901203 add1_health and welfare - acgov.org web viewif a bidder is taking any exceptions to the rfp...

COUNTY OF ALAMEDAADDENDUM No. 1

to

RFP No. 901203

for

Health and Welfare Consulting ServicesSpecification Clarification/Modification and Recap of the Networking/Bidders Conferences

Held on February 4, 2014 and February 5, 2014

This County of Alameda, General Services Agency (GSA), RFP Addendum has been electronically issued to potential bidders via e-mail. E-mail addresses used are those in the County’s Small Local Emerging Business (SLEB) Vendor Database or from other sources. If you have registered or are certified as a SLEB, please ensure that the complete and accurate e-mail address is noted and kept updated in the SLEB Vendor Database. This RFP Addendum will also be posted on the GSA Contracting Opportunities website located at http://www.acgov.org/gsa/purchasing/bid_content/ContractOpportunities.jsp.

Alameda County is committed to reducing environmental impacts across our entire supply chain. If printing this document, please print only what you need, print double-sided, and use recycled-content paper.

1401 Lakeside Drive, Suite 907 Oakland, CA 94612Phone: 510-208-9600 Website: http://www.acgov.org/gsa/departments/purchasing/

I:\PURCHASING\Contracting Opportunities\Purchasing\Health and Welfare (901203)\Add1_HealthWelfareServices.docx Rev 2012-11-02

http://www.acgov.org/gsa/departments/purchasing/

http://www.acgov.org/gsa/purchasing/bid_content/ContractOpportunities.jsp

County of Alameda, General Services Agency – PurchasingRFP No. 901203, Addendum No. 1

The following Sections have been modified to read as shown below. Changes made to the original RFP document are in bold print and highlighted, and deletions made have a strike through.

Page 13 of the RFP, CALENDAR OF EVENTS, has been modified as follows:

II. CALENDAR OF EVENTS

EVENT DATE/LOCATIONRequest Issued January 13, 2014 CompletedWritten Questions Due by 5:00 p.m. on February 5, 2014 CompletedNetworking/Bidders Conference #1

February 4, 2014 @ 10:00 a.m.COMPLETED

at: General Services Agency Room 1107, 11th Floor, 1401 Lakeside Drive, Oakland, CA 94612

OR remotely @ https://gsaalamedacounty.adobeconnect.com/admin/show-event-catalog

Networking/Bidders Conference #2

February 5, 2014 @ 1:30 p.m. COMPLETED

at: Dublin Public Library Program Room 200 Civic Plaza,

Dublin, CA 94568Addendum Issued February 24, 2014Response Due March 12, 2014 by 2:00 p.m. Evaluation Period March 12 - 21, 2014Vendor Interviews Week of March 31, 2014 April 10 -18, 2014Board Letter Recommending Award Issued

May 6, 2014 May 13, 2014

Board Consideration Award Date

May 20, 2014 June 3, 2014

Contract Start Date June 15, 2014 July 1, 2014

RFP No. 90XXXX, Addendum No. 1

https://gsaalamedacounty.adobeconnect.com/admin/show-event-catalog




Page 14 of the RFP, Section G (EVALUATION CRITERIA/SELECTION COMMITTEE), has been revised as follows:

G. EVALUATION CRITERIA / SELECTION COMMITTEE

All proposals that pass the initial Evaluation Criteria which are determined on a pass/fail basis (Completeness of Response, Financial Stability, and Debarment and Suspension) will be evaluated by a County Selection Committee (CSC). The County Selection Committee may be composed of County staff and other parties that may have expertise or experience in health and welfare consulting services. The CSC will score and recommend a Contractor in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in this RFP. Other than the initial pass/fail Evaluation Criteria, the evaluation of the proposals shall be within the sole judgment and discretion of the CSC.

All contact during the evaluation phase shall be through the GSA–Purchasing Department only. Bidders shall neither contact nor lobby evaluators during the evaluation process. Attempts by Bidder to contact and/or influence members of the CSC may result in disqualification of Bidder.

