My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Finance Committee Agenda and Packet 2023 06 15
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
FINANCE COMMITTEE
>
2023 Finance Committee Agendas and Packets
>
Finance Committee Agenda and Packet 2023 06 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/5/2023 5:17:22 PM
Creation date
7/5/2023 3:58:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
6/15/2023
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
75
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Schedule. Schedule scoring may represent what is desired versus what the competitive vendor <br />provides. In the case of the 2019 bid process, Thursday service was desired, but the City was open <br />to entertaining other service schedules. <br />Equipment. City Staff will review equipment provided for the contract for industry standards of <br />quality, functionality, or additional factors such as sustainability. <br />Interview. The City Staff selection committee will evaluate the vendors team and their levels of <br />experience and professionalism in relation to the City's contract. <br />Overall, each time the City works through this process the scoring is very competitive and <br />decisions aren't necessarily obvious or straight forward. <br />Adjustment to Incorporate Added Customer Service Criteria <br />Historical RFP scoring criteria could be updated to include a Customer Service Criteria. <br />This new criterion could provide the following scoring points: <br />• (5) Exceptional Customer Service <br />• (2.5) Satisfactory Customer Service <br />• (0) Neutral/Unknown Customer Service <br />• (-2.5) Unsatisfactory Customer Service <br />(-5) Poor Customer Service <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />65.00 <br />-5.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />90.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />65.00 <br />0.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />95.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />65.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />5.00 <br />100.00 <br />In the example above, assuming all things equal except Customer Service, Vendor X, providing <br />poor customer service (-5 points) would need to overcome a 10 point deficit to Vendor Z, providing <br />exceptional customer service (5 points). Vendor Y, a vendor the City had not previously worked <br />with would be an unknown customer service quality (0 points). <br />Differences in pricing and how competitive bidder pricing is relative to their perceived customer <br />service levels could be one way to provide an objective way to score vendors with further emphasis <br />on Customer Service. <br />The following table provides a quick reference to the relationship for the percent difference in <br />price versus the associated calculated point difference: <br />12/75 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.