11-15 Exhibits to Resolution Awarding Contract for 911 System Maintenance and Repair.pdf

6.4 STATE'S RIGHT TO REQUEST FURTHER INFORMATION The Director reserves the right to request all information which may assist him or her in making a contract award, including factors necessary to evaluate the bidder’s financial capabilities to perform the contract. Further, the Director reserves the right to request a bidder to explain, in detail, how the proposal price was determined. 6.5 PROPOSAL EVALUATION COMMITTEE Proposals may be evaluated by an Evaluation Committee composed of members of affected departments and agencies together with representative(s) from the Division. Representatives from other governmental agencies may also serve on the Evaluation Committee. On occasion, the Evaluation Committee may choose to make use of the expertise of outside consultant(s) in an advisory role. 6.6 ORAL PRESENTATION AND/OR CLARIFICATION OF PROPOSAL After the submission of proposals, unless requested by the State as noted below, vendor contact with the State is still not permitted. After the proposals are reviewed, one, some or all of the bidders may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposals. A request for clarification may be made in order to resolve minor ambiguities, irregularities, informalities or clerical errors. Clarifications cannot correct any deficiencies or material omissions or revise or modify a proposal, except to the extent that correction of apparent clerical mistakes results in a modification. The bidder may be required to give an oral presentation to the State concerning its proposal. Bidders may not attend the oral presentations of their competitors. It is within the State’s discretion whether to require the bidder to give an oral presentation or require the bidder to submit written responses to questions regarding its proposal. Action by the State in this regard should not be construed to imply acceptance or rejection of a proposal. The Division will be the sole point of contact regarding any request for an oral presentation or clarification. 6.7 EVALUATION CRITERIA The following evaluation criteria categories, not necessarily listed in order of significance, will be used to evaluate proposals received in response to this RFP. The evaluation criteria categories may be used to develop more detailed evaluation criteria to be used in the evaluation process: 6.7.1 TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA a. The bidder's general

RFP. The evaluation criteria categories may be used to develop more detailed evaluation criteria to be used in the evaluation process: 6.7.1 TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA a. The bidder's general approach and plans in meeting the requirements of this RFP. b. The bidder’s detailed approach and plans to mobilize its resources, provide equipment, perform services required under the Scope of Work of this RFP, anticipate and identify possible problems in executing these requirements and meet the ongoing needs of the State and its cooperative purchasing partners to complete the contract successfully. This judgment will include, but not be limited to: the number and qualifications of management, supervisory and other staff proposed by the bidder to complete the contract; availability and commitment to the contract from bidder’s management, supervisory and other staff 57