The CSC will evaluate each proposal meeting the qualification requirements set forth in this RFP. Bidders should bear in mind that any proposal that is unrealistic in terms of the technical or schedule commitments, or unrealistically high or low in cost, will be deemed reflective of an inherent lack of technical competence or indicative of a failure to comprehend the complexity and risk of the County’s requirements as set forth in this RFP.

Bidders are advised that in the evaluation of cost it will be assumed that the unit price quoted is correct in the case of a discrepancy between the unit price and an extension.

As a result of this RFP, the County intends to award a contract to the responsible bidder whose response conforms to the RFP and whose bid presents the greatest value to the County, all evaluation criteria considered. The combined weight of the evaluation criteria is greater in importance than cost in determining the greatest value to the County. The goal is to award a contract to the bidder(s) that proposes the County the best quality as determined by the combined weight of the evaluation criteria. The County may award a contract of higher qualitative competence over the lowest priced response.

The basic information that each section should contain is specified below, these specifications should be considered as minimum requirements. Much of the material needed to present a comprehensive proposal can be placed into one of the sections listed. However, other criteria may be added to further support the evaluation process

RFP No. 901203, Addendum No. 1


whenever such additional criteria are deemed appropriate in considering the nature of the goods and/or services being solicited.



Each of the Evaluation Criteria below will be used in ranking and determining the quality of bidders’ proposals. Proposals will be evaluated according to each Evaluation Criteria, and scored on the zero to five-point scale outlined below. The scores for all Evaluation Criteria will then be added, according to their assigned weight (below), to arrive at a weighted score for each proposal. A proposal with a high weighted total will be deemed of higher quality than a proposal with a lesser-weighted total. The final maximum score for any project is five hundred fifty (550) points, including the possible fifty (50) points for local and small, local and emerging, or local preference points (maximum 10% of final score).

The evaluation process may include a two-stage approach including an initial evaluation of the written proposal and preliminary scoring to develop a short list of bidders that will continue to the final stage of oral presentation and interview and reference checks. The preliminary scoring will be based on the total points, excluding points allocated to references, oral presentation, and interview.

If the two-stage approach is used, the three five bidders receiving the highest preliminary scores and with at least 200 points will be invited to an oral presentation and interview. Only the bidders meeting the short list criteria will proceed to the next stage. All other bidders will be deemed eliminated from the process. All bidders will be notified of the short list participants; however, the preliminary scores at that time will not be communicated to bidders.

The zero to five-point scale range is defined as follows:

0 Not AcceptableNon-responsive, fails to meet RFP specification. The approach has no probability of success. If a mandatory requirement this score will result in disqualification of proposal.

1 PoorBelow average, falls short of expectations, is substandard to that which is the average or expected norm, has a low probability of success in achieving objectives per RFP.

2 Fair Has a reasonable probability of success, however, some objectives may not be met.

3 Average

Acceptable, achieves all objectives in a reasonable fashion per RFP specification. This will be the baseline score for each item with adjustments based on interpretation of proposal by Evaluation Committee members.

4 Above Average / Good

Very good probability of success, better than that which is average or expected as the norm. Achieves all objectives per RFP requirements and expectations.



5 Excellent / Exceptional

Exceeds expectations, very innovative, clearly superior to that which is average or expected as the norm. Excellent probability of success and in achieving all objectives and meeting RFP specification.

The Evaluation Criteria and their respective weights are as follows:

Evaluation Criteria WeightA. Completeness of Response:

Responses to this RFP must be complete. Responses that do not include the proposal content requirements identified within this RFP and subsequent Addenda and do not address each of the items listed below will be considered incomplete, be rated a Fail in the Evaluation Criteria and will receive no further consideration.

