HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2009-04-27 #DAGEN®A STAFF REPORT
DATE: April 27, 2009
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: David N. Carmany, City Manager
FROM: Jill R. Ingram, Assistant to the City Manager
SUBJECT: OCFA AWARD OF EMERGENCY AMBULANCE
CONTRACTS
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
That the City Council receive and file this report regarding the Orange County
Fire Authority competitive Request for Proposal process for the award of an
emergency ambulance service agreement to Care Ambulance Service, Inc. for
the City of Seal Beach Exclusive Operating Area 21, effective September 1,
2009.
BACKGROUND:
The Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) has completed the competitive
Request for Proposal (RFP) process for the award of emergency ambulance
service agreements for Exclusive Operating Areas (EOAs), which includes the
City of Seal Beach (EOA 21), currently being served by Medix Ambulance. The
City of Seal Beach is one of several member cities that elected to delegate final
selection and contracting authority to the OCFA Board of Directors for the award
of an emergency ambulance EOA contract within EOA 21, which includes the
City of Seal Beach and the Unincorporated Sunset Beach and Bolsa Chica Area.
The OCFA Board of Directors is expected to take formal action at their special
meeting of April 23, 2009.
The OCFA issued Phase I of the RFP to qualified 911 ambulance service
providers on May 27, 2008 for the award of new EOA contracts for ten (10)
EOAs. The purpose of Phase I was to establish minimum performance
standards, prequalification criteria, and requirements a provider was required to
meet in order to participate in Phase 2 of the RFP. Ambulance service providers
not satisfying all of the minimum prequalification criteria and requirements were
not eligible to continue in the RFP and selection process.
Agenda Item
Page 2
Nine (9) ambulance providers submitted a Phase I Prequalification Application.
The applications were reviewed by two (2) independent outside Emergency
Medical Services (EMS) consultants. Seven (7) of the nine (9) providers that
participated in Phase I met the minimum qualifications to participate in Phase 2
of the RFP.
The seven (7) providers were invited back by the OCFA on August 22, 2008 to
participate in Phase 2, the "Proposal, Grading, Recommendation and Selection"
of the RFP process. Of the seven (7) pre-qualified providers, five (5) submitted a
bid proposal on or before the submission deadline of December 11, 2008. Those
five (5) providers included American Medical Response, AmeriCare, Care,
Doctors, and Emergency Ambulance Services. One of the proposals, American
Medical Response, was rejected for failure to comply with the terms and
conditions set forth in the RFP regarding maximum allowable ambulance service
rates in Orange County. Two (2) of the four (4) remaining bidders, AmeriCare
and Care, competed for the north county EOAs, which includes Cypress, La
Palma, Los Alamitos, and Seal Beach.
The OCFA RFP Grading Panel consisted of Primary Evaluators and EOA
Evaluators, which spent three (3) full days on January 13, 14, and 20, 2009,
participating in the RFP evaluation process at OCFA headquarters. The Primary
Evaluators included individuals from outside fire and emergency services
agencies with extensive EMS experience who were selected by OCFA to
evaluate and rank each bid received according to established criteria. They
reviewed and evaluated all aspects of each proposal. To avoid any bias or
conflict of interest, OCFA staff did not participate as evaluators. Additionally, the
panel of evaluators was not provided the relative weighting for each item in the
proposal. There were ten (10) EOA Evaluators, one representative selected by
each of the ten cities participating in the RFP process. The EOA Evaluators
reviewed and ranked only the proposals submitted for their respective EOAs and
only those items in the proposals that were EOA specific. The EOA Evaluator for
Seal Beach was Assistant to the City Manager Jill Ingram.
The evaluation process was designed to: 1) provide a method of evaluating each
proposal not simply on its own merits, but as it compares to the other proposals
under evaluation for a given EOA; 2) provide a method of evaluation that is fair
and unbiased; and 3) provide a method that evaluates the Bidder's business as a
whole, and evaluates the proposal specific to the EOA being bid (with each part
given equal overall weight). Each evaluator reviewed each item within each
proposal and "ranked" the proposal responses from "best" to least" responsive (a
ranking of "1" reflected the best response).
