My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
55E - RESO - AGMT - DEPOSITORY SRVS
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2016
>
12/06/2016
>
55E - RESO - AGMT - DEPOSITORY SRVS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/1/2016 5:01:03 PM
Creation date
12/1/2016 4:49:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Finance & Management Services
Item #
55E
Date
12/6/2016
Destruction Year
2021
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.
/
346
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
Agreement with JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. <br />For Depository Services ( "Banking Services ") <br />Page 2 <br />Responses: <br />A summary of the RFP solicitations and the proposals received is as follows: <br />20 - Potential Bidder Sites/Vendors were electronically notified <br />5 - Vendors downloaded the bid packet <br />• Banc of California <br />• JPMorgan Chase Bank <br />• MUFG - Union Bank <br />• U.S. Bank <br />• Wells Fargo Bank <br />3 - Bids received <br />• JPMorgan Chase Bank <br />i MUFG - Union Bank <br />• Wells Fargo Bank <br />1 - Bid judged most responsive and lowest cost <br />• JPMorgan Chase Bank <br />1 - Agreement recommended with JPMorgan Chase Bank. <br />The three Banking Services proposals received were subsequently reviewed by an eight - <br />member committee comprised of staff from Finance & Management Services Agency and the <br />Information Technology Agency. <br />Each of the responding financial institutions ( "respondents ") were interviewed, given an <br />opportunity to demonstrate their governmental banking software systems, and proposal <br />evaluations were based on the following criteria equaling a score of 100 %: <br />55E -2 <br />Proposal Evaluation Criteria <br />Available <br />Points <br />1 <br />Qualifications <br />20% <br />2 <br />Experience <br />20% <br />3 <br />Client references <br />10% <br />4 <br />Proposed scope of services and time of performance <br />30% <br />5 <br />Cost of providing services <br />20% <br />Total = <br />100% <br />55E -2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.