Responses that are rated a Fail and are not considered may be picked up at the delivery location within 14 calendar days of contract award and/or the completion of the competitive process. Pass/FailFinancial Stability (See Exhibit A – Bid Response Packet) Pass/FailDebarment and Suspension:Bidders, its principal and named subcontractors are not identified on the list of Federally debarred, suspended or other excluded parties located at www.sam.gov. Pass/Fail

B. Cost:The points for Cost will be computed by dividing the amount of the lowest responsive bid received by each bidder’s total proposed cost.

Consideration of price in terms of overall affordability may be controlling in circumstances where two or more proposals are otherwise adjudged to be equal, or when a superior proposal is at a price that the County cannot afford. 15 Points

C. Specific Capabilities and Expertise: Bidders will be evaluated on their proposed solutions, capabilities, and expertise in the following areas: 1. Quality and Research Experience (8 points)

a. Information and legal/regulatory updates – State and

32 Points


http://www.sam.gov/


Federalb. Information, legal/regulatory updates, State and

Federal as it pertains Health Care Reform/Affordable Care Act.

c. Competitive Surveysd. Utilization and Experience studies

2. Support and Strategy (8 points)a. Support for Open Enrollment (see I.E - Specific

Requirements - Items 1.q and 1.s, Page 8-12 of 28)b. Communication Support and examples of

communications (see Specific Requirements - Items 1.h, 1.k and 1.r, Page 8-12 of 28)

c. Health and Welfare Plan Design - fully insured and self-insured (see I.C - Background, Page 6 of 28)

d. Contract Review and Renewal (see I.E - Specific Requirements - Items 1.a, 1.d and 1.v, Page 8-12 of 28)

e. Provider Contracting (see I.E - Specific Requirements - Items 1.b, 1.c, 1.d, 1.l and 1.w, Page 8-12 of 28)

f. Provider/Carrier Placement (see I.E - Specific Requirements – Items 1.e and 1.i, Pages 8-12 of 28)

g. Project management and timelines (see I.E - Specific Requirement – Items 1.e, 1.t, 1.x and 1.z, Page 8-12 of 28)

h. Support for Health Care Reform/Affordable Care Act.

3. Problem Prevention and Solving (8 points)a. Periodic Carrier Audits/ Monitoring (see I.E -

Specific Requirements – Items 1.g and 1.n, Pages 8-12 of 28)

b. Problem Resolution (see I.E - Specific Requirements – Items 1.o and 1.u, Pages 8-12 of 28)

c. Vendor Performance Audits (see I.E - Specific Requirements – Items 1.j, 1.m and 1.dd., Pages 8-12 of 28)

4. Experience working with Required Valuations (8 points)a. Retiree Health Plan Liability Valuationb. GASB 43 and 45 Consultation



c. Annual calculation of Implicit Subsidyd. Voluntary & Non-Voluntary Employee

Benefits



D. Relevant Experience and Overall Capabilities of the Firm:Relevant Experience and Overall Capabilities of the Firm:Proposals will be evaluated against the RFP specifications and the questions below:

1. Do the individuals assigned to the project have experience on similar projects? (5 Points)

2. Are resumes complete and do they demonstrate backgrounds that would be desirable for individuals engaged in the work the project requires? (5 Points)

3. How extensive is the applicable education and experience of the personnel designated to work on the project? (5 Points) 15 Points

E. References (See Exhibit A – Bid Response Packet) If a short list process is used for a solicitation, references are only performed on the short list vendors and the score is not included in the preliminary short list score 12 Points

F. Description of Proposed Services:Proposals will be evaluated against the RFP specifications including, but not limited to, Bidder’s proposed strategy and team structure. 10 Points

G. Oral Presentation and Interview:The oral presentation by each bidder shall not exceed sixty (60) minutes in length. The oral interview will consist of standard questions asked of each of the bidders and specific questions regarding the specific proposal. The proposals may then be re-evaluated and re-scored based on the oral presentation and interview. 16 Points