Based on the combined results of the competitive selection process, including
the overall quality of the bid proposals received for EOA 21, the OCFA RFP
Grading Panel recommended the award of the service contract to Care
Ambulance Service, Inc.
Page 3
On March 3, 2009, City Manager David Carmany, Assistant to the City Manager
Jill Ingram, Mayor Pro Tem David Sloan (Council-appointed Director to the OCFA
Board of Directors), and Council Member Mike Levitt (Council-appointed
Alternate to the OCFA Board of Directors), had the opportunity to participate in a
site visit and tour of the Care Ambulance headquarters facility in Orange. Care
Ambulance is a family owned and operated company that began operations in
1969, and has been committed to the residents and visitors of Orange County for
over 40 years. As the largest provider of ambulance services in Orange County,
Care responds to approximately 80,000 annubl 911 calls for service, and is the
incumbent ambulance provider in LaPalma and Stanton, and also serves the
cities of Anaheim, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden
Grove, La Habra, and 22 communities of southeast Los Angeles County. We
were extremely impressed with the site visit and tour, their professionalism, and
dedication to the communities they serve.
The current exclusive emergency ambulance service contract with Medix
Ambulance Service is scheduled to automatically terminate on August 31, 2009
at 11:59 p.m. The new exclusive emergency ambulance service contract with
Care Ambulance Service, Inc. is effective September 1, 2009 at 12:00 a.m. and
will terminate on August 31, 2014 at 11:59 p.m., with no extensions, unless there
are unavoidable or unforeseeable circumstances beyond the control of OCFA
that would preclude a new RFP process and contract award. In such
circumstances, the contract may be extended up to one additional year.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact to the City of Seal Beach associated with this item.
REC®MMENDATI®N:
That the City Council receive and file this report.
SUBMITTED BY:
ill .Ingram,
Assistant to the City Manager
NOTED AND APPROVED:
~-~~
David N. Carmany, City Manager
Attachment:
A. Contract Award Recommendation by the OCFA RFP Grading Panel
FIRE
if ;. - ~
~7{,py
CI~'Y OF SEAL BEACH
~ #
•... :
x e' `\
Orange County Fire Authority
2008 Fire/EMS Emergency Ambulance Transportation and Related Services
Request for Proposal (RFP #JR 1494)
CONTRACT AWARD RECOMMENDATION BY THE RFP GRADING PANEL
EXCLUSIVE OPERATING AREA (EOA) N0.21
SUMMARY;
The Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) has completed, on behalf of the Orange
County Emergency Medical Services Agency (OCEMSA), the legally required competitive
process for the award of an exclusive operating area ambulance service agreement within the
City of Seal Beach and the Unincorporated Sunset Beach and Bo1sa Chica Area (referred to as
"EOA No. 21").
The City of Seal Beach has elected to delegate final selection and contracting authority
for the award of the exclusive operating area contract within EOA No. 21 to the OCFA Board of
Directors. OCFA is forwarding the RFP Grading Panel's award recommendation to the City for
final review and consideration prior to taking formal action at the OCFA Board of Directors
meeting on April 23, 2009.
AWARD RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the results of the competitive selection process, including the overall quality of
the bid proposals received for EOA No. 21, it is the recommendation of the OCFA RFP Grading
Panel that the exclusive operating azea agreement be awarded to Care Ambulance Service. Inc.
BACKGROUND:
A. Competitive Process for Exclusive Oueratin~ Areas for Ambulance Service
Pursuant to the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Act, only the County may create
exclusive operating areas for the provision of ambulance services. However, if it chooses to
establish exclusive operating areas, the County must conduct a competitive process for the
selection and award of exclusive operating area ambulance contracts in order to avoid anti-trust
liability. The County has delegated its responsibility for conducting the competitive process to
the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) for all OCFA jurisdictional areas except the cities of
Buena Pazk, San Clemente, and Westminster.
Page 2
The competitive selection process utilized by OCFA, including the Request for Proposal
(RFP) and the model EOA agreement attached hereto, as well as the grading criteria, were
submitted to Orange County EMSA (OCEMSA) and the State Emergency Medical Services
Authority and were approved by both agencies on August 6, 2008.
