Ill. Admin. Code tit. 44, § 2600.310 - Competitive Sealed Proposals
a)
Competitive Sealed Proposals, as opposed to Competitive Sealed Bidding, may be
used whenever permitted by the Code and as described in this Part.
b) The Competitive Sealed Proposal method of
source selection may be used to procure the following categories (note that the
following services , if they are professional and artistic, must be procured
pursuant to Section
2600.330
):
1) electronic data processing equipment,
software, and services ;
2)
telecommunications equipment, software, and services ;
3) consulting services ; and
4) employee benefits and management of those
benefits.
c) Competitive
Sealed Proposals may be used on a case-by-case basis when it is determined by
the Procurement Officer that competitive sealed bidding is either not
practicable or not advantageous .
1) If
competitive sealed bidding is not practicable or is not advantageous ,
competitive sealed proposals should be used.
2) "Practicable" Distinguished from
"Advantageous ". As used in Section 20-15 (Competitive Sealed Proposals) of the
Illinois Procurement Code and in this Section, "practicable" denotes what may
be accomplished or put into practicable application, and "advantageous "
connotes a judgmental assessment of what is in the State 's best interest.
Competitive sealed bidding may be practicable, that is, reasonably possible,
but not necessarily advantageous , that is, in the State 's best interest. Before
procurement may be conducted by competitive sealed proposals, the Procurement
Officer shall determine in writing that competitive sealed bidding is either
not practicable or not advantageous to the State .
3) The key element in determining whether use
of a proposal is advantageous is the need for flexibility. The competitive
sealed proposal method differs from competitive sealed bidding in two important
ways:
A) it permits discussions with
competing offerors and changes in their proposals, including price;
and
B) it allows comparative
judgmental evaluations to be made when selecting among acceptable proposals for
award of the contract .
4) When evaluation factors involve the
relative abilities of offerors to perform, including degrees of experience or
expertise, where the types of supplies or services may require the use of
comparative, judgmental evaluations to evaluate them adequately, or where the
type of need to be satisfied involves weighing aesthetic values to the extent
that price is a secondary consideration, use of competitive sealed proposals is
the appropriate procurement method.
5) Competitive sealed bidding is not
practicable unless the nature of the procurement permits award to a low bidder
who agrees by its bid to perform without condition or reservation in accordance
with the purchase description, delivery or performance schedule, and all other
terms and conditions of the Invitation for Bids . Factors to be considered in
determining whether competitive sealed bidding is not practicable include:
A) whether the contract needs to be other
than a fixed-price type;
B) whether
oral or written discussions may need to be conducted with offerors concerning
technical and price aspects of their proposals;
C) whether offerors may need to be afforded
the opportunity to revise their proposals, including price;
D) whether award may need to be based upon a
comparative evaluation, as stated in the Request for Proposals , of differing
price, quality, and contractual factors in order to determine the most
advantageous offering to the State . Quality factors include technical and
performance capability and the content of the technical proposal ; and
E) whether the primary consideration in
determining award may not be price.
6) Competitive sealed proposals may be used
if it is determined that it is not advantageous to the State , even though
practicable, to use competitive sealed bidding. Factors to be considered in
determining whether competitive sealed bidding is not advantageous include:
A) if prior procurements indicate that
competitive sealed proposals may result in more beneficial contracts for the
State ; and
B) whether the factors
listed in subsection (c)(3) of this Section are desirable, in conducting a
procurement, rather than necessary; if they are, then such factors may be used
to support a determination that competitive sealed bidding is not
advantageous .
d) The Request for Proposals must be prepared
in accordance with Section
2600.305
and must include a statement that discussions may be conducted with offerors
who submit proposals determined to be reasonably susceptible of being selected
for award , but that proposals may be accepted without such discussions and a
statement of when and how price should be submitted. Proposals must include the
name and place of business of the offeror , a plan for carrying out the
requested services together with a showing of qualifications to carry out the
plan, and a list of any relevant experience the offeror has had with similar
plans.
e) Proposals and
modifications shall be opened as designated in the Request for Proposals .
Opening shall be witnessed by at least two SBE employees. A record shall be
prepared that shall include the name of each offeror , the number of
modifications received, if any, and a description sufficient to identify the
supply or service item offered. The record of proposals shall be open to public
inspection after award of the contract . Proposals and modifications shall be
opened in a manner to avoid disclosing contents to competitors. Only State
personnel and contractual agents may review the proposals prior to
award .
f) Criteria and evaluation
of proposals in this Section shall be performed in accordance with Section
2600.305.
g) Proposal Discussions
with Individual Offerors
1) Discussions may be
held to promote understanding of the State 's requirements and the offerors '
proposals or facilitate arriving at a contract that will be most advantageous
to the State , taking into consideration price and the other evaluation factors
set forth in the Request for Proposals .
2) Offerors shall be accorded fair and equal
treatment with respect to any opportunity for discussions and revisions of
proposals. If during discussions there is a need for any substantial
clarification of, or change to, the Request for Proposals , the Request shall be
amended to incorporate the clarification or change. Any disclosure of
information to offerors from competing proposals is prohibited. Any
clarification of a proposal shall be reduced to writing by the
offeror .
3) Best and Final Offers.
The Procurement Officer may request Best and Final offers, when in the best
interest of the State , for reasons including, but not limited to, reducing
scope to accommodate budget, obtain lower cost at no or insignificant change
from original proposal , accepting new technology at no or insignificant change
in cost, or having vendors adjust proposals to focus on one or several
alternatives originally requested or proposed. Best and Final offers may be
requested from all offerors or from only those in the zone of contention after
preliminary evaluation as determined by the Procurement Officer . The request
for Best and Final offers may pertain to any aspect of the solicitation ,
including but not limited to qualifications, specifications , scope of work or
price. The Best and Final request shall clearly identify the matters that the
offerors must address, and the matters may vary from vendor to vendor if
necessary. Best and Final offers shall be submitted by a specified date and
time. The Procurement Officer may conduct additional discussions or change the
State 's requirements and require another submission of Best and Final offers.
If an offeror does not submit a Best and Final offer , that offeror 's
immediately previous offer will be construed as its Best and Final
offer .
h) An award shall
be made by the Procurement Officer pursuant to a written determination showing
the basis on which the award was found to be most advantageous to the State ,
based on the factors set forth in the Request for Proposals .
i) The successful offeror shall be notified
of award . Notification may be in the form of a letter, purchase order or other
clear communication. When the award exceeds the small purchase limit set in
Section
2600.315 of this
Part, notice of award shall be published in the Bulletin .
Notes
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.