SMALL LOCAL EMERGING BUSINESS PREFERENCE

Local Preference: Points equaling five percent (5%) of bidder’s total score, for the above Evaluation Criteria, will be added. This will be the bidder’s final score for purposes of award evaluation. Five Percent (5%)Small and Local or Emerging and Local Preference: Points equaling five percent (5%) of bidder’s total score, for the above Evaluation Criteria, will be added. This will be the bidder’s final score for purposes of award evaluation. Five Percent (5%)



Responses to Verbal Questions

Q1) Page 18 of the RFP, Section G (EVALUATION CRITERIA/SELECTION COMMITTEE), Evaluation Criteria Table, Row C, Item 4.b. states:

4. Experience working with Required Valuations (8 Points)b. GASB 43 and 45 – Annual Calculation of Implicit Subsidy.

Will the GASB 43 and 45 valuations be performed as part of this contract or consulting related be performed as part of this contract?

) No, GASB 43 and 45 valuations will not be performed under this contract. Consulting related to GASB 43 and 45 may be required, if needed under this contract. Additionally, the annual calculation of the Implicit Subsidy is required.

Q2) In the Sample Template of Standard Service Agreement it doesn’t mention about any limitation of liability. Can we request a limitation of liability and would that be part of the acceptance in our proposal or is there no limitation accepted by the County?

) Any changes or exceptions taken by a Contractor on the County’s standard service agreement will be subject to approval by the County Counsel. If a bidder is taking any exceptions to the RFP and associated bid documents, please use Exceptions, Clarifications, Amendments forms attached to the bid documents. However, the County is under no obligations to accept any exceptions and such exceptions may be a basis for bid disqualification.

Q3) Why is the County going out to bid at this time?) The County’s requirements for a contract is three years and can be extended for a single

two-year extension. The current contract for health and welfare consulting services is on its 5th year.

Q4) It seems like this particular bid is about benefits more so than anything. Not just contracting a person to come in and help you focus in on benefits and Health Care Acts, and different things like that? Is that correct?

) Yes, primarily this contract is for a new Health and Welfare consultant that works very closely with the benefits unit department in Human Resource Services.

Q5) Who is the County’s current contractor for this contract?) Hay Group is the current contractor for this contract.

Q6) How much was the total amount of the current contract?) The total contract amount for five years is $993,381.



Q7) What were the current contractors consulting fees?) The current contract hourly rates were divided into five different positions and as follows:

Position Year 1 Year 2 Year 3Sr. Benefits Consultant $330 $340 $350Account Executive/Manager $330 $340 $340Benefits Consultant $240 $250 $260Actuary $160 $165 $165Administrative Assistant $60 $62 $65

Q8) How satisfied is the County with the current consultant? ) The County is very satisfied with the services provided by the current contractor.

Q9) Can the County provide bidders with a list of small, local and emerging business (SLEB) subcontractors?

) Bidders can find Certified SLEB’s for different areas from the SLEB Homepage. Go to the County’s Website, www.acgov.or g , go to the SLEB Homepage and you can do a search by the NAICS Code 501612 or 501611 as listed on page 22 of the bid documents. If you have any difficulty in finding certified vendors, you may contact the Auditor Controller’s Agency-Contract Compliance Office at (510) 891-5500 and they are more than happy to assist you.

Q10) Are the bidders still limited to one SLEB or can they have multiple SLEB Partners?) Prime bidder can have multiple SLEB subcontractors as long as it totals to a minimum of

20% of the contract.

Q11) What is the County’s top 3 benefit issues over the next 3 years? ) The County is declining to respond to this question as this one of the questions

being asked in the RFP Questionnaire, Exhibit D #23 and states as follows:23. List the three (3) most important concerns you see for Alameda County over the next eighteen (18) months.

a. What resource does your firm have in place to address these concerns?b. List your firm’s experience in addressing these concerns.

Q12) When will the Addendum be issued? ) The addendum will be issued on February 24, 2014.