B. Contractinn Authority
Under the current County EMS system, OCFA-member cities may decide whether they
want to retain final selection and contracting authority for themselves, or whether they want to
delegate such authority to the OCFA Board of Directors. Currently, approximately half of the
OCFA cities have elected to retain final selection and contracting authority, while the other half
have delegated such responsibility to OCFA.
The City of Seal Beach has elected to delegate final provider selection and contracting
authority to the OCFA.
C. Existing Ambulance Service Contract
The current exclusive operating area contract for EOA No. 21 with Medix Ambulance
Service is scheduled to automatically terminate on August 30, 2009 at 11:59 p.m.
D. Key Contract Provisions
The Agreement provides that all provisions of the RFP and the Bid Proposal shall be
binding on the parties. Should any inconsistency or ambiguity occur or exist in the Contract
Documents and the provisions of the RFP, then the provisions of the Bid Proposal shall control.
The Agreement also contains terms and conditions concerning provider breach and performance-
related compliance provisions, including termination.
The new exclusive operating area contract for EOA No. 21 is effective August 31, 2009
at 12:00 a.m. and will terminate on August 31, 2014 at 11:59 p.m., with no extensions, unless
there are unavoidable or unforeseeable circumstances beyond the control of OCFA that would
preclude a new RFP process and contract award. In such circumstances, the contract may be
extended up to one additional year.
SUMMARY ®F T)EiE RFP PR®CESS:
A. Phase 1-Provider Preaualification
On May 27, 2008, OCFA issued Phase 1 of the RFP to interested private ambulance
service providers ("providers'. The purpose of Phase 1 was to establish the minimum
performance standards, prequalification criteria, and requirements a provider had to meet in
order to participate in Phase 2 of the RFP. Ambulance service providers not satisfying all of the
minimum prequalification criteria and requirements were not eligible to continue in the RFP and
selection process.
Page 3
Nine ambulance providers submitted a Phase 1 Prequalification Application. The
applications were reviewed by two independent outside EMS consultants. (Darlene Gidley BSN,
MPA, retired Manager of Orange County EMS, and JR Henry, anout-of--state experienced EMS
Consultant.)
Seven of the nine providers that participated in~ Phase 1 met the minimum qualifications
to participate in Phase 2 of the RFP.
B. Phase 2-PronosaI Submission. Grading. Recommendation and Selection
On August 22, 2008, OCFA invited the seven providers who met the minimum
requirements of Phase 1 to participate in Phase 2, the "Proposal, Grading, Recommendation and
Selection" of the RFP process. Of the seven pre-qualified providers, five providers (American
Medical Response, AmeriCaze, Care, Doctors, and Emergency Ambulance Services) submitted
bid proposals on or before the submission deadline of December 11, 2008. One of these
proposals (American Medical Response) was determined to benon-responsive and disqualified
by OCFA because it proposed ambulance service rates that exceeded the maximum allowable
charges in Orange County.
Consequently, four ambulance providers competed for the 10 exclusive operating areas
offered in this RFP. The proposals from AmeriCare, Caze, Emergency, and Doctors ambulance
services were referred to the OCFA RFP Grading Panel for evaluation and ranking.
C. OCFA RFP Grading Panel
The RFP Grading Panel consisted of both "Primary Evaluators" and "EOA Evaluators".
The Primary Evaluators included individuals with extensive EMS experience who were selected
by OCFA to evaluate and rank each bid proposal received according to established criteria. They
reviewed and evaluated all aspects of each proposal. To avoid any bias or conflict of interest,
OCFA staff did not participate as evaluators.
The Primary Evaluators were: (1) Cathy Ord, RN, EMS Coordinator for Newport Beach
Fire Department; (2) Michael Antonucci, Fire Chief of the Upland Fire Department; (3) Randy
Bradley, Deputy Chief of the Alameda County Fire Department, (4) Ray Ramirez, Deputy Chief
of the Ontario Fire Department, and (5) Luanne Underwood, RN from the Los Angeles County
EMS Agency.
