How to Evaluate an Rfp of Adt System Essay

Define selection criteria R/A C/I N/A N/A Obtain a list of approved vendors R/A C/I N/A N/A Call the contractor R/A I N/A N/A Rate and choose the contractor R/A

Based on the textbook and my understanding, whenever there are negotiations between a procurer and a supplier regarding a competitive bidding, the first thing that might be favored is the scope of the project, meaning both will sit down and discuss the entire project prior the work begins. Meanwhile, during the negotiations, evaluation criteria should be clear, and stated and defined. As the evaluation is based on the criteria stated and the procurer can request or ask the supplier’s opinions on certain specifications and where things can be improved.

The government selects contract proposals from many competitors large and small, and each proposal must be effective in scope and developed with an attitude of winning the contract. From the e-Activity, select two (2) of the suggested commandments that you feel are most important to understand in order to write a government bid proposal effectively. Provide a rationale for your selection.

Simultaneously I would contact the other vendors (if any, depending on the Single source reason) and find out if they are interested in participate on the solicitation. Also, find out what was the reason/s of them not biding or not participate.

What team structures, functions, goals, obstacles, and communication will be used in the selected process

The performance factors most relevant to our vendor selection are cost, flexibility, speed and quality. Our evaluation will prioritize quality first, speed second, flexibility third and cost lastly.

More specifically, we have been asked to develop a proposal by preforming five different tasks:

The final recommendations for our client were based on analysis of the each aspect and we evaluated weekly each aspect listed. Our timeframe to review these aspects are shown in the chart below.

The evaluation process consists of different standards and guidelines for evaluators and stakeholders to follow. The use of evaluation may remain constant, but

(topic selection) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |2 |Internet and library search | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |3 |Preparation of proposal | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |4 |Consultation | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |5 |Submission of Proposal | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |6 |Preparation of chapter 1 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |7 |Preparation of chapter 2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |8 |Laboratory experiment | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |9 |Data analysis | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |10 |Preparation of progress report | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |11 |Submission of progress report

Because the evaluation process is a critical factor in determining the systems, the process should include various components. Some of the ways that I would evaluate the individual RFPs would be to analyze the product by conducting a due diligence plan (Plan, 2011). The components involved in this process consist of looking at demonstrations, conducting site visits, and doing check references (Oachs & Watters, 2016) (Plan, 2011). By looking at demonstrations, (whether they’d be vendor fairs or individual presentations) it gives the potential users the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the system and thus makes the users feel part of the whole process (Plan, 2011). Additionally, demonstrations allow for easy side to side system comparison which also eases the evaluation process. By doing so, it can help the vendor have a clearer understanding of what the facility’s specific requirements are (Amatayakul, 2013). Furthermore, conducting site visits, allows the project team to get real feedback about how the staff feels with new system and allows the potential buyer to see the system in action (Oachs & Watters, 2016). Furthermore, I would use reference checks to check the credibility of the vendor (StratisHealth, Analysis, RFP, 2009). By doing so, it would allow me to have a better visual as to seeing if the items listed on the RFP are things that can actually be accomplished accurately and efficiently (Amatayakul, 2013). That said, in order to evaluate the system, other

I have received the three project proposals for review along with the information relative to what the company is seeking to gain as a result of project implementation. Taking those factors into account, my team is prepared to present a project recommendation. Moving forward it would make the most sense to move forward with two of the three proposed projects, Project Juniper and Project Stargazer. While these projects are drastically different, implementing together will serve as the best potential course of action for the company precisely because of how divergent they are.

3. Weigh the criteria – This step requires the manager to rank the criteria according to its importance. It could be very dangerous if the manager is not fully knowledgeable about its company’s processes. However, when the criteria have been correctly weighed, it really builds a frame work for generating alternatives.

3. Avoid changing contractors, as new contractors are not familiar with the project’s personalities and systems design complexities. Choose a contractor who has an ongoing business relationship with a project group and avoid long-distance and out-of-country subcontracts which will make it difficult to form closer communication (Rob, 2003).

There are two types of rating methods for proposals that the government uses. One is the Numerical Method and the other is the Adjectival Method. Each method is based off each agencies preference. The numerical method is quite simple there are categories that can be used to rate such as total cost and or a combination of cost and non-cost on how the proposal meets the objectives that have been asking to fulfill. The rating scale is on bias way of being able to objectively provide no favoritism but use the facts. The scale adds up to 100. For an example it is like a grading rubric that is used on the grading of papers for universities. Each proposal will have a list of criterias or objectives that needs to be meant. Next you have a scale of percentages or a number scale that will give each one a weight to use in the rating part of each objective. Also, it 's common knowledge to list the most important task first on the proposal and that the vendors should be made aware on how the proposal will be weighted meaning if cost is more important or a combination of cost and non-cost. This allows the vendor equal opportunity to be able to tailor the proposal to give them a better chance in being picked and make the proposal reasonable so no one 's time is wasted. Last, rating method is adjectival which is a way of rating each proposal on a simple four to five categories. The scale could be a simple scale that consists of unacceptable, poor, satisfactory, good, and