Q13) Can bidders submit additional written questions?) Yes, bidders can submit additional written questions via email to

[email protected] until 5:00 p.m., February 5, 2014


http://www.acgov.or/


Q14) Is there a list of SLEBs or vendors who attended the bid conference or how can we gain access to who had indicated some interest that was in that category?

) Attendees of the bid conferences will be included in the addendum. The list will be a short list and we encourage you to do your own research on the County’s website, www.acgov.org, in finding SLEB subcontractors.

Q15) Does a prime bidder have to be a SLEB by the time they are contracted or do they have to be a SLEB to be selected?No, prime bidders don’t have to be a SLEB in order to be selected. Bidders not meeting the definition of a small or emerging local business do not qualify for a bid preference and must subcontract with one or more County certified small and/or emerging local businesses for at least twenty percent (20%) of the total bid amount in order to be considered for contract award. For further information, please refer to page 22 of the RFP, Section III.M.3 which states:

3. Small and Emerging Locally Owned Business: The County is vitally interested in promoting the growth of small and emerging local businesses by means of increasing the participation of these businesses in the County’s purchase of goods and services.

As a result of the County’s commitment to advance the economic opportunities of these businesses, Bidders must meet the County’s Small and Emerging Locally Owned Business requirements in order to be considered for the contract award. These requirements can be found online at:

http://acgov.org/auditor/sleb/overview.htm

Q16) Are SLEB subcontractors entitled to preference points?No, SLEB subcontractors are not entitled to preference points. SLEB subcontractors should also be certified by the time of submission to be qualified as a SLEB subcontractors.

Q17) What are the biggest concerns or challenges that the County has, with respect to the delivery of the benefits now? Is it cost?

) Please see Q11/A11.


http://acgov.org/auditor/sleb/overview.htm

http://www.acgov.org/


The following participants attended the Bidders’ Conferences:

Company Name / Address Representative Contact Information

Hay Group100 Penn Square EastPhiladelphia, PA 19107

Jim McPhillips

Phone: (215) 861-2713E-Mail: [email protected] Contractor: YesSubcontractor: NoCertified SLEB: No

Carmen West–Jefferson256 Lexington LaneSan Leandro, CA 94577

Carmen West-Jefferson

Phone: (510) 206-0527E-Mail: [email protected] Contractor: Subcontractor: Certified SLEB: No

Milliman650 California Street, 17th FloorSan Francisco, CA 94108

Susan Pantely

Phone: (415) 409-1333E-Mail: [email protected] Prime Contractor: YesSubcontractor: NoCertified SLEB: No

Barney & Barney1999 Harrison StreetOakland, CA 94618

Dave Cannon


Aon Hewitt707 Wilshire BlvdLos Angeles, CA 90017

Brent Crane


OmniConsultants800 Laurel Ct.Rodeo, CA 94572

Tess Snook O’Riva

Phone: 925-408-0588E-Mail: [email protected] Contractor: NoSubcontractor: YesCertified SLEB: No

Oracle475 Sansome St, Fl. 15San Francisco, CA 94111

Cory Lovell

Phone: 415-717-8782E-Mail: [email protected] Contractor: NoSubcontractor: NoCertified SLEB: No

Phone: E-Mail: Prime Contractor: Subcontractor: Certified SLEB:


mailto:[email protected]




EXHIBIT CVENDOR LIST

RFP No. 901203 – Health and Welfare Consulting Services

Below is the Vendor Bid List for this project consisting of vendors who have responded to RFP No. 901203, and/or been issued a copy of the RFP. This Vendor Bid List is being provided for informational purposes to assist bidders in making contact with other businesses as needed to develop local small and emerging business subcontracting relationships to meet the requirements of the Small Local Emerging Business (SLEB) Program: http://www.acgov.org/gsa/departments/purchasing/policy/slebpref.htm.

