PURPOSE: This rule prescribes the request for a proposal evaluation and award procedures.

1. (1) All proposals received before the closing time and date shall be reviewed by the department.
2. (2) The department shall first evaluate proposals for responsiveness to the request for a proposal (RFP) criteria, terms and conditions. The department shall not evaluate any proposal on any criteria which is not disclosed in the RFP and amendments. The department shall not recommend any nonresponsive proposal to the next evaluation step.

3. (3) When the request for proposal stipulates the procurement procedure to be noncompetitive negotiation, the following procedures shall be taken:

   1. (A) A negotiation officer/team shall conduct negotiations, as appropriate to price, scope of work and needed services;
   2. (B) The negotiation officer/team should make a list of specific objectives relating to price, performance standards and other conditions in preparation of the negotiations;
   3. (C) The negotiation officer/team and the offeror shall negotiate the items specified as the specific objectives;

   4. (D) A record of services procured through the noncompetitive negotiation procedures shall be maintained that lists—

      1. 1. Each contractor’s name;
      2. 2. The amount and location of each con-

tract; and

1. 3. The services procured under each

contract; and

1. (E) Should the department be unable to negotiate an acceptable contract, other offerors may be solicited by any procurement method allowed by this rule.

1. (4) When the request for proposal stipulates the procurement procedure to be comparative negotiation, the following procedures shall be taken:

   1. (A) If one (1) proposal is received from a responsive offeror, the department shall evaluate it to determine the award. The department may give the offeror an opportunity to revise the proposal if any proposal elements are not acceptable by the department or are contrary to the RFP and do not negate the competitive process. The department shall evaluate the unit price(s) by comparing it with the average unit prices the department currently pays or has previously paid for the services in the area;
   2. (B) If only two (2) proposals are received, the department shall also evaluate the weighted average unit prices by comparing each proposal and the average unit prices the department currently pays or has previously paid for the services in the area;
   3. (C) If more than two (2) proposals from responsive offerors are received offering to provide the same services in a geographic area specified in an RFP, the department shall determine if any of the proposals contain desirable elements not specified in the RFP. Where a change in the RFP results, the department shall inform the responsive offerors of the change in desirable elements. Where a change has resulted, each responsive offeror may submit a revised and final proposal based upon the original RFP and the subsequent list of desirable elements for reevaluation; and
   4. (D) If three (3) or more proposals are received, the department shall evaluate weighted average unit price by comparing the average unit prices from the responsive offerors.
2. (5) When the request for proposal stipulates the procurement procedure to be comparative evaluation, the resulting contract shall be awarded to the best proposal to the department. After determining responsiveness, all proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation categories, respective weight criteria or method of evaluation as listed in the RFP. For alcohol and drug abuse services, the department may conduct negotiations with the responsive offerors as described in the RFP. If negotiations are conducted for alcohol and drug abuse services, the negotiation proceedings shall be public.
3. (6) An award or multiple awards shall be selected by the department based on the lowest and best proposal(s). If the department chooses not to select any proposal submitted in response to any RFP, the department shall issue another RFP or shall forego purchasing the particular service(s) in the area.
4. (7) The department reserves the right to make multiple awards when a single provider is unable to meet the units of service required geographically and other factors considered. RFP criteria, service quantity, scope of work, and the like, will determine the possibility of multiple awards. A record showing the basis for determining the successful offerors shall be made a part of the procurement file.
5. (8) The evaluation committee or individual designated to evaluate the proposals shall recommend award to the contracts’ coordinator for review and recommendation to the director of the division, or designee, for which the services are to be purchased. If the division approves the award, the purchase of service unit shall forward the contract to the deputy director of administration (mental health) for signature. Upon signature by the deputy director of administration (mental health), the contract is final.
6. (9) The department shall make the notice of award available to the public.

AUTHORITY: sections 34.100, 630.050 and 630.405, RSMo 1986.* Original rule filed Oct. 16, 1986, effective July 13, 1987. Emergency amendment filed May 15, 1990, effective May 25, 1990, expired Sept. 21, 1990. Amended: Filed Aug. 14, 1990, effective March 14, 1991. Emergency amendment filed July 7, 1992, effective July 17, 1992, expired Nov. 13, 1992. Amended: Filed July 7, 1992, effective Feb. 26, 1993. *Original authority: 34.100, RSMo 1945, amended 1983; 630.050, RSMo 1980; and 630.405, RSMo 1980.