There were ten EOA Evaluators, one representative selected by each of the ten cities
participating in the RFP. The EOA Evaluator for the City of Seal Beach and the Unincorporated
Sunset Beach and Bolsa Chica Area was Jill Ingram.
The EOA Evaluators were asked to review and rank only the proposals submitted for
their respective EOAs and only those items in the proposals that were EOA specific. However,
the EOA Evaluators were invited to be present for the full discussion of each of the proposals.
Page 4
D. Review and Evaluation Process
The focus of the evaluation was to select the bidder that provided the most thorough and
competitive bid proposal and program design and would meet or exceed the performance
standards set forth in the R.FP.
Bidders were asked to address twenty-five (25) separate items and to make an oral
presentation. Of the twenty-five (25) items identified in the ItFP, the Grading Panel evaluated
and assigned a ranking to seventeen (17) of the requested items. The remaining eight (8} items
were mandatory submission items that were not graded or ranked, but rather checked for
inclusion by OCFA staff.
Each of the seventeen items was assigned a "weighting factor" based on its relative
importance. The Grading Panel was not advised of the weighting assigned to any given item in
order to ensure an objective and unbiased evaluation of all items.
Evaluators independently ranked each item from most to least responsive by comparing
and contrasting the proposals. OCFA staff averaged the Evaluators' rankings for each item and
multiplied it by the assigned weighting factor to arrive at a final score for that item.
The best (i.e., lowest) possible score that could be achieved for Part 1 was "50" and the
best possible score for Part 2 was "50", with a best overall score (Part 1 + Part 2) of "100".
Since the proposals were "ranked"--{"1" being best), the proposal with the lowest overall score
(the score closest to 100) was considered to be the best proposal for an EOA.
Each of the members of the RFP Grading Panel received and reviewed copies of the
proposals and assigned a preliminary ranking to each of the items prior to meeting as a group.
On January 13 and 14, 2009, the Grading Panel met to discuss the proposals for each EOA. On
January 20, 2009, each bidder made an oral presentation to the panel about their proposal,
answering and clarifying questions posed by the Grading Panel. Upon completion of the oral
presentations, members of the Grading Panel were asked to submit their final ranking for each
item. OCFA computed and certified the final scores.
E. Bid Proposals Received for Seal Beach and the 1(Jnincorporated Sunset Beach
and Bolsa Chica Area (EOA No. 21)
OCFA received two bid proposals for the City of Seal Beach and the Unincorporated
Sunset Beach and Bolsa Chica Area, EOA 21, from the following ambulance service providers,
both of which are well qualified to provide the requested services:
a AmeriCare Ambulance Service; and
Care Ambulance Service, Inc.
Page 5
OCFA RFP GRADING PANEL RESULTS:
A. Bidder Refines and Recommendation
The OCFA RFP Grading Panel ranked the bidders for EOA No. 21 (Seal Beach and the
Unincorporated Sunset Beach and Bolsa Chica area) as follows:
Provider Final Score Rank of Pro osal
Care Ambulance Service, Inc. 139.18 1 anel Recommended
AmeriCare Ambulance Service 251.22 2
Included as Attachement 4A of this report is a composite chart itemizing the rankings for
each item evaluated by the Grading Panel.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Listed below are some comparisons of the proposals submitted by AmeriCare and Care.
The list is not intended to be all-inclusive.
K Areas AmeriCare Ambulance Service Care Ambulance Service
Corporate Headquarters AmeriCare's headquarters and dispatch Care's corporate headquarters and
center are in Carson, CA. dispatch center is in Orange, CA.
Company History and AmeriCare Ambulance Service was Care Ambulance Service has been
9-1-1 Experience founded in 1996. It responds to providing ambulance services to the
approximately 1,100 9-1-1 calls residents and visitors of Orange County
annually. for over 39 years, with over 35 years of
contracted9-1-1 emergency ambulance
service. It responds to over l 10,000
9-1-1 calls annually.
AmeriCare currently provides service to Care currently provides service to
EOA 24 (Villa Park) and provides non- Anaheim, Buena Park, Costa Mesa,
contracted back-up services to the Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden
Downey and Compton Fire Grove, La Palma, Midway City, Stanton
Departments. They are under contract and 22 cities and communities in Los
with San Diego Courrty to provide Angeles County.
service to Camp Pendleton and the i-5
Corridor.