This RFP Addendum is being issued to all vendors on the Vendor Bid List; the following revised vendor list includes contact information for each vendor attendee at the Networking/Bidders Conferences.

RFP No. 901203 - Health and Welfare Consulting ServicesBusiness Name Contact

NameContact Phone Address City ST Email

A Squared Ventures, Inc. Andrea Lowe 510-435-2380 357 Hanover Ave. Oakland CA [email protected]

ABD Insurance and FinancialLaurie Anderson-Jones 925-280-2731 1350 Treat Blvd., #550 Walnut Creek CA [email protected]

Alliant Insurance ServicesMichael Menerey 949-660-8174 1301 Dove St., Ste. 200

Newport Beach CA [email protected]

Aon Hewitt Brent Crane 801-652-1697 707 Wilshire Blvd. Los Angeles CA [email protected] Hewitt Donna Curry 415-486-7674 199 Fremont St., 15th Fl. San Francisco CA [email protected]

Barney & Barney Dave Cannon 510-466-60571999 Harrison St., Ste. 1230 Oakland CA [email protected]

Buck ConsultantsAnne-Marie Kearney

972-682-6827415-392-0616

353 Sacramento St., Ste. 800 San Francisco CA [email protected]

Carmen West-JeffersonCarmen West-Jefferson 510-206-0527 256 Lexington Lane San Leandro CA [email protected]

Chemoff Diamond & Co. Kevin Quinn 516-247-3342725 RXR Plaza, East Tower Uniondale NY [email protected]

Craford Benefits Consulting Jill Madison 415-755-6332 990 5th Ave. San Rafael CA [email protected]

Filice Insurance Dawn Alvarez 925-962-19823736 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Ste. 301 Lafayette CA [email protected]

Gallagher Benefit Services Bruce Caldwell 415-925-2087101 Larkspur Landing Cir. Ste. 120 Lakrspur CA [email protected]

Hay Group Jim McPhillips 251-861-2713 100 Penn Square East Philadelphia PA [email protected] Group Jim McPhillips 215-861-2713 55 2nd St., Ste. 550 San Francisco CA [email protected]

Keenan & AssociatesE. Peter McNamara 510-986-6761 111 Broadway, Ste. 2000 Oakland CA [email protected]

Lockton Nancy Faville 415-586-41112 Embarcadero Ctr., 17th Fl San Francisco CA [email protected]

Mercer Chris Renz 415-743-87004 Embarcadero Ctr., Ste. 400 San Francisco CA [email protected]

Milliman Casey L. Word 415-394-3769650 California St., 17th Fl.. San Francisco CA [email protected]

Milliman Susan Pantely 650 California St., 17th Fl.. San Francisco CA [email protected]

Exhibit C – RFP No. 901203Page 1



call:%20(510)%20532-7610








call:%20(510)%20532-7610








http://www.acgov.org/gsa/departments/purchasing/policy/slebpref.htm

OmniConsultantsTess Snook O'Riva 925-408-0588 800 Laurel Court Rodeo CA [email protected]

Oracle Cory Lovell 415-717-8782 475 Sansome St., FL15 San Francisco CA [email protected] Consulting Jay Sanders 510-986-0686 222 14th St., Ste. 100 Oakland CA [email protected]

Saylor & Hill Dave Cannon 510-466-60571999 Harrison St., Ste. 1230 Oakland CA [email protected]

SEGALGeorge N. Korean 818-956-6717

330 North Brand Blvd., Ste. 1100 Glendale CA [email protected]

Towers Watson Tom Matthews 415-733-4145345 California St., Ste. 2000 San Francisco CA [email protected]

Wells Fargo/ABD Insurance Peter Vu 925-280-2731 1350 Treat Blvd., #550 Walnut Creek CA [email protected]

Exhibit C – RFP No. 901203Page 2







901203 add1_health and welfare - acgov.org web viewif a bidder is taking any exceptions to the rfp...

Documents