Laserfiche WebLink
r] <br /> <br />3. EVALUATION CRITERIA AND <br />The City's evaluation of proposals will consist <br />submission items and 2) a review of the subsl <br />two-phases: 1) a review of requested <br />five content of proposals. <br />3.1 Review of Requested Submission <br />Proposals will be reviewed for completeness. <br />considered. Submission items should include: <br />with missing items may not be <br />a. Correct delivery. Was the submission <br />specified closing date and time (see S <br />b. Number of copies. Have the required <br />been delivered (see Section 5.1 )? <br />c. Complete inputs. Does the proposal inc <br />Transmittal letter (see Section 2.1 )? <br />Service approach (see Section 2.2)' <br />Proposer qualifications (see Section <br />Pricing offered (see Section 2.4)? <br />d. Special inputs. Where applicable, was <br />provided (see Section 5.21)? <br />3.2 Review of Proposals <br />Selection shall be based upon a competitive <br />Proposers must satisfy the City of their ability <br />Proposers may offer services to all or any set <br />specialties of interest to the City. The City res <br />category independently. <br />All proposal material will be reviewed and eva <br />The City will apply the following weights to its <br />red to the correct place prior to the <br />5.1 )? <br />of copies of all submission requirements <br />separate Sections describing: <br />2.3)? <br />of Authority to bind the corporation <br />action process and not limited to price alone. <br />perform the services required. <br />~g the four (4) categories of technical <br />the right to select Vendors for each <br />by a select City team. <br />Criteria Points <br />Vendor Marku 30 <br />Vendor Total Cost 10 <br />Method of Assurin Ca aci and Skill A enc Em to ees 15 <br />Qualifications of Pro oser 25 <br />Quantit and Qualit of the Pro oser's ool of Potential Candidates 20 <br /> Total 100 <br />General comments on cost related criteria: <br />November 2001 ~ ~ <br />