RFP 902647 Senate Bill 90 Mandated Cost Reimbursement Services

It is the intent of these specifications, terms, and conditions to describe Senate Bill (SB) 90 Mandated Cost Reimbursement Services with the specific requirements and deliverables as set forth herein, being requested by the County.

The County intends to award a three-year contract (with the option to review for two consecutive one-year terms) to the Bidder selected as the most responsive and responsible Bidder whose response conforms to the RFP and meets the County’s requirements.

Background

The County Administrator’s Office (CAO) oversees and coordinates the mandated cost reimbursement process for all applicable County agencies and departments.

The CAO requires mandated cost reimbursement services pursuant to SB 90, Chapter 1406, Statutes of 1972, and Article XIII B of the State Constitution, added by Proposition 4 in 1979. The statutes generally require the State to reimburse local jurisdictions for the cost of administering newly mandated State programs or for increased mandated service levels in existing State programs. 

The Contractor must adhere to the SB 90 claims process, whereby:

1. 1. 1. Newly mandated programs or service levels are identified by the Legislature, the courts, or through test claims filed by local jurisdictions with the Commission on State Mandates.
      2. Based on instructions provided by the State Controller’s Office, an annual and as-needed claiming process with specific deadlines is used by local jurisdictions to pursue reimbursement of new or existing mandated costs for prior and current years.
      3. Claims preparation and justification by local jurisdictions must include documentation of all direct costs and documentation of all allowable indirect costs.

The Contractor will accurately identify, prepare, file, and monitor all eligible mandated cost reimbursement and test claims in full compliance with State requirements, ensuring timely submissions, audit-ready documentation, and maximized reimbursement recovery for the County.

Project Details

• Reference ID: RFP 902647
• Department: General Services Agency-Procurement
• Department Head: Detra Dillon (Purchasing Administrator)

Important Dates

• Questions Due: 2026-04-29T00:00:00.000Z
• Pre-Proposal Meeting: 2026-04-27T17:30:00.000Z — Online TEAMS meeting

Evaluation Criteria

• Completeness of Response (1 pts) —

  Responses to this solicitation must be complete.  Responses must address all the requirements identified within this solicitation and all related documents, including any Addenda. Failure to meet the Bidder Minimum Qualifications may also be considered an incomplete response and may result in the disqualification of the Bidder.

• Debarment and Suspension (1 pts) —

  Bidders, its principal, and named subcontractors are not identified on the list of Federally debarred, suspended, or other excluded parties located at www.sam.gov/SAM.

• Cost (75 pts) —

  The points for Cost will be computed by dividing the amount of the lowest responsive and responsible bid received by each Bidder’s total proposed cost.

  Cost evaluation points may be adjusted by considering:

  1. Reasonableness (i.e., how well does the proposed pricing accurately reflect the Bidder’s effort to meet requirements and objectives?).
  2. Realism (i.e., is the proposed cost appropriate to the nature of the products and/or services to be provided?).
  3. Affordability (i.e., the ability of the County to finance SB 90 Mandated Cost Reimbursement Services).
• Description of Proposed Services (100 pts) —

  Proposals will be evaluated considering the solicitation specifications, bid response, and the questions below:

  1. How well does the proposal describe a clear and comprehensive methodology for identifying, preparing, filing, and monitoring mandated cost reimbursement claims and test claims in compliance with State requirements?
  2. To what extent does the proposer demonstrate an effective approach to ensuring timely claim development, review, and submission in accordance with SCO and CSM deadlines?
  3. How clearly does the proposal outline coordination and collaboration processes with County staff, including the SB 90 Coordinator and departmental personnel, for data collection and claim development?
  4. How effective are the proposer’s methods, tools, and quality control processes to ensure claims are accurate, well-documented, audit-ready, and compliant with applicable claiming instructions?
  5. How well does the proposer address training, reporting, and ongoing support, including development of guidelines, custom reports, and communication of new or suspended mandates?
• Methodology (100 pts) —

