- operates a water and sewer utility located in Kearns, Salt Lake County, Utah. KID encompasses the area formerly known as Camp Kearns, which was established as an air force replacement center during World War II, in addition to adjoining areas. KID is a political subdivision of the State of Utah with specific statutory powers. It is governed by an elected Board of Trustees. The District currently has 13,800 customers, and serves approximately 50,000 residents and has approximately 40 employees -about 20 office staff-.

RFP CONTACT

This Request for Proposals (RFP) has been prepared by KID and KID is the issuing entity of this RFP. KID's representative for this RFP is Bruce Hicken, CPA, Finance Director or Greg Anderson, Public Works Director.

PURPOSE / SCOPE OF RFP

The purpose and scope of this RFP is to solicit proposals from qualified companies to provide fleet management services for the District.  The fleet management company should be prepared to provide certain services that will include, but not necessarily be limited to:

-	Assist the District with the acquisition, licensing & titling, registering, disposal and maintenance of approximately 28 fleet vehicles -See Exhibit A for a list of current fleet-
-	Provide a system to track fleet maintenance and minimize the cost of routine maintenance and repairs by providing an approval purchase order to maintenance shops that will be performing the work on KID fleet vehicles
-	Meet with District personnel as needed to make recommendations on which fleet vehicles to replace and when to replace them

This RFP is designed to provide basic information sufficient to solicit proposals from qualified companies, but (except to the extent expressly provided otherwise) is not intended to limit a proposal's content or exclude any relevant, important, or essential information.  This RFP is part of a competitive procurement process which is intended to serve the best interests of KID and its citizens. It also provides each qualified company responding to this RFP with a fair opportunity for its services to be considered. 




TIMELINE

The following timeline will be followed with respect to this RFP:

1.	Beginning date: Tuesday, April 4, 2017
2.	Response submission deadline:  Monday, April 24, 2017
3.	Evaluation committee review period: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 - Friday, April 28, 2017
4.	Anticipated conditional* award of contract: Tuesday, May 9, 2017
5.	Notification of conditional award of contract to bidding companies: Wednesday, May 10, 2017
*Conditional award of contract pending executing an agreeable contract to both parties

CONTENTS OF PROPOSAL

The District requires all proposals to be submitted in two separate documents.  The first document will include responder information and requested qualification criteria as outlined in items B and C below, and shall be no more than ten -10- pages in length.  The second document will be the Cost Proposal, described in item D below, and shall be no more than two -2- pages in length.

Proposals should be submitted following these guidelines:

A.	 Submission Time, Place and Manner

Printed copies -3 copies- or an electronic copy (in PDF format), of the Proposal Documents and Cost Proposal, must be received on or before Monday, April 24, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. -MDT-.  Mail to Kearns Improvement District, PO Box 18608, Kearns, UT 84118, or e-mail as follows:

	Proposal Documents:		Attention: Bruce Hicken
					E-Mail: bhicken@kearnsid.org

	Cost Proposal:			Attention: Pamela Gill
					E-Mail: pgill@kearnsid.org

Late Submission:  Proposals received after April 24, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. -MDT- will not be considered.   Any mailed proposal received after that date and time will not be considered, irrespective of the date of mailing or any other factor.



B.	 Responder Information

The first page of the proposal should include:

	Title: 'Proposal to Provide Fleet Management Services'
	Responder information:	Company Name / RFP Contact Person
					Address
					Telephone
					E-Mail

C.	 Response Criteria

The proposal should address the following:

1.	Qualifications and ability to provide fleet management services:

Qualifications and expertise:
-	Provide a brief description of your company including ownership, volume of business, number of employees, and number of years in business
-	Describe your overall business philosophy
-	Describe your company's strength in the marketplace
-	What distinguishes your company and the services you offer from other companies

Support team:
-	Describe the team that would service the District relationship, specifying the individual who will be the lead person
-	Describe the responsibilities, expertise, experience, and education of each team member

Services provided:
-	Provide a list of services provided by your company, and indicate those services that will be included in your Cost Proposal

2.	 Work plan:

Include a complete narrative of your assessment of the work to be performed, your company's ability and approach, and the resources necessary to fulfill the requirements.  Include discussion of the following, and any other role of a fleet management company:

