HomeMy WebLinkAboutCORRESPONDENCE - RFP - P978 FIRE ENGINE 2005City of Fort Collins
Administrative Services
Purchasing Division
MEMORANDUM
To: Glenn Levy, PFA
From: Jim Hume, CPPO, Senior Buyer
Date: March 11, 2005
Re: Proposal P-978 Fire Truck
Enclosed for your evaluation and review are proposals we received for the above captioned
project. Proposals were submitted by:
Crimson Fire
Pierce
Ronsenbauer
American LaFrance
If you have any questions, please contact me at ext. 6776.
215 North Mason Street • 2nd Floor • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6775 • FAX (970) 221-6707
Section 5.0 Pricing
Proposals must include lump sum prices for the two engines, as specified, along with detailed
price breakdowns for components. Proposals should also include a proposed method of
negotiating price and equipment changes on any additional engines. The proposed method
should contain a guaranteed maximum annual percentage of price increase over the lump sum
price for the first two engines. Price and equipment changes must be negotiated by and agreed
to by both parties.
Section 6.0 Evaluation
6.1 Evaluation and Assessment of Proposal
An evaluation committee shall rank the interested firms based on their written proposals using
the ranking system set forth below. Firms shall be evaluated on the following criteria.
The rating scale shall be from 1 to 5, with 1 being a poor rating, 3 an average rating, and 5 an
outstanding rating. Recommended weighing factors for the criteria are listed adjacent to the
qualification. A selection may be made on the basis of written proposals, or the City may
schedule demonstrations/interviews with up to three firms. Such demonstrations/interviews will
be rated, in general, using the same procedure as the written proposals.
Weighting
Qualification
Standard
Factor
2.0
Scope of Proposal
Does the response address all the elements of the
proposal?
3.0
Technical
Does the proposed unit meet the general
Specifications
specifications? How well does the unit meet the
specific design requirements?
3.0
Construction &
Has the requested design, materials, fabrication,
Materials
construction and performance information been
provided? How well does this information indicate
long-term durability, reliability, performance, and
ease of maintenance?
2.0
Availability
How does delivery time of finished units compare to
other manufacturers?
2.0
Motivation
Is the firm interested? Have they provided a
reasonable method for handling additional
purchases in the future?
2.0
Cost
How does the cost compare to other vendors? Is
the proposed cost reasonable?
2.0
Firm Capability
Is the firm capable of doing the work in the required
time frame? Does the firm have the warranty and
support capabilities needed?
EK