The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About24 - Notice of Awards - Professional Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Services (2)Criteria #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 Scale 0 Weight 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.35 0.2 0.1 Total 1. Executive Summary 2. Proposal Requirements 3. Experience with similar projects 4. Approach to the Project 5. Qualifications of the Firm for Scope of Services 6. Cost Consultant: Reviewer: Date Reviewed: Criteria #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 Resource Data Gail Jorgenson 3/22/2024 Scale 0.03 0.1 0.2 0.35 0.18 0.07 0.93 Weight 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.35 0.2 0.1 Total 1. Executive Summary 2. Proposal Requirements 3. Experience with similar projects 4. Approach to the Project 5. Qualifications of the Firm for Scope of Services 6. Cost Comments A sales pitch that didn't really identify Bozeman's needs. Well done (surprising given the Exec Summary) Also surprising given Exec Summary Establishing an Advisory Board or Tech Committee (I like this). I know it is weird, but just calling out that they need remote access to our systems give me the heebees. Necessary, but if you don't know the people on the other end of the connection is worrisome. Saw this later in the approach, "However, if the City prefers not to provide direct access to staff during this phase, our technical staff can support your staff as needed to perform the verification activities.". Pg 24, right before Task 3. Team is a dedicated staff of GIS professionals, although not local. John Waterman has local ties. The costs seem to be spot on. I liked that they called out what the cost for the VertiGIS migration would be along with the City Works upgrades…although I am trying to figure out why the upgrade is so high…even the Build Respond UI for 12 Domains seems a little steep as well. Subcontractors: GCS (Montana Based), I did a little research on John Waterman. Looked him up on LinkedIn and he knows Rob Ahl. They went to graduate school together and were room mates. ESRI Partner Yes VertiGIS Yes (mentioned 44 times :) ) CityWorks Yes (mentioned 31 times) FME Yes (Lee Graham, PhD, Technical Lead, Resource Data) Python Yes (Lee Graham, PhD, Technical Lead, Resource Data), mentioned 12 times SOP for Publishing Yes, included in upgrade approach Training Yes On Site Visit as part of Proposal No, doesn't discvuss an on site visit Consultant: Reviewer: Date Reviewed: Criteria #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 HDR Gail Jorgenson Scale 0.03 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.15 0.1 0.88 Weight 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.35 0.2 0.1 Total 1. Executive Summary 2. Proposal Requirements 3. Experience with similar projects 4. Approach to the Project 5. Qualifications of the Firm for Scope of Services 6. Cost Comments Ugh, really busy page. The font is weird. While HDR addressed how they would approach our SOW, I didn't really feel this was an Executive Summary. Nicely laid out proposal that followed the Proposal Requirements. Dollars came in exactly as budgeted. Yes, City of Billings. I like that they have a local presence I felt t hat it was clear what we were asking for regarding the Cityworks upgrade and the move the VertiGIS Studio Web and I don't think that they did as good a job of outlining how to make these upgrades as they could have While reviewing the staff and availability of staff it seems that their least qualified GIS Analysti is the one with the most availability. I am not sure she is up for the task. The cost is as anticipated. Subcontractors: ESRI Partner Yes - Platinum Partner VertiGIS Yes Cityworks Yes FME Yes Python Yes (ish) SOP for Publishing Yes! Training Yes! On Site Visit as part of Proposal Yes! Consultant: Reviewer: Date Reviewed: Criteria #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 Gail Jorgenson Scale 0.03 0.1 0.05 0.25 0.05 0.2 0.68 Weight 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.35 0.2 0.1 Total 1. Executive Summary 2. Proposal Requirements 3. Experience with similar projects 4. Approach to the Project 5. Qualifications of the Firm for Scope of Services 6. Cost Comments meh Yes. Well, they say they have completed hundreds of them, but didn't list a single one in any detail. There is mention of the CIP project. Did that ever get off the ground? I wasn't here then, but as far as I know it never was deployed. Timmons wrote a robust proposal, which identified all of the city's asks. Still it feels very impersonal and based on the "Cost" I think there is a lot of room for scope creep. Yes, but who knows who will be on the project? Cost seems very low for the work we are asking to be completed for Phase 1 and did not provide a cost analysis for Phase 2, just a cost schedule