-	Description of the approach to be used in providing the services requested, including an explanation and history of successfully providing similar services to similar organizations
-	Description of the fleet management services offered including, but not limited to, the following:
o	Open-ended lease
o	Maintenance program including a process that a shop would go through to work on our fleet vehicles after getting an approved purchase order
o	Physical damage program
o	Vehicle resale process
o	Ability of the proposer to sell vehicles in the existing District fleet
-	Summary of how your company is uniquely qualified to perform the services outlined in this RFP

3.	Past performance:

-	List references -including a contact person and that person's contact information and title- of at least three entities for which fleet management services have been provided, and who can render an opinion regarding the ability of the responder to provide those services
-	Describe any work performed for water and/or sewer districts, or other similar local or special service districts

4.	 Standard Agreement:

Provide a standard contract, including terms and conditions, which your company uses for financial advisor agreements.  This is necessary to satisfy Utah Code Ann. § 63G-6a-703-2- -d-iii-.  Include term requirements such as month-to-month or annual contract.

5.	Conflicts of interest:

Indicate whether there are any potential conflicts of interest that would affect the ability of your company to fairly represent the District.  For each potential conflict of interest state:
-	The names of the individuals and entities involved;
-	The nature of the conflict, and 
-	The steps that responder will take to mitigate the impact of the conflict

D.	 Cost Proposal (Separate Document-

In a separate document entitled 'Cost Proposal', include all information on cost to provide fleet management services.  A proposal may be deemed to be nonresponsive if any cost information is included in any portion of the proposal response other than in the 'Cost Proposal' document.  Specifically, include the cost for the following services:

Cost of Lease.  For evaluation purposes, please include the following 'Cost Proposal Form' using the following assumptions.    

1.	Five (5) year open-ended lease with no mileage restrictions
2.	Vehicles must be depreciated at 1.5% per month with a 10% residual book value
3.	Supply end of term balance at the end of the 60 month lease
4.	List all other applicable fees and charges

COST PROPOSAL FORM
INSTRUCTIONS:   Using this form, provide a cost proposal for the vehicle lease scenario provided below.  Scenarios will be used for evaluation purposes only.  
DESCRIPTION	60 MONTH LEASE
Scenario  - Vehicle priced at $20,000 to be depreciated at a rate of 1.5% per month with Net Book -Depreciated- Values as defined in Section A Lease Requirements of this RFP	
CAPITALIZED COST FOR VEHICLE:	20,000
DEPRECIATION RATE:	1.5%
MONTHLY LEASE COST 	
LEASE TERM:	60
LEASE REMAINING BALANCE:	
TOTAL VEHICLE COST (PRODUCT OF MONTHLY LEASE COST AND LEASE TERM ADDED TO LEASE REMAINING BALANCE-:	
	

Upon award, the District will negotiate with the awarded vendor the appropriate lease parameters the District deems necessary for each individual vehicle leased.

The District reserves the right to order any amount of leased vehicles and additional services it deems in the best interest of the District and is not obligated to order the quantities outlined in this RFP.

Cost of Maintenance Program. For evaluation purposes, include the monthly administration cost of a maintenance program per vehicle based on the assumption of a 5 year lease and 12,000 miles per year.

Administration Fees / Other Charges.  List any other information relevant to cost related to providing lease and or maintenance services.

EVALUATION AND CONTRACT

Evaluation Criteria
An evaluation and selection committee will meet to consider all responsive proposals submitted and rank the proposals based on the criteria stated below.  If a responder is eliminated during the evaluation process, the company will be notified in writing.  

Evaluation categories are assigned a maximum number of points for evaluation purposes, with a maximum cumulative total of 100 points.  Cost proposals will be retained by the District and will be evaluated only after the basic proposals have been evaluated and ranked.  The proposals will be evaluated based on the following factors:

 	Criteria	Score (0 - 5) *	Weight	Maximum Points
1	Demonstrated qualifications and ability to provide fleet management services:	 	 	 
	 	Qualifications and expertise	5	x 2	10
	 	Support team	5	x 3	15
	 	Services provided	5	x 1	5
2	Responsiveness of work plan	 	 	 
	 	Clearly written proposal which indicates an understanding of the key issues, clearly defines deliverables, and the responders ability to meet the demands of fleet management services, as they arise.	5	x 5	25
3	Past Performance	 	 	 
		Demonstrated experience (i.e. proven track record).  Positive references indicating successful past performance for districts or other similar local or special service districts.	5	x 3	15
4	Standard Contract Provided	 	 	 
	 	The provided contract should be suitable for the services being sought and the relationship between KID and the company responding to the RFP.  The contract should be fair and balanced and should adequately protect KID's interests.  KID reserves the right to discuss proposed contract terms and negotiate appropriate changes with the successful company.	5	x 1	5
5	Cost Proposal - based on formula (see phase 4 below).	5	x 5	25
 	Total Maximum Score Available	 	 	100
Score -0 - Unacceptable, 5 - Superior-

	Evaluation Process

Phase 1:	The evaluation committee will review all proposals that are timely received.  Proposals that are not responsible, responsive, or do not comply with the requirements of this RFP and the requested submission format will be eliminated from consideration.

Phase 2:	The evaluation committee will evaluate proposals that are not eliminated in Phase 1 in accordance with criteria 1 - 4 listed on previous page.  Proposals that achieve a total technical score of 60 points or more will be designated as finalists and will move on to Phase 3.

Phase 3:	If needed, discussions may be conducted with responders who were not eliminated in Phase 1 or Phase 2.  The discussions may be conducted in person or by telephone.  The scores awarded under Phase 2 could be adjusted, if justified.  If discussions are deemed unnecessary, proposals may be evaluated and ranked without discussions.

Phase 4:	After the adjustments described in Phase 3 are made, if any, each finalist will receive a score for 'Cost' of up to 25 points, as follows:

	The proposal with the lowest cost will receive the maximum points available.  All other proposals will receive points determined by the ratio for the lowest proposal's cost to each other proposal's cost with the points being rounded down to the nearest whole number.  The ratio is calculated as follows: the maximum points available for the cost category, multiplied by lowest proposed price/proposal price.  

	Utah Procurement Code
	
All proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the requirements of the Utah Procurement Code, Title 63G, Chapter 6a of the Utah Code.

Accuracy of Proposal

All proposals will be relied upon to be true and accurate.  The District will rely on this information when evaluating each submission by the criteria listed in the Evaluation and Contract section.


E-Verify Compliance

The company that is awarded the bid must certify that they are in compliance with Utah Code Ann. § 63G-12-302-3- -including amendments and substitutions to the law- relative to the verification of the work eligibility status of employees and, in particular, that Company is registered and participates in a Status Verification system as required by law.  Please see attached certification form.

Addenda
	
In the event that it becomes necessary to revise any part of this RFP, respondents that are invited to submit in response to the RFP, and any other person requesting such information, will be notified by e-mail that a copy of the addenda is available. It is the responsibility of each respondent to ensure that its contact information given to KID is correct. The final date for the issuance and notification of addenda will be five -5- days prior to the due date of the proposal.

Protected Information
	
As a governmental entity, KID is subject to the Government Records Access and Management Act, Title 63G, Chapter 2 of the Utah Code -'GRAMA'-, and cannot guarantee that information provided in a proposal will not be subject to disclosure under GRAMA.

Contract
	
A contract may be awarded -pending successful contract negotiations- to the responder whose proposal is the most advantageous to the District, taking into consideration price and the other evaluation factors described in this RFP.

In accordance with Utah Procurement Code, the District reserves the right to award the contract to a technically lower-cost responder that scored lower than the highest scoring responder if, based on a cost benefit analysis required by the Utah Procurement Code, the highest scoring responder will not provide the best value to the District.

The contract may be for a period of up to five -5- years, and may be canceled at any time with or without cause upon 30 days written notice from either the District or the company. 

The District reserves the right to reject any and all proposals.


Best and Final Offers
	
In accordance with Utah Code Ann. § 63G-6a-707.5, the evaluation committee may request best and final offers from responsible offerors who have submitted responsive proposals that meet the minimum qualifications, evaluation criteria, or applicable score thresholds identified in this RFP, if: 

1.	no single proposal addresses all the specifications stated in the request for proposals;
2.	all or a significant number of the proposals are ambiguous on a material point and the evaluation committee requires further clarification in order to conduct a fair evaluation of proposals;
3.	the evaluation committee needs additional information from all offerors to complete the evaluation of proposals;
4.	the differences between proposals in one or more material aspects are too slight to allow the evaluation committee to distinguish between proposals;
5.	all cost proposals are too high or over budget; or
6.	another reason exists supporting a request for best and final offers, as provided in established rules.

