The Contract will be awarded in accordance with the competitive sealed proposals process found at COMAR 21.05.03. The competitive sealed proposals method allows for discussions and revision of proposals during these discussions; thus, the State may hold discussions with all Offerors judged reasonably susceptible of being selected for award, or potentially so. However, the State also reserves the right to make an award without holding discussions.

In either case, the State may determine an Offeror to be not responsible and/or an Offeror's proposal to be not reasonably susceptible of being selected for award at any time after the initial closing date for receipt of proposals and prior to contract award . If the State finds an Offeror to be not responsible and/or an Offeror's technical proposal to be not reasonably susceptible of being selected for award that Offeror's financial proposal will be returned if still unopened.

Proposals are usually evaluated by a committee, which then makes a recommendation for award to the Procurement Officer. However, the Procurement Officer may evaluate proposals without a committee and recommend an Offeror for award. In either case, the Procurement Officer, with the concurrence of the agency head or designee, will make the final determination for award.

5.5.2 Selection Process Sequence

5.5.2.1 A determination is made that MBE form D-1 is included and is properly completed.

5.5.2.2 Technical proposals are evaluated for technical merit and ranked. During this review, oral presentations and discussions may be held. The purpose of such discussions will be to assure a full understanding of the State's requirements and the Offeror's ability to perform and to facilitate arrival at a Contract that is most advantageous to the State. For scheduling purposes, Offerors should be prepared to make an oral presentation and participate in discussions within two weeks of the delivery of proposals to the State. Qualified Offerors will be contacted by the State as soon as discussions are scheduled.

5.5.2.3 Offerors must confirm in writing any substantive oral clarification of, or change in, their proposals made in the course of discussions. Any such written clarification or change then becomes part of the Offeror's proposal. Proposals are given a final review and ranked.

5.5.2.4 The financial proposal of each qualified Offeror will be evaluated separately from the technical evaluation. After a review of the financial proposals of qualified Offerors, the evaluation committee or Procurement Officer may again conduct discussions to further evaluate the Offeror's entire proposal.

5.5.2.5 When in the best interest of the State, the Procurement Officer may permit Offerors who have submitted acceptable proposals to revise their initial proposals and submit, in writing, best and final offers (BAFOs). However, the State may make an award without issuing a BAFO.

5.5.3 Award Determination

Upon completion of all discussions and negotiations, reference checks, and site visits (if any), the Procurement Officer will recommend award of the Contract to the responsible Offeror(s) whose proposal(s) is determined to be the most advantageous to the State considering technical evaluation factors and price factors as set forth in this RFP.

THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS BLANK

34