Electronic security maintenance

1. Introduction

RFP Solutions Inc. was engaged on September 26, 2019 as a Fairness Monitor (FM) to observe all phases of the competitive procurement process for the Electronic Security Maintenance contract for facilities operated by the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC).

The competitive procurement process involved a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Electronic Security Maintenance contract issued by the Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) on behalf of CSC. The RFP was issued as Solicitation Number 21120-196032/A on December 18, 2019 with a closing date of February 11, 2020.

RFP Solutions Inc. is an independent third party with respect to this activity.

We hereby submit this Final Report, covering the activities of the FM, commencing with the draft RFP prior to posting on the Government Electronic Tendering System buyandsell.gc.ca, continuing through the mandatory site visit and responses to enquiries from potential bidders leading to the bid closing. This report also addresses the evaluation of the two proposals received, leading to the identification of the successful Bidder and notification of Bidders.

The report includes our attestation of assurance, a summary of the scope and objectives of our assignment, the methodologies applied and relevant observations from the activities undertaken to date.

2. Project requirement

CSC requires managerial and technical services to provide an effective national maintenance program for the electronic security systems and associated equipment owned by CSC at 43 correctional institutions (including 4 healing lodges) across Canada. CSC also requires an option to add maintenance service for up to 14 community correctional centres (CCC), regional headquarters and the national training academy. The maintenance program will include routine and preventative maintenance and modifications, first- and second-line corrective maintenance at CSC institutions and third line repair at the Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) facilities.

A typical institution has the following

• A fence detection system motion detection system closed circuit television system and a public address system to cover the perimeter
• A radio communications network personal portable alarm (PPA) devices for security personnel PPA locating system fixed point alarm system for offices a facility annunciations alarm system and an integration unit which displays and controls all these systems from one console by one staff member
• Other electronic security systems consisting of inmate cell call system internal closed circuit television (CCTV) for visiting areas corridors special handling units gymnasium and yards
• Internal radio communications network public address intercommunication system X-ray baggage equipment ion scanners walk through metal detector and handheld metal detectors

A minimum of 66 technical resources will be required to fulfill this requirement.

Any resulting contract will be for one year, plus two additional one-year irrevocable option periods allowing Canada to extend the term of the contract.

3. Attestation of assurance

The Fairness Monitor hereby provides the following unqualified assurance statement concerning the competitive procurement process for the Electronic Security Maintenance contract.

It is our professional opinion that the Request for Proposal process for the Electronic Security Maintenance contract we observed, was carried out in a fair, open and transparent manner.

4. Methodology

In accordance with the terms of our engagement, we familiarized ourselves with the relevant documents, reviewed the RFP documents prior to release, observed the RFP solicitation activities and the post solicitation period, including the evaluation of bids, identified fairness-related matters to the Contracting Authority, and verified that responses and actions were reasonable and appropriate. The following summarizes the specific activities and observations of the Fairness Monitor.

5. Fairness monitor activities and observations

5.1 Procurement planning/pre-issue stage

The Fairness Monitoring activities began during the development phase of the RFP. A review of the drafts and final RFP documentation was conducted. This included a review of the:

• General Instructions
• Bidder Instructions
• Bid Preparation Instructions
• Evaluation Procedures and Basis of Selection
• Certifications and Additional Information
• Security, Financial and Other Requirements
• Resulting Contract Clauses and
• Annexes including
  • Statement of Work
  • Basis of Payment
  • Security Requirements
  • Security Requirements Checklist and
  • Insurance Requirements.

The Fairness Monitor provided assurance as to the neutrality of the requirements, the objectivity of evaluation criteria and process; and the clarity of the documentation to support understandability by Proponents in preparing their Proposals, as well as to mitigate the potential for inconsistency or errors in the eventual application of evaluation criteria by the Evaluation Committee. All feedback provided by the Fairness Monitor was fully addressed by the Contracting Authority.

Observations

In reviewing the RFP documentation, the Fairness Monitor did not observe any fairness issues or risks.

5.2 Request for proposal posting

The RFP was issued via buyandsell.gc.ca on December 18, 2019 as Solicitation Number 21120-196032/A. The RFP final closing date was February 11, 2020 at 2:00 pm Eastern Standard Time.

A mandatory site visit was conducted at the Collins Bay Institution in Kingston on January 9, 2020; representatives from five potential suppliers attended. The FM was present to observe the site visit.

A total of 17 questions were received from potential suppliers during the posting period. Responses to these questions, as well as eight amendments to the terms and conditions of the solicitation were issued in four Solicitation Amendment documents; all of which were posted to buyandsell.gc.ca. All amendment documents were reviewed by the Fairness Monitor prior to being issued.

Observations

In reviewing the RFP amendments, the Fairness Monitor did not observe any fairness issues.

5.3 Request for proposal close

The Fairness Monitor reviewed the way the proposal responses to the RFP were received and handled with the Contracting Authority.

Two proposals were received and handled in accordance with the closing requirements and deadline stated in the RFP.

Observations

In reviewing the receipt and handling of the RFP responses, the Fairness Monitor was satisfied that the closing was undertaken in accordance with the RFP and established procedures and no fairness issues were identified.

5.4 Evaluation instructions

Prior to bid evaluations, the Fairness Monitor again reviewed the evaluation guidelines, including evaluator responsibilities, code of conduct, security, confidentiality and conflict of interest requirements, and evaluation methodology. The evaluation of submissions was subject to a Phased Compliance process for the mandatory submission and technical requirements.

The Fairness Monitor provided assurance as to the impartiality of evaluation methodology.

Observations

In reviewing the evaluation methodology, the Fairness Monitor did not observe any fairness concerns.

5.5 Administrative review

Following RFP closing, a review of mandatory submission and technical requirements was undertaken by the Contracting Authority and Evaluation Committee respectively of the two proposals received. Compliance Assessment Reports (CAR) were issued to both Bidders, informing one Bidder it was compliant with the mandatory submission and technical requirements, while the other Bidder was given the opportunity to provide additional information to address areas of noncompliance. After the Remedy Period was closed, the CAR response of the noncompliant Bidder was reviewed by the Evaluation Committee on March 27, 2020 and deemed nonresponsive to these requirements as stated in the RFP, and therefore ineligible to proceed to technical evaluation.

The Fairness Monitor reviewed the results of the Phased Compliance process to assess them against the requirements in the RFP.

Observation

In reviewing the assessment of Bidders’ compliance with the mandatory submission and technical requirements, the Fairness Monitor did not observe any fairness issues.

5.6 Technical evaluation

The rated technical evaluation was conducted on the one proposal that met all mandatory requirements.

The rated requirements were reviewed individually by each member of the Evaluation Committee. The evaluators subsequently met via teleconference on March 27, 2020 to conduct a consensus evaluation.

The evaluators unanimously agreed that the proposal met the overall minimum rated technical evaluation threshold to be deemed a responsive proposal and proceed to the financial evaluation.

Observation

In observing the consensus evaluation and reviewing the results of the technical evaluation, the Fairness Monitor did not identify any fairness issues.

5.7 Price evaluation, verification and bidder selection

In accordance with the RFP, the pricing envelope for the one responsive proposal was opened and the Contracting Authority determined the Price Points for the Bidder. The Fairness Monitor reviewed the Price Proposals and Price Ratings with the Contracting Authority.

The selection of the successful Bidder was based on the responsive proposal with the highest Total Score (Total Score = Technical Points + Price Points).

The Contracting Authority verified the Total Score for the responsive Bidder and reviewed the results with the Fairness Monitor.

Following review of the financial proposal, the Contracting Authority requested price support for the pricing provided by the Bidder. Upon receipt of this support the Contracting Authority finalized the financial evaluation. The Fairness Monitor reviewed the pricing support and the final pricing evaluation.

Following the confirmation of the top ranked Bidder, including verification of security and integrity requirements the Contracting Authority finalized the overall results which were verified with the Fairness Monitor.

Observation

In reviewing the results of the price evaluation, verification and bidder selection, the Fairness Monitor did not observe any fairness concerns.

5.8 Communications and debriefing

The successful Bidder was notified in writing of contract award on April 15, 2020. The unsuccessful Bidder was notified of the results on the same date. The Fairness Monitor had the reviewed the notifications before they were issued.

An Addendum to this report will be issued following the close of the period to request a debriefing and any requested debriefing of Bidders have been conducted.

6. Reference documents

The following documents related to Solicitation Number 21120-196032/A are available on buyandsell.gc.ca and/or through the project office.

7. Addendum to final report, May 29, 2020

Addendum to the Fairness Monitor Final Report dated April 16, 2020 pertaining to the competitive procurement process for the Electronic Security Maintenance contract for facilities operated by the Correctional Service of Canada, issued by Public Services and Procurement Canada as a result of Solicitation Number 21120-196032/A.

This Addendum to the Fairness Monitor Final Report covers the period following the conclusion of the evaluation phase and includes contract award and an allowance of time during which proponents could pose questions or request a debriefing. There were two proposals received by PSPC in response to the Request for Proposal (RFP). Both bidders were issued Compliance Assessment Reports (CAR) based on administrative review of the mandatory submission and technical requirements of the RFP. One bidder was informed that its proposal was compliant with the requirements; the other bidder was given the opportunity to provide additional information to address areas of noncompliance. After the Remedy Period was closed, the CAR response of the noncompliant bidder was reviewed by the Evaluation Committee and deemed nonresponsive to these requirements as stated in the RFP, and therefore ineligible to proceed to technical evaluation. The proposal of the compliant bidder met the overall minimum rated technical evaluation threshold and proceeded to the price evaluation. Because there was only one compliant proposal, additional price support was requested and received from the bidder.

After review of the contract award notice by the Fairness Monitor, both bidders were notified via e-mail on April 15, 2020 of the contract award (notification of the contract award was posted on buyandsell.gc.ca on the same day) and advised that they were entitled to a debriefing.

Neither of the bidders requested a debriefing on the results of the solicitation process within 15 working days from the receipt of the results.

Attestation of Assurance

The Fairness Monitor hereby provides the following unqualified assurance statement concerning the competitive procurement process for the Electronic Security Maintenance contract for facilities operated by the Correctional Service of Canada.

It is our professional opinion that the Technical Advisor Services for the Electronic Security Maintenance contract for facilities operated by the Correctional Service of Canada Project Request for Proposal evaluation and contract award processes we observed were carried out in a fair, open and transparent manner.