for implementation Subcontractors: VertiGIS ESRI Partner Yes VertiGIS Yes CityWorks Yes FME Through VertiGIS Python Yes, through VertiGIS and Matt Moore SOP for Publishing Yes Training Yes On Site Visit as part of Proposal Consultant: Reviewer: Date Reviewed: Criteria #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 NV5 Geospatial Gail Jorgenson 3/22/2024 Scale 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.6 Weight 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.35 0.2 0.1 Total 1. Executive Summary 2. Proposal Requirements 3. Experience with similar projects 4. Approach to the Project 5. Qualifications of the Firm for Scope of Services 6. Cost Comments Very well written ES that notes the City's objectives and complexity's of our system and letting us know they can help. Did a great job of following the RFP directions. I did like the way they used the headers, but if they wanted to add additional detail they indented and made it a sub-item in the Table of Contents The projects didn't seem quite the same. Deliverables: • Roadmap document outline • Draft roadmap • Roadmap overview and orientation • Budgetary references for up to three prioritized projects • Final roadmap Only provided two "key personel" to be on the project Cost for Phase 1, but didn't really provide cost for Phase 2, but rather time and materials support block. Costs seem higher than other proposal cost schedules Subcontractors: VertiGIS ESRI Partner Yes VertiGIS Yes CityWorks Yes FME Yes, through VertiGIS Python No SOP for Publishing No Training On Site Visit as part of Proposal Yes, two days to kick off Consultant: Reviewer: Date Reviewed: Criteria #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 Cultivate Geospatial Gail Jorgenson 3/22/2024 Scale 0.05 0.08 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.02 0.6 Weight 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.35 0.2 0.1 Total 1. Executive Summary 2. Proposal Requirements 3. Experience with similar projects 4. Approach to the Project 5. Qualifications of the Firm for Scope of Services 6. Cost Comments I like that they have a robust GIS staff including a software architect. Also appreciate the diversity in their staff. I also like that they took the time to find our City of Bozeman logo that we use on our Viewer launch page. Cultivate Geospatial has not done work for the City of Bozeman previously. According to the commitment to the City 3 of the assigned CGS Team members have 90% availability. Does this mean they aren't busy? All of the Proposal Requirements were addressed in the Proposal, but there is no Index and no hyperlinks so it was difficult to navigate the Proposal. Cultivate Geospatial has experience with GIS architectures, but is weak on CityWorks and VertiGIS technologies. VertiGIS is not mentioned at all in the proposal, and CityWorks just twice Cultivate Geospatial didn't really get "us". The Approach to the project was vague and didn't address what our needs are. I said this before, and again, I really like the diversity of this team and the background is GIS all the way. The cost seems very low for both Phase 1 and Phase 2 which makes me concerned they don't really get it. Subcontractors: ESRI Partner VertiGIS CityWorks FME Python SOP for Publishing Training On Site Visit as part of Proposal Consultant: Reviewer: Date Reviewed: Criteria #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 Sanborn/AppGeo Gail Jorgenson Scale 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.17 0.1 0.05 0.57 Weight 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.35 0.2 0.1 Total 1. Executive Summary 2. Proposal Requirements 3. Experience with similar projects 4. Approach to the Project 5. Qualifications of the Firm for Scope of Services 6. Cost Comments Well done. Surprising how difficult this seems for some consultants I am not seeing experience in the areas that are of high priority to the COB including publishing SOP's, training documents, and experience with the two key integrations we have. City Works and VertiGIS would be subcontracted out to partners we don't know). Also Sanborn recently purchased AppGeo and the relevant experience falls to AppGeo, not Sanborn. I disagree with their approach to updating the Geocortex Viewers to Studio Web. If we had the resources it would be done. And they overlooked the very real challenge of untangling the web services. Relies on subcontractors Sanborn also broke out the costs for the VertiGIS migration and the City Works upgrade. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VGIS Resource data = $49,815 VGIS Sanborn = $26,690 ($23,125 difference) CW Resource data =$25,800 CW Sanborn =$17,413 ($8,387) for a total difference of $34,187 Subcontractors: KCI Technologies - City Works Digital Data Services, Inc. (DDS) - VertiGIS (Bronze ESRI Partner) AppGeo was purchased by Sanborn in 2022 ESRI Partner Silver Partner VertiGIS Yes - DDS - Bronze Partner CityWorks Yes - KCI Technologies FME Yes Python Yes SOP for Publishing Yes, at Phase 2 Training Yes On Site Visit as part of Proposal None mentioned Consultant: Reviewer: Date Reviewed: Criteria #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 GTG Gail Jorgenson Scale 0.05 0.1 0.05 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.55 Weight 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.35 0.2 0.1 Total 1. Executive Summary 2. Proposal Requirements 3. Experience with similar projects 4. Approach to the Project 5. Qualifications of the Firm for Scope of Services 6. Cost Comments Bulleted list, but that list includes the majority of items we will need to touch during this SOW. The proposal includes all of the Proposal Requirements, including hyperlinks to get to them. There were a lot of inserted images, but no real content The approach that GTG presented assumes that the COB doesn’t have many of the proposed items in place, but fails to acknowledge what was asked for in the RFP. I confess that I am really disappointed by GTG as I went in thinking that they would be a leader in the proposals. I didn't see VertiGIS, Geocortex in any of the references, or in the Approach to the project (I feel I am being generous with giving them a score of 50% allowable for this category) Lump sum fee f $58,600. No break out for VertiGIS or Cityworks, Phase 2 is Time and Materials. Subcontractors: GHD? for Cityworks ESRI Partner Yes (Cornerstone Partner, 20 years with ESRI) VertiGIS NOPE! CityWorks Apparently. Mentioned 41 times vs VertiGIS which is mentioned 4 times and Geocortex which is mentioned 2 times FME Python SOP for Publishing Training On Site Visit as part of Proposal Consultant: Reviewer: Date Reviewed: Criteria #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 Magnolia River Gail Jorgenson 3/22/2024 Scale 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.15 0.1 0.39 Weight 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.35 0.2 0.1 Total 1. Executive Summary 2. Proposal Requirements 3. Experience with similar projects 4. Approach to the Project 5. Qualifications of the Firm for Scope of Services 6. Cost Comments I like the acknoledgment that a GIS Roadmap allows organizations to reach goals and improve outcomes. Core patterns image calls out AM, Planning and Analysis, Field mobility, Operational Awareness and Stakeholder Engagement…all really important components of our GIS/AM Team. Did not follow the Proposal Requirements. There is a Table of Contents with hyperlinks but items are out of order and renamed. Called "Past Performance" (again didn't follow the instructions)…I didn't see anything in this section that was really similar to our project. A couple of the projects ended in 2019 (Covid related?). Workshops, stakeholder interviews. I do like the "six Pillars of GIS Sustainability" chart on page 12. Otherise there was really no talk about the technical side of how they are going to perform the assessment. I do like the idea of Workshops and stakeholder interviews. There was no reference to being an ESRI Partner or subcontractors. The word "Qualifications" appears exactly once in this proposal. Firm profile is like the other proposals, but without the "Similar Projects" to back it up. Interesting the way they dodged the "cost" component for Phase 2= and Phase 1 seemed very high. Subcontractors: ESRI Partner VertiGIS CityWorks FME Python SOP for Publishing Training On Site Visit as part of Proposal Consultant: Reviewer: Date Reviewed: Criteria #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 InterDev Gail Jorgenson 3/22/2024 Scale 0.01 0.05 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.16 Weight 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.35 0.2 0.1 Total 1. Executive Summary 2. Proposal Requirements 3. Experience with similar projects 4. Approach to the Project 5. Qualifications of the Firm for Scope of Services 6. Cost Comments LOL, I think it is funny when consultants address an RFP to somone not even remotely involved in the project. Shows they didn't really do their homework. Didn't really sell me. Did not follow the Proposal Requirements Outline, although there is a Table of Contents with hyperlinks. I think they lazed out on this. Looks like references and not an opportunity to tell us what they can do for us by showing what they have done for others.a I couldn't find the "Approach to the Project" in the Table of Contents and didn't have time to hunt for it. Could not find "Qualifications of the Firm" in the Table of Contents and didn't have time to hunt for it. Wow, really low bid. I am not sure they really know what we are asking for. Subcontractors: ESRI Partner VertiGIS CityWorks FME Python SOP for Publishing Training On Site Visit as part of Proposal