Attachment A Selection Criteria.PDF

SELECTION CRITERIA

The RFQ will be reviewed by the Evaluation Panel. Each proposal will be evaluated as described below and assigned an overall score ranking.

Major Criteria Categories Point Weight Qualifications of Firm 30 Relevant Experience of Firm 25 Quality & Price of Product and Services 20 Compensation to the City 15

DBE/WBE/DVB 5

Local Preference 5

TOTAL 100

Definition of Major Criteria Categories:

Qualification of Firm: The evaluation is based on qualifications and competence in relation to the scope of the project, the overall approach and strategy described in the proposal and company’s capacity to perform the work within the specified timeframe, the professional qualifications of key personnel related to the work described in the scope of the project.

Relevant Experience of Firm: Evaluation is based on the history of the company, the experiences as it related to the requirements within the RFP, evidence of past performance, quality and relevance of past work, reference and related items.

Quality & Price of Products and Services: Evaluation is based on the overall quality, variety, and appeal of the proposed products and services in alignment with community needs and expectations. This includes the nutritional value, freshness, and innovation of food and beverage offerings, as well as the ability to accommodate dietary preferences and restrictions. Pricing will be assessed for fairness, affordability, and competitiveness within the local market. Consideration will also be given to customer service practices, proposed service hours, and overall ability to enhance the visitor experience at City facilities.

Compensation to the City: Evaluation is based on the financial return to the City through the proposed compensation structure. Proposals may include a percentage share of gross sales, a flat fee, or a hybrid model combining both. The evaluation will consider the clarity, fairness, and sustainability of the proposed financial terms, as well as the proposer’s methodology for tracking and reporting sales.

Preference will be given to proposals that demonstrate a strong, transparent revenue model and a meaningful financial benefit to the City over the term of the agreement.

DBE/WBE/DVB:

DBE (Disadvantaged-Owned Business Enterprise):

At least 51 percent owned by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals;

and

Controlled (managed and operated daily) by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals.

WBE (Woman-Owned Business Enterprise):

Organized as a for-profit business, performing a commercially useful function;

At least 51 percent owned by one or more women; and Controlled (managed and operated daily) by one or more women There are no size restrictions for WBE certification

DVB (Disabled Veteran Business)

At least 51% owned, controlled, and actively managed by an identified service-disabled veteran and serve a useful business function.

The service-disabled veteran owner has demonstrated that they: 1) Have a certificate of release or discharge from active duty (Form DD214); 2) Reside in Wisconsin: and 3) Have a disability rating of at least 0% with the Department of Veteran’s Affairs or an Armed Services Branch.

Local Preference: To qualify as “local,” a business must meet at least two of three criteria:

The portion of its employees working at facilities in the City of Sun Prairie (at least 50%);

The portion of ownership vested with City of Sun Prairie residents (at least 50%); and The portion of sourcing within the City of Sun Prairie area (at least 15%).

Evaluation of Criteria

Criteria 1 and 2: Qualifications of Firm and Relevant Experience of Firm:

Evaluation team will use the evaluation scoring guide below to evaluate these two criteria. Each criteria will have a maximum number of points assigned to it. Based upon how well the proposal addressed each criteria, the evaluation team assigns a percentage of 0% up to maximum percentage of 100% to each criteria and then multiplies the maximum points by the appropriate scoring percentage to compute the final score.

Evaluation Scoring Guide

Percentage

Quality of Response

Description Strengths Relative to Requirement

Weaknesses Confidence In Proposed Approach

90-100 Excellent The proposal addresses the requirements completely, exhibits outstanding knowledge, creativity, innovation or other factors to justify this rating.

Meets requirements -numerous strengths in key areas.

None Very High

80-89 Good The proposal addresses the requirements completely and addresses some elements of the requirements in an outstanding manner

Meets requirements -some strengths in key areas

Minor - not in key areas

High

70-79 Moderate The proposal addresses most elements of the requirements.

Meets most requirements -minimal strengths provided in their response.

Moderate -does not outweigh strengths

Moderate

60-69 Marginal The proposal meets some of the RFP requirements.

Meets some of the requirements with some clear strengths.

Exist in key areas -outweighs strengths

Low

0-59 Unacceptable The proposal meets a few to none of the RFP requirements.

Meets a few to none of the requirements with few or no clear strengths.

Significant and numerous

No Confidence

For example:

Criteria (1) Point weight (2) Percentage (3) Final Score (2x3)

Qualifications of Firm 25 80% 20 Relevant Experience of Firm 25 90% 22.5

Criteria 3: Quality & Price of Products and Services Total Points Available: 20

Evaluators will score proposals based on the following three categories. For each, a number will be assigned a score based on how well the proposal meets expectations.

1. Product Quality & Relevance (8 Points) 8 points: High-quality products with strong appeal, healthy options, and good fit for the community.

5-7 points: Good quality with some healthy choices; generally meets expectations.

3-4 points: Average quality; limited healthy options or unclear community alignment.

0-2 points: Low quality or poorly aligned with community needs.

2. Pricing Fairness (6 Points)

