SOFTMASTER 1 - 2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Overall qualifications of the P type of service. • Identification of the technical placements. • Any unique qualifications and provide temporary contract se • References. e. Quantity and Quality of the Proposer's The City will evaluate the pool of p for possible consideration. Factors • The number of the qualified cai • The range of the skills and abil • The depth of the skills and abili and experience and ability to perform this Proposer handles for temporary rience which distinguish Proposer's ability to persons in the various technical specialties. of Potential Candidates: ntial candidates that a Proposer can present be looked at included: in each category and specialty. of the candidates. of the candidates. 3.3 Scoring Method Each criteria of evaluation will be scored on a ~ a "0" and a "10" is based on the criteria below: scale of 0 to 10. The distinction between Table 3.3 Scoring Criteria 0% Criterion was not addres material resented was t ed in the proposal or the tall without merit. 10% Bare minimum 20% Criterion was addressed little ca abili or awaren inimally, but indicated ss of area. 30% Intermediate score betty en 20% and 40%. 40% Criterion was addressed some ca abili inimally, but indicated 50% Intermediate score betty en 40% and 60 60% Criterion was addressed basic ca abili dequately. Overall, a 70% Intermediate score betty en 60% and 80% 80% Criterion was addressed indicates some su erior ell. This response atures. 90% Intermediate score betty en 80% and 100%. 100% Criterion was addressed indicatin an excellent or n superior fashion, outstandin ca abilit . For example, method of assuring capacity score of 15 points. If "Proposer A" addresses 15 points would be factored by 80%. skill of agency employees has maximum topic well (the definition of an 80% factor), the Maximum Points Score 15 X 80% Net Points 12 November 2001 ~3