  Proposals will be evaluated considering the solicitation specifications, bid response, and the questions below:

  1. How well does the Bidder’s methodology describe a logical and effective approach to delivering Mandate Cost Reimbursement Services and fulfilling the requirements and objectives of this RFP?
  2. How well does the methodology describe the Bidder’s approach to coordinating with County departments, the CAO, and State agencies?
  3. How well does the methodology describe the Bidder’s process for collecting documentation and assembling claim packages for submission to the State?
  4. How well does the methodology describe the Bidder’s approach to tracking deadlines, managing follow-up, and aligning the work with the County’s budget schedule?
  5. How well does the methodology describe the quality control measures and communication practices the Bidder will use to keep the County informed and support timely reimbursement?
• Relevant Experience (100 pts) —

  Proposals will be evaluated, including considering the solicitation specifications, bid response, and the questions below:

  1. How relevant and extensive is the Bidder’s experience in preparing and filing mandated cost reimbursement claims with the State Controller’s Office (SCO)? 
  2. How strong is the Bidder’s experience with test claims filed with the Commission on State Mandates (CSM), including demonstrated outcomes or approvals?
  3. To what extent does the Bidder demonstrate experience working with public sector clients, particularly California counties, and knowledge of applicable laws and regulations (e.g., Government Code 17500 et seq.)?
  4. How well does the Bidder demonstrate experience supporting audits, desk reviews, and Incorrect Reduction Claims, including successful outcomes?
  5. How qualified and experienced are the proposed key personnel in delivering mandated cost reimbursement and test claim services, including their ability to collaborate effectively with government entities?
• Reference (50 pts)
• Vendor Interview (75 pts) —

  Should the County opt to conduct a vendor interview, the interview may include responding to standard and specific questions from the CSC regarding the Bidder’s proposal.  Whether or not a shortlist process is used, the scores of any evaluation criterion above may be revised or informed based on the vendor interview.

  As part of the vendor interview, Bidder may be evaluated against the RFP specifications and the questions below:

   

  1.   How well did the Bidder and its team respond to questions?

  2.   How well did the Bidder and its team demonstrate the necessary expertise and experience to achieve the County’s needs?

  3.   How well did the Bidder demonstrate its ability to be a valued partner with the County?

• Small Local Emerging Business Preference (ADMIN SCORING) (25 pts) —

  Points equaling 5% of the Bidder’s total score for the above Evaluation Criteria will be added.  This will be the Bidder’s final score for purposes of award evaluation.

• Local Preference (ADMIN SCORING) (25 pts) —

  Points equaling 5% of the Bidder’s total score for the above Evaluation Criteria will be added.  This will be the Bidder’s final score for purposes of award evaluation.

Submission Requirements

• Submit Bid Response and Bid Form (required) —

  Please confirm that both your response and the Bid Form have been uploaded here.

• Submit Bid Response (required) —

  Please confirm that your response has been uploaded here.

• Has your response addressed all the requirements identified within the solicitation and all related documents, including any addenda? Failure to meet the Bidder Minimum Qualifications may also be considered an incomplete response and may result in the disqualification of your bid. (required)
• Your company, its principal, and named subcontractors are not identified on the list of Federally debarred, suspended, or other excluded parties located at www.sam.gov/SAM. (required)
• I certify that I have read, understood and agree to the terms in this solicitation, and that I am authorized to submit this response on behalf of my company. (required)
• Pricing (required) —
  • Choose Option 1 when you have set line items, for example:
    • This is a quote for goods or commodities.
    • This is a public works bid, with a pricing table that can be uploaded into OpenGov Procurement from an Excel spreadsheet.
    • Seeking services for hourly rate schedules.
  • Choose Option 2 when you need vendors to provide you with the line items. 
• Evaluation Committee? (required) —

  Will there be an evaluation committee to review the proposals and score them based on weights and multiple criteria?

• Procurement and/or Project Contact (required) —

  Select the information you would like display.