CAAS Certification AmeriCare applied for accreditation by Care has been continuously accredited by
the Commission on Accreditation of the Commission on Accreditation of
(The intent of the CAAS Ambulance Services (CARS) in 2008. Ambulance Services (CAAS) since 1993.
Standards is to define a Accreditation had not been received by
"gold standard" for the the submission date for the proposals.
medical transportation OCFA has not been advised of
industry of a higher caliber subsequent accreditation status.
than is typically required for
state or local licensing.
There are approximately 120
ambulance services
throughout the United States
that are CAAS accredited.
Page 6
Ke Areas AmeriCare Ambulance Service Care Ambulance Service
Dedicated Ambulance Units AmeriCare is proposing two dedicated Care is proposing two dedicated
and Back-Up Ambulances 24/hour/day staffed to be housed in the 24/hour/day staffed ambulances, one to
vicinity of Seal Beach Boulevard and be housed within the gated community of
Pacific Coast Highway. Seal Beach Leisure World (upon
' approval of Leisure World) and the other
AmeriCare maintains aresponse-ready at 12850 Seal Beach Boulevard, Seal
fleet of 61 emergency vehicles which Beach, CA.
are spread throughout their service area
of Los Angeles County to San Diego Care maintains aresponse-ready fleet of
County. 118 emergency ambulances.
Proposed Budget AmeriCaze submitted the following Care submitted the following Budget:
Budget:
Revenue 1,137,628~1~ Revenue 1,169,025
Ezoenses 505 929 Expenses 938.710~1~
Operating Income $631,699tZ~nt Operating Income $230,315
Proposed Ambulances Type AmeriCare will provide two new Care will provide two new specialized
specialized Ford E350's with "Road Chevrolet diesel chassis, "Road Rescue"
Rescue" Type III modular ambulances. Type III modulaz ambulances.
Response Time AmeriCare proposes to meet the Code 2 Care proposes to meet the Code 2 and
(The minimum OCFA and Code 3 response time requirements Code 3 response time requirements 93%
requirement is 90 %.) 93% of the time and has offered self- of the time and has offered self-imposed
imposed monetary penalties if they do monetary penalties if they do not meet
not meet this standard. this standard.
• • incorporates ucrA Advanced Lite Support (ALS) paramedic services and Basic Life Support (BLS) supply
reimbursements.
Cat The Evaluation Panel believed that the proposed budget submitted by AmeriCare was unrealistic and determined
it contained mathematical errors.
c~> The numbers were rounded to the nearest dollaz by OCFA staff.
SU1VfMARY:
The proposals were similar in overall content, although there were notable differences
between the companies in terms of 9-1-1 experience and the fact that Care is CAAS accredited.
Both companies have proposed two (2) dedicated 9-1-1 emergency ambulances, 24 hours a day,
7 days a week to the City of Seal leach and the Unincorporated Sunset Beach and Bolsa Chica
Area (EOA#21). Additionally, both companies have proposed to meet code 2 and code 3
responses on time 93% of the time. The RFP minimum response time required is 90%.
During the evaluation process, the panel felt that AmeriCare's budget proposal did not
appear correct. The panel determined that the proposed budget by AmeriCare contained
mathematical errors in calculating revenue. Also noted was the fact that the projected expense
budget for direct expenses including labor/personnel costs, payroll taxes, employee benefits,
workers' compensation insurance, vehicle insurance, additional insurance, fuel expense, and
Page 7
maintenance was similar to what was projected for Villa Pazk (EOA 24), where only one
dedicated ambulance was proposed by AmeriCare.
During the oral presentations, (Day 3) AmeriCaze was not able to provide the RFP
evaluation panel sufficient justification and support for the revenue and expenditure budget that
was included in their proposal. AmeriCaze did respond that an error had occurred, but they
agreed to honor their original bid submittal. After the oral presentations, the RFP evaluation
panel reaffirmed their unanimous recommendation of Care Ambulance for the City of Seal
Beach and the Unincorporated Sunset Beach and Bolsa Chica Area (EOA#21).
