Laserfiche WebLink
City ofSouth Bend Information Technologies Department <br />Project Definition Document for <Project Name> <br />Written Proposal Evaluation: <br />PROPOSALTEAM <br />Ability to Meet <br />System <br />Requirements <br />Imp <br />Methodology <br />and Approach <br />a <br />and <br />Experience <br />with South <br />Hend'sTerms <br />Cost <br />Total <br />Cost <br />Rank <br />Score <br />Written Proposal Evaluation considered 5 weighted criteria: Ability to Meet System <br />Requirement (25%), Implementation Methodology and Approach (35%), Qualifications and <br />Experience (20%), Compatibility with South Bend's Terms and Conditions (10%), and Cost (10%). <br />Per the expectations set out in the RFP, Cost was not given rank until after every other element <br />was scored byour selection team to mitigate cost bias. Given 13 proposals, each proposal was <br />ranked I-12 (l most favored, 12 being least favored) per criteria and assigned a soore <br />proportional to the rank received (i.e., a I for Cost grants 10 points, a 12 grants 83). The top <br />three selections of this phase of evaluation, CherryRoad, Crowe Horwath, and Infor, are <br />highlighted imgreen inthe above score sheet, and advanced toDemonstration. <br />