Implement
Private Institutions: Draft Requests for Proposals for Food Service Management Companies
- Private Institution
- FSMC-Operated
Set Values-Based Evaluation Metrics
An RFP must clearly state the evaluation criteria used to score bids. To ensure the management company can support values-based procurement, these priorities should be explicitly included in evaluation metrics. Many institutions have established evaluation and scoring procedures for food service management RFPs; this section focuses only on how values-based procurement can be incorporated into those existing systems.
Typically, responses are scored based on points assigned across various criteria.[5] Criteria may vary and be weighted differently. Naturally, cost is a central concern for all institutions, and cost criteria may be more heavily weighted than other criteria. Including values-based criteria enables institutions to assess bids more holistically, emphasizing alignment with institutional values rather than cost alone. These criteria should reflect an institution’s food purchasing guidelines and stated priorities.
To strengthen the evaluation process, staff from food operations, procurement, sustainability, or other relevant personnel should participate in reviewing proposals. Their involvement ensures that values-based procurement goals are meaningfully considered during selection.
Model Recommendation
The model recommendation below sets forth a criterion specific to values-based procurement, which would be included alongside other food operations RFP criteria (e.g., cost, business practices, experience, staffing, references, etc.). Including values-based procurement as a standalone criterion emphasizes its importance and place as a core responsibility of the selected management company.
Evaluation Criteria
RFP submissions will be evaluated by the [Institution RFP Review/Selection Committee] based on the established Evaluation Criteria detailed below:
- [List the food operations RFP evaluation criteria (e.g., cost, business practices, experience, staffing, references) and allocated points or percentage.]
- Values-Based Procurement: The management company’s demonstrated desire and ability to deliver a program that is consistent with [Institution’s Food Purchasing Guidelines] and advance [Institution’s] goals related to values-based procurement. The management company’s demonstrated ability to track and report program adherence to [Institution’s Food Purchasing Guidelines] and progress toward [Institution’s] goals.
- [If allocating points or percentages to criteria, list the allocation for the values-based procurement.]
Keep In Mind:
Model recommendations are provided for values-aligned procurement criteria. Other criteria, such as price/budget, delivery, food quality, packaging, staffing adequacy, and ability to meet all aspects of dining/food operations needs required by the institution, will also be part of the evaluation criteria, but are not laid out in this model recommendation.
Alternative: Breakdown of Values-Based Procurement Criteria
Instead of one comprehensive metric for values-based procurement, an institution may list values as separate metrics. This alternative serves an institution that has clear values-based procurement priorities that it wishes to highlight and score specifically. This alternative would also provide more clarity in scoring if the selection committee includes individuals less familiar with the values-based procurement program.
The description of metrics will still rely on the standards and requirements set forth in the institution’s food purchasing guidelines but allows room to emphasize particular aspects of the guidelines. Such a breakdown in evaluation criteria can also provide more clarity to responders about the information they must provide in a competitive proposal.
The alternative language in the table below shows how aspects of values-based procurement can be presented as metrics (“additional breakdowns”). Other values or requirements that are part of an institution’s values-based procurement program—and are not covered in detail by this Toolkit—may be inserted following this same approach.
Option for Breakdown of Values-Based Procurement Metrics in Evaluation Criteria:
[Insert VBP Metric, see table of options below]:
The management company’s demonstrated desire and ability to adhere to [Institution’s] [insert Procurement Metric, see table of options below] standards, requirements, and goals, including:
- [Insert additional breakdown (see table of options below) and scoring allocation for each.]
| Procurement Value | Additional Breakdowns |
| Animal Welfare | • Demonstrates commitment to animal welfare in its operations and/or has requirement(s) or preference(s) for meat/seafood welfare certifications in vendors.
•Demonstrates existing vendor pool that prioritizes animal welfare and/or has a plan for increasing the vendor pool meeting this standard. |
| Climate & Sustainability | • Has a Climate Action Plan or Sustainability Plan with ongoing review and evaluation.