CEQA FINDINGS:
The proposed action does not constitute a project under CEQA Guidelines §15378(a) (l4
CCR § 15378).
ATTACHMENT:
EOA Grading Results- Seal Beach
PROFESSIONAL GRADING PANEL EVALUATION
SUMMARY FOR EOA#21 SEAL BEACH
PART 1-Overall Business Items (50%)
Rankings of 1 to 4 (Based on Four Bidders Responding to RFP -1 Being Best)
Emergency and Doctors did not bid on EOA #21 Seal Beach
PART 1
(See Pa e 5 of
neriCare Care
159.0 105.0
31.80 21.00
L52.80 87.60
PART 2 - EOA-Specific Items
Rankings of 1 to 2 (Based on Two Proposals Received for Seal Beach -1 Being Best)
ART 2
See Pa e 7 of
neriCare Care
70.5 37.5
11.75 6.25
98.42 51.58
~' GRANID TOTAL
Rankings of 1 to 2 (Based on Two Proposals Received for Seal Beach -1 Being Best)
TOTAL
(See Pa e 8 of 8)
AmeriCare Care
229.5 142.5
e 43.55 27.25
ed Avg. 25l .22 139.18
Rank 2 1 (Grading Panel
RFP Evaluations - EOAs.xls - EOA #2] Page 1 of 8
PROFESSIONAL GRADING PANEL EVALUATION
Item Weight Item Description and Rankings
PART 1-Overall Business Items (50%)
Rankin of 1 to 4 ased on Four Bidders - 1 Bein Best
Item #1 COVER LETTER
Ranker AmeriCare Care
Consultant
~ Item #2 BID DEPOSIT
Item #3 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ranker AmeriCare
OCFA Consultant •/
Item #4 NOTIFICATION OF PROVIDER PRE UALIF
Ranker AmeriCare
OCFA Consultant /
Item #5 8 EMERG
Care
Care
r~~ /
TION
Care
NCY RESPONSE AND VEHICLE COMM. SYSTEM
Ranker AmeriCare Care
AAA l.5 1.5
BBB 3 1
CCC 1 2
DDD 2 1
EEE 4 1
Total 11.5 6.5
Averse 2.30 1.30
Wei hted Av . 18.40 E
10.40
Item #6 3 SERVICE RATES
Ranker AmeriCare Care
AAA 2.5 2.5
BBB 2.5 2.5
CCC 2.5 2.5
DDD 2.5 2.5
EEE 2.5 2.5
Total 12.5 12.5
Averse 2.50 2.50
Weighted Avg. 7.50 7.50
RFP Evaluations - EOAs.xls - EOA #21 Page 2 of 8
PROFESSIONAL GRADING PANEL EVALUATION
Item Weight Item Description and Rankings
Item #7 6 ON-BOA
RD E UIPMENT & S UPPLIES
Ranker AmeriCare Care
AAA 4 2.5
BBB 4 1
CCC 3 1.5
DDD 2.5 2.5
EEE 3.5 l
Total 17 8.5
Ave a 3.40 1.70
Wei ted Av 20.40 10.20
Item #8 5 VEHICLE 8c EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
1.5
H13B 3.5 l
CCC 3 2
DDD 2.5 2.5
EEE 2.5 1
Total 14.5 8
Avera a 2.90 1.60
Wei ted Avp~ 14.50 8.00
Item #9 6 PERSO
NEL AND TRAINING
Ranker AmeriCare Care
AAA 3 1
BBB 4 1
CCC 3 1
DDD 2 i
EEE 4 1.5
Total 16 5.5
Av a 3.20 1.10
Wei ted Av . 19.20 N
6.60
RFP Evaluations - EOAs.xls - EOA #21 Page 3 of 8
PROFESSIONAL GRADING PANEL EVALUATION
~ Item ~ Weight ~ Item Description and Rankings ~
Item #11 5 INTERNAL MEDICAL QUALITY CONTROL
