Implementation of SAP R/3
October 8, 1999

This is Addendum 003 to RF-P00027 Implementation of SAP R/3

This addendum is issued for the propose of providing the criteria, including weights, that will be used to evaluate proposals received through the issuance of this RFP and to revise the timetable for submission of proposals. Vendors who have submitted proposals within the time frame previously provided will have an opportunity to resubmit their proposal. The University regrets any inconvenience you may experience from the issuance of this addendum.

The revised timetable and evaluation criteria are as follows:

TIMETABLE

EVALUATION CRITERIA

General Approach

The University of Tennessee will select an implementation partner with whom to jointly implement the SAP R/3 software on time and within budget.

Proposals will be evaluated based on information gathered from the RFP responses, vendor presentations, reference contacts, and additional research.

This evaluation process was documented, and a sealed copy was provided to the Office of Business Services before the University opened any response to the RFP.

Minimum Acceptable Prime Contractor Qualifications

To be considered, a vendor must meet the Minimum Acceptable Prime Contractor Qualifications specified in Appendix A of RF-P00027. Vendors who do not meet all minimum qualifications will be disqualified from further evaluation. The determination of whether a vendor meets the minimum qualifications will be based on the supporting documentation provided by the vendor and the University’s independent verification of that documentation. The University will be the sole judge of whether a vendor meets the minimum qualifications.

Evaluation Criteria

Responses to The University of Tennessee’s 21st Century Systems Request for Proposal for the Implementation of SAP R/3 will be evaluated in the following four categories:

1.  Qualifications and Experience
2.  Technical Approach (Methodology and Project Plan)
3.  Proposed Staffing
4.  Price Proposal

The evaluation will be conducted in two separate phases, with Phase I based on categories 1 through 3 and Phase II based on category 4. Phase I scoring will be completed before the price proposal envelopes are opened.

Category 1: Qualifications and Experience (3,000 points)

Reference checks may be made to any or all references provided by the vendor, as well as to other institutions or organizations identified by the University as using that vendor in the implementation process. Additional information provided by the vendor or obtained by the University will be considered.

The following criteria will be considered in scoring Category 1:

• Vendor qualifications and experience
• Quality of consultants provided by vendor
• Quantity of consultants
• Working relationship with vendor
• Methodology
• Project completion
• Other information gathered by the University

Category 2: Technical Approach (Methodology and Project Plan) (1,000 points)

The following criteria will be considered in scoring Category 2:

• Structure and pre-defined tasks
• Vendor experience
• Project management, tracking, and milestones
• Flexibility of plan
• Scope control
• Roles and responsibilities
• Project completion criteria
• Project plan assumptions
• Training plans
• Documentation
• Conversion, extensions, and reports
• Compatibility with University environment
• Other information gathered by the University

Category 3: Proposed Staffing (2,500 points)

The following criteria will be considered in scoring Category 3:

• Consultant pool
• Vendor project manager
• Staffing assumptions
• Staffing configuration
• Accommodation of staffing contingencies
• SAP presence
• Other information gathered by the University

Category 4: Price Proposal (3,500 points)

Scoring is a three-step process. The following method will be used in scoring Category 4:

Step 1 - The lowest bid receives 100% of the fixed price points (2,500 points); the others are apportioned relative to that bid.

Scoring will be based on the fixed price submitted by the vendor. All fixed price values will then be scored relative to the lowest.

The formula to be used is as follows:

All proposal calculations shall result in numbers rounded to the nearest whole number.

Step 2 - Each RFP is evaluated as a whole and given a percentage rating indicating the judged completeness of the offering relative to the University’s requirements.

Step 3 - The point yield of Step 1 is multiplied by the "completeness of offering" percentage of Step 2 to give the final fixed price proposal score.

Scoring

The technique to be used in scoring is as follows:

• In each of the four categories, the University has developed criteria on which scoring will be based.
• The members of the evaluation team will individually score each category.
• The team will then meet and discuss their individual scores and their reasoning for their scores.
• Team members may re-score the categories – or leave them unchanged.
• The final score for each category will be computed as the numeric average of the second round of the team’s individual scores.

After the Phase I evaluation, points will be totaled for categories 1 through 3. After the Phase II evaluation, the points from both Phase I and Phase II will be totaled. This total will be used to select one or more vendors with which to begin negotiations of the final price and contract terms.

The scores for the categories are as follows: