My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FULL PACKET_2012-01-17
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2012
>
01/17/2012
>
FULL PACKET_2012-01-17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/22/2016 4:05:57 PM
Creation date
1/12/2012 5:09:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Clerk of the Council
Date
1/17/2012
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
450
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
III. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS <br />The response to this Request for Proposals should contain documentation of contractor's credentials <br />and expertise in this field. Consideration will be given to contractors with demonstrable and <br />documented experience in similar work. An evaluation committee will review the responses received <br />and interview the companies who submit the most responsive proposals. The following evaluation <br />criteria and weights will be used to evaluate the bids: <br />Capability and Experience of Contractor (25 %) <br />1. Ability of contractor and his /her ball diamond infield maintenance sub - contractor to obtain the <br />staff and equipment necessary to perform specifications as outlined in the contractor's business <br />plan <br />2. Ongoing plan for providing certified irrigation techs on this job, and FTE's assigned <br />3. Training and safety precautions taken to perform specifications <br />4. Experience of supervisory and management staff assigned to the contract <br />5. The value of any new product or service suggestions or other new ideas or enhancements <br />Past Performances (25 %) <br />1. Past record of performance on contracts of similar size and scope with Santa Ana or other <br />governmental agencies including such factors as reliability, adherence to specifications and <br />compliance with contract terms and conditions <br />2. Past record of performance on requests for extra work, including ability to accurately bid jobs, <br />cost competitiveness, and quality of work <br />3. Acceptable, verifiable references and site reviews <br />Cost of Proposal 50 %) <br />1. Cost of base proposal <br />2. Cost of specialized services <br />Based upon the foregoing criteria, all proposals shall be ranked by score. Only those proposals <br />receiving a score above 70 will be considered for award. The City reserves the right to award the <br />contract to any proposer with a score above 70. <br />FOLLOW -UP OF EVALUATION PROCESS BY CONTRACTOR <br />Contractors may follow up on the evaluation of the proposals by contacting Robert Carroll, via email <br />at rcarroll @ santa - ana.org. <br />6 <br />25H -16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.