25B - AGMT - INTEGRATED SOFTWARE CONSULTING SERVICES

Home Browse Search

4. Vendor Response Forms (including the evaluation and selection approach) S. Functional Specifications Cit Com was a primary author of the Law Enforcement Information Technology Standards Council's (LEITSC) national CAD and RMS functional standards. Therefore, we possess the "source" material from which those documents were crafted, and provide our clients with detailed (technical and functional) requirements in a succinct medium for use in RFP documents. The SAPD RFP documentation would fully describe the criteria to be used in evaluating the proposals as welt as set forth the plan to be followed in conducting the evaluation. Cit Cum would make recommendations for the most appropriate method far evaluating the responses. The RFP would be submitted in draft form to project team members for review and amendment. Following Steering Committee approval, a final copy would be delivered to the City for release. Cit Corn would release the RFP to a fist of qualified vendors (prepared cooperatively with SAPD), as well as to any vendor responding to the open hid (in concurrence with city requirements). A pre - proposal conference would be conducted for prospective vendors, addressing questions and issues and Cit Cam would be in attendance. Specific dcliverables of this task would Include: — Draft and Final Specification documents — Draft and Final SAPD RFP Trask. 1 -4: Procurement Support. Cit Gam, acting as a member or the evaluation team, would review each proposal response to determine which systems are best able to meet the requirements. Each proposal would also be reviewed by members of the project team for completeness and to ensure that they properly address the functionality requirements of the RFP. During this portion of the project, the evaluation and selection criteria methodology would be applied, thus eliminating vendors who fail to meet the requirements. Using the evaluation criteria as a guide, qualified proposals would be evaluated in depth based upon (at a minimum) the following criteria; • Adherence of the proposal to the format. • Completeness of the proposal. • Quality and depth of references. • Previously demonstrated ability to mocessfully install police technology applications. • Level of service and responsiveness that the vendor commits to providing to the City. • Financial stability and resources of the vendor. • Experience and technical expertise of staff, m • Design, capability, and functionality of system and application software as determined by w � the evaluation team.° • Current availability and ability to demonstrate Installation of the proposed software applications required by the City. W a n; f 25B -18