S.C. Code Ann. § 11-35-1528 – Competitive best value bidding

(1) Conditions for Use. When a purchasing agency determines in writing that the use of competitive sealed bidding is either not practicable or not advantageous to the State, a contract may be entered into by competitive best value bidding subject to the provisions of Section 11-35-1520 and the ensuing regulations, unless otherwise provided for in this section.
(2) Best Value Bidding. The purpose of best value bidding is to allow factors other than price to be considered in the determination of award for specific supplies, services, or information technology based on pre-determined criteria identified by the State.
(3) Public Notice. Adequate public notice of the request for the solicitation shall be given in the same manner as provided in Section 11-35-1520(3).
(4) Bid Opening. At bid opening, the only information that will be released is the names of the participating bidders. Cost information will be provided after the ranking of bidders and the issuance of award.
(5) Evaluation Factors. The best value bid must state the factors to be used in determination of award and the numerical weighting for each factor. Cost must be a factor in determination of award and cannot be weighted at less than sixty percent. Best value bid evaluation factors may include, but are not limited to, any of the following as determined by the procurement officer in its sole discretion and not subject to protest:
1. (a) operational costs the State would incur if the bid is accepted;
2. (b) quality of the product or service or its technical competency;
3. (c) reliability of delivery and implementation schedules;
4. (d) maximum facilitation of data exchange and systems integration;
5. (e) warranties, guarantees, and return policy;
6. (f) vendor financial stability;
7. (g) consistency of the proposed solution with the state's planning documents and announced strategic program direction;
8. (h) quality and effectiveness of business solution and approach;
9. (i) industry and program experience;
10. (j) prior record of vendor performance;
11. (k) vendor expertise with engagement of similar scope and complexity;
12. (l) extent and quality of the proposed participation and acceptance by all user groups;
13. (m) proven development methodologies and tools; and
14. (n) innovative use of current technologies and quality results.
(6) Discussion with Responsive Bidders. Discussions may be conducted with apparent responsive bidders to assure understanding of the best value bid. All bidders whose bids, in the procuring agency's sole judgment, need clarification shall be accorded such an opportunity.
(7) Selection and Ranking. Bids shall be evaluated by using only the criteria stated in the best value bid and by adhering to the weighting as assigned. All evaluation factors, other than cost, will be considered prior to determining the effect of cost on the score for each participating bidder. Once the evaluation is complete, all responsive bidders shall be ranked from most advantageous to least advantageous to the State, considering only the evaluation factors stated in the best value bid.
(8) Award. Award must be made to the responsive and responsible bidder whose bid is determined, in writing, to be most advantageous to the State, taking into consideration all evaluation factors set forth in the best value bid. The contract file shall contain the basis on which the award is made and must be sufficient to satisfy external audit.