• Has requirement(s) or preference(s) for climate/sustainability certifications and/or practices in vendors. • Demonstrates existing vendor pool that meets [Institution’s] local & sustainable definitions and/or demonstrates plan for increasing vendor pool meeting this definition. |
| Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion | • Has a DEI Plan/Commitment with ongoing review and evaluation and/or demonstrates prioritization of DEI in its staffing, operations, and vendor selection.
• Demonstrates existing vendor pool that meets [Institution’s] producer DEI requirements/preferences and/or has a plan for increasing the vendor pool meeting this standard. |
| ESG & CSR | • Has an ESG/CSR Plan/Commitment with ongoing review and evaluation. |
| Health & Nutrition | • Has requirement(s) or preference(s) for health and nutrition certifications and/or has health and nutrition product quality specifications/standards for vendors.
• Demonstrates existing vendor pool that satisfies health and nutrition product quality specifications/standards. |
| Land & Conservation Preservation | • Demonstrates commitment to land conservation and preservation in its operations.
• Demonstrates existing vendor pool practicing land conservation/preservation and/or has a plan for increasing the vendor pool meeting this standard. |
| Local Economic Investment | • Demonstrates commitment to local economic investment in its operations.
• Has a vendor certification process for local producers and/or plan for certifying local producers. • Demonstrates existing vendor pool that meets [Institution’s] local definition and/or demonstrates plan for increasing vendor pool meeting this definition. |
| Resilience | • Demonstrates commitment to resilience in its operations and practices for increasing supply chain and institutional resilience. |
| Workers’ Right & Welfare | • Demonstrates commitment to workers’ rights and welfare in its operations.
• Has requirement(s) or preference(s) for workers’ rights and welfare certifications and/or practices in vendors. |
| Transparency | • Collects and tracks vendor and product data relevant to [Institution’s Food Purchasing Guidelines].
• Maintains a process for tracking and reporting volume rebates, credits, or incentives received from vendors. |
| Vendor Recruitment & Relationships | • Has a vendor certification process for values-based vendors.
• Demonstrates experience certifying, working with, and maintaining relationships with vendors that meet [Institution’s Food Purchasing Guidelines; or insert vendor preferences]. |
| Communication | • Demonstrates reporting and communication experience with institutional clients.
• Has marketing and content creation capabilities to support [Institution’s] marketing and promotional goals. |
Alternative: Incorporate Values-Based Procurement Metrics Into Other RFP Criteria
An institution may have primary criteria in its food operations RFPs that cannot be changed. For example, most RFPs for food operations include the following criteria:
- Cost & Budget
- Service Capabilities
- Experience
- Personnel/Staffing
- Accounting & Reporting
- Business Practices
- References
If values-based procurement cannot be added as a standalone criterion, the descriptions of the primary criteria can be updated to include values-based metrics. For example, “Service Capabilities” can be updated to specifically reference and include the capacity to source and serve products that align with the institution’s food purchasing guidelines or specific values-based procurement requirements. “Experience” can assess experience working with other institutions with values-based procurement programs, as well as experience working with vendors that meet the institution’s requirements and preferences. “Accounting & Reporting” and “Business Practices” can delve into levels of transparency, data collection and management, and communication.
The key to using this alternative effectively is to clearly communicate how values-based criteria will be considered within primary criteria, so both the responders and the institutional personnel evaluating proposals understand the role of values-based considerations in scoring.
Footnotes
[5] While this Toolkit does not provide examples of RFP scorecards, there are excellent resources available to help institutions make evaluation scorecards. For example, Partners for Public Good’s “Evaluation Scorecards” resource provides instructions and real-world examples. See, Rebecca Graffy, Tomas Aponte, & Lars Benson, Evaluation Scorecards, Partners for Pub. Good https://partnersforpublicgood.org/procurement-excellence-network/resource/evaluation-scorecards/.