Laserfiche WebLink
4. Vendor Response Forms (including the evaluation and selection approach) <br />5. Functional Specifications <br />Cit Com was a primary author of the Law Enforcement Information Technology Standards Council's <br />(LEI'i-SC) national CAD and RMS functional standards. Therefore, we possess the "source" material <br />from which those documents were crafted, and provide our clients with detailed (technical and <br />functional) requirements in a succinct medium for use in RFP documents. <br />7"he SAPD RFP documentation would fully describe the criteria to be used in evaluating the <br />proposals as well as set forth the. plan to be followed in conducting the evaluation. Ci Com would <br />make recommendations For the most appropriate method for evaluating the responses. "I'he RFP <br />would be submitted in draft form to project team members for review and amendment. Following <br />Steering Committee approval, a final copy would be delivered to the City for release. Cit Com <br />would release the RFP to a list of qualified vendors (prepared cooperatively with SAPD), as well as <br />to any vendor responding to the open bid (in concurrence with city requirements). Apre-proposal <br />conference wrould be conducted for prospective vendors, addressing questions and issues and Cit <br />Com would bc. in attendance. <br />Specific deliverables of this task would include: <br />- Dralt and Final Specification Documents <br />- Draft and Final SAPD RFP <br />3'?sr. !-il. Pr'vc:a?rt?r??trik SU(??9Urt. <br />Cit. Com, acting as a member of the evaluation team, would review each proposal response to <br />determine which systems are best able to meet the requirements. Each proposal would also be <br />reviewed by members of the project team for completeness and to ensure that they properly address <br />the Functionality requirements of the RFP. During this portion of the project, the evaluation and <br />selection criteria methodology would be applied, thus eliminating vendors who fail to meet the <br />requirements. Using the evaluation criteria as a guide, qualified proposals would be evaluated in <br />depth based upon (at a minimum) the following criteria: <br />• Adherence of the proposal to the format. <br />• Completeness of the proposal. <br />• Quality and depth of references. <br />• Previously demonstrated ability to successfully install police technology applications. <br />• Level of service and responsiveness that the vendor commits to providing to the City. <br />• Financial stability and resources of the vendor. <br />• Experience and technical expertise of stall-. ti <br />• Design, capability, and functionality of system and application software as determined by a <br /> <br />the evaluation team. 0 <br />a <br />• Current availability and ability to demonstrate installation of [he proposed software S <br /> applications required by the City. ?_, <br /> G <br />U <br />uT <br />a??