Compilation of Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia › Department 665 - RULES OF GEORGIA TECHNOLOGY AUTHORITY › Chapter 665-2 - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROCUREMENT › Subject 665-2-11 - MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS › Rule 665-2-11-.12 - Offeror Responsibility

Current through Rules and Regulations filed through June 27, 2024
(a) Policy. Purchases shall be made from, and
				contracts shall be awarded to responsible offerors in accordance with O.C.G.A.
				§
									50-25-7.3(a)(6). Because it is important that the State strive for best
				value, an award to an offeror is not required solely because that offeror
				submits the lowest offer. As used throughout these Rules, the term "offeror"
				refers to any entity that may respond to an Invitation for Bids, Request for
				Proposals, or any other procurement solicitation document, by whatever name it
				is called.
(b) General Standards.
1. A responsible offeror is one that GTA
				believes has the capability in all respects to perform fully the contract
				requirements and the business integrity to justify a public contract
				award.
2. Responsibility shall be
				generally presumed.
3. GTA may base
				its belief that an Offeror is responsible on responses provided on the
				offeror's "Statement of Responsibility Certification Form" (where such a form
				is used) and/or based on an offeror's responses to the requirements of the
				solicitation document.
4. In order
				for an offeror to be deemed non-responsible, the contracting officer must make
				an affirmative determination of non-responsibility.
5. GTA shall have the right to conduct
				investigations and other forms of due diligence into any offeror's (or
				potential offeror's) responsibility status at any time and for any reason. Such
				due diligence may include investigations into one or more of the following
				areas listed in Rule  665-2-11-.12(b)6  below.
6. Areas affecting an offeror's
				responsibility may include, but are not necessarily limited to one or more of
				the following criteria:
(i) adequacy of
				financial resources. This may include, but is not limited to, the ability to
				obtain required bonds and insurance from sureties and insurance companies
				authorized to do business in Georgia.
(ii) satisfactory ability to comply with the
				contract requirements, considering the firm's other business
				obligations.
(iii) satisfactory
				accounting and auditing procedures.
(iv) satisfactory technical
				qualifications.
(v) satisfactory
				experience;
(vi) adequacy of the
				organization, material, equipment, facilities and personnel resources and
				expertise necessary to carry out the work and meet required delivery or
				performance schedules;
(vii)
				whether offeror is presently debarred or suspended from bidding or proposing by
				any governmental entity;
(viii)
				whether offeror is presently proposed for debarment or suspension from bidding
				or proposing by any governmental entity;
(ix) Whether offeror has within a three year
				period preceding the present procurement been convicted of, or had a civil
				judgment rendered against them for, commission of fraud or a criminal offense
				in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public
				contract; violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes or commission of
				embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records,
				making false statements, or receiving stolen property;
(x) Whether offeror is presently indicted for
				or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity with
				commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining,
				attempting to obtain, or performing a public contract; violation of Federal or
				State antitrust statutes or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery,
				bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or
				receiving stolen property.
(xi)
				Whether offeror has had a contract terminated for default in the last 3
				years.
(xii) Whether offeror is
				currently under investigation for any possible breach of contract, or fraud or
				allegations of criminal activity related to the types of Services requested
				within the subject procurement.
(xiii) satisfactory record of
				performance.
(xiv) Whether offeror
				has a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics in any public or
				private procurement.
7.
				Failure of a firm to provide relevant information specifically requested by the
				Contracting Officer may be grounds for a determination of
				non-responsibility.