About this deal
Each evaluator conducted his/her own independent review and scoring of the proposal in his/her evaluator workbook explanation of fairness and the need for objectivity, consistency and equitable treatment of all proposals Defence Resource Management Information System: Integrated support services and SIGMA integrated support services—Request for proposal2— PDF version (412KB) The scoring criteria and assessment tools were established prior to the receipt of proposals and were consistent with the RFP. The scoring criteria contained no hidden criteria The FM confirmed with each member of the evaluation team that they were in agreement with the final consensus scores and rationale
Evaluation training was provided to all evaluators. This included informing evaluators of the following:press the keys button. Press sounds to open the sound panel and adjust the volume of each drum and cymbal. The FM reviewed the assessment of financial proposals and confirms that the process was conducted appropriately in accordance with the process established in the RFP and in a fair, open and transparent manner. The FM had no fairness concerns related to the assessment of financial proposals. 4.2.5. Fairness monitor specialist observations: Request for proposals process
Each Bid’s responses to the rated requirements were reviewed separately, on an item-by-item basis against the identified evaluation criteria. For each requirement, the individual evaluator scores and the rationale for the scores were reviewed and discussed by the team. The evaluators used a consensus approach to determine a single score and rationale for each rated requirement that all evaluators agreed to. The consensus score and associated rationale was recorded in the master record The FM met with the PSPC individual on April4,2016 to review and verify the financial proposal process and results. The FM was shown all financial spreadsheets and was able to verify that the process defined in the RFP had been used. The FM verified that the financial assessment results were consistent with the proper application of the process defined in the RFP.Prior to joining Waterman, John was Head of Business Development for Gaist Solutions, where he worked with local authorities to develop strategic planning and development improvements. Technical mandatory requirements were reviewed for compliance with the information provided in both the compliance matrix and in the substantiating information in the proposal. A record of compliance or non-compliance was recorded in the master record along with the rationale Experienced highways specialist John Swift has joined Waterman’s Glasgow team as Associate Director to take a leading role in developing Waterman’s nation-wide DRIMS (Dynamic Response Intelligent Monitoring) offering.