Ranker AmeriCare Care
AAA 3.5 3.5
BBB 3 4
CCC '' 4 2.5
DDD 1.5 1.5
EEE 3.5 3.5
Total 15.5 15
Avers a 3.10 3.00
Weighted Avg. 15.50 15.00
Item #12 4 BILLING AND COLLECTION PRACTICES
Ranker AmeriCare Care
AAA 3 1.5
BBB 4 1
CCC ] 2.5
DDD 3.5 2
EEE 4 1.5
Total 15.5 8.5
Avers a 3.10 1.70
Wei hted Av 12.40 6.80
I Item #13 1 HIPAA COMPLIANCE PLAN I
AmeriCare Care
2.5 2.5
1.5 3.5
] .5 3.5
1 3
1 2
7.5 14.5
1.50 2.90
AVg. 1.50 2.90
I Item #14 1 CORPORATE COMPLIANCE PLAN I
AAA 3 3
BBB 2.5 2.5
CCC 3.5 1.5
DDD 2.5 2.5
EEE 1.5 1.5
Total 13 11
Avers a 2.60 2.20
Weighted Avg. 2.60 2.20
RFP Evaluations - EOAs.xls - EOA #21 Page 4 of 8
PROFESSIONAL GRADING PANEL EVALUATION
Item Weight Item Description and Rankings
Item #15 COMPLIANCE WITH MONTHLY PAYMENTS
Ranker AmeriCare Care
~OCFA Consultant ~ / .i
Item #16 911 FIRE/EMS RESUME/EXPERIENCE
Moved to Part 2 Item #28
Item #l7 CONFLICT OF INTEREST CERTIFICATION
Ranker AmeriCare Care
OCFA Consultant / /
Item #18 STATEMENT OF TRUTH
Ranker AmeriCare C~
Item # 19 NON-COLLUSION CERTIFICATION
Ranker AmeriCare Care
OCFA Consultant / /
Item #20 7 CARS CERTIFICATION
~K~' AmeriCare Care
AAA 4 2
BBB 4 2
CCC 4 2
DDD 4 2
EEE 4 2
Total 20 10
Avera a 4.00 2.00
Wei hted Av . 28.00 14.00
PARTITOTAL
Total 159.0 105.0
Avera a 31.80 21,00
Weighted Avg. 152.80 87.60
RFP Evaluations - EOAs.xls - EOA #21 Page 5 of 8
PROFESSIONAL GRADING PANEL EVALUATION
Item Weight Item Description and Ranltings
PART 2 - EOA-Specific Items
Rankin of 1 to 2 axed on Two Bidders -1 Bein Best
Item #21 16 Overall C
I tional S stem and Pro Desi n for EOA
Ranker AmeriCare Care
AAA 2 1
BBB 2 1
CCC 2 1
DDD 2 1
EEE 2 1
Ci Re . 2 1
Total 12 6
Averse 2.00 1.00
Wei hted Av . 32.00 16.00
RFP Evaluations - EOAs.xls - EOA #21 Page 6 of 8
PROFESSIONAL GRADING PANEL EVALUATION
Item Weight Item Description and Rankings
Item #24 3 Mutual
id Providers
Ranker AmeriCare Care
AAA 2 l
BBB 2 1
CCC 1.5 1.5
DDD 2 1
EEE 2 1
Ci Re . 2 1
Total 11.5 6.5
Avera a 1.92 1.08
Wei hted Av . 5.75 A
3.25
OCFA
Item #27 PHOTOGRAPHS (OPTIONAL)
PART 2 TOTAL
Total 70.5 37.5
Avera a 11.75 6.25
Weighted Avg. 98.42 51.58
RFP Evaluations - EOAs.xls - EOA #21 Page 7 of 8
~ Item #26 LETTERS OF REFERENCE
PROFESSIONAL GRADING PANEL EVALUATION
Item Weight Item Description and Rankings
GRAND TOTAL
Total 229.5 142.5
Ave a 43.55 27.25
Wei hted Av 251.22 139.] 8
Final Rank 2 (Least
Favorable 1(Most Favorable)
Note:
Tied ranks take the average.
ItFP Evaluations - EOAs.xls - EOA #21 Page 8 of 8