Best and final offers will then be evaluated and scored by the evaluation committee in accordance with the evaluation criteria and procedures stated in this RFP.


	Cost of Responding to RFP and Contract Negotiations

All expenses relating to responding to this RFP, including, but not limited to, preparing, submitting, and presenting a proposal, attending meetings in relation to this RFP, discussions, and all travel, dining, lodging, and communication expenses will be borne by the responder.  The District assumes no liability for any costs incurred by a responder in responding to this RFP.

All expenses of the successful responder relating to conducting contract negotiations, including, but not limited to, drafting, research, legal review, preparation, attending meetings, site visits, travel, dining, lodging, and communication expenses will be borne by the responder.  The District assumes no liability for any costs incurred by a responder relating to contract negotiations.

Responder will not bill for any expense that was incurred before the contract is signed.




Exhibit A

Asset	Fleet #	Year	Make	Model	 Mileage 
2001 Dodge Ram 3500	103	2001	Dodge	3500	       28,119 
2004 Ford F-550 SD	205	2004	Ford	F-550	       47,825 
2005 Chevy 4500	207	2005	Chevrolet	4500	       62,231 
2005 Chevy Silverado	401	2005	Chevrolet	Silverado 1500	       87,833 
2006 Chevy Silverado	108	2006	Chevrolet	Silverado	       99,100 
2006 GMC 1500	208	2006	GMC	1500	       41,306 
2006 Chevy Impala	402	2006	Chevrolet	Impala	       24,970 
2007 Chevy Silverado	109	2007	Chevrolet	Silverado 1500	       67,974 
2007 Chevy Silverado	110	2007	Chevrolet	Silverado	       48,330 
2008 Chevy 4500	210	2008	Chevrolet	4500	       53,124 
2008 Ford Ranger	211	2008	Ford	Ranger	       26,558 
2009 Chevrolet Silverado 	112	2009	Chevrolet	Silverado	       52,565 
2009 Chevrolet Silverado 	113	2009	Chevrolet	Silverado 3500	       49,865 
2009 GMC TC 4500	114	2009	GMC	4500	       19,100 
2009 Chevy Colorado	305	2009	Chevrolet	Colorado	       34,606 
2010 Ford 350	115	2010	Ford	F-350	       32,405 
2010 Ford F-150	306	2010	Ford	F-150	       65,373 
2012 Dodge Ram 4500 Crew Cab	216	2012	Dodge	4500	       17,481 
2012 Dodge Ram 4500 Reg Cab	217	2012	Dodge	4500	       19,685 
2013 Dodge Ram	116	2013	Dodge 	Ram	       16,688 
2014 Ford F150	123	2014	Ford	F150	       15,626 
2014 F-150	307	2014	Ford	F-150	       16,545 
2015 F-150	308	2015	Ford	F-150	         7,437 
2015  Chevy Sierra TK36043	214	2015	Chevrolet	Sierra 3500	         9,818 
2016 Dodge Ram 1500	215	2016	Dodge	RAM 1500	         2,455 
2016 Dodge Ram 1500	309	2016	Dodge	Ram 1500	         1,191 
2016 Dodge Ram 1500	404	2016	Dodge	Ram 1500	         7,781 
2017 Ford-550 Mini Dump	218	2017	Ford	F-550	         1,836 
































CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE
WITH E-VERIFY PROGRAM OR EQUIVALENT


	This is to certify that __________________________________________ -'Company'- covenants, represents and warrants to Kearns Improvement District -'District'- that Company is and at all times during the performance of any contract with the District will be in full compliance with the requirements of Utah Code Ann. § 63G-12-302-3- -including amendments and substitutions to the law- relative to the verification of the work eligibility status of employees and, in particular, that Company is registered and participates in a Status Verification system as required by law.

	Dated this ____ day of ________________________, 201__.


 							
 Name of Company


By: 						
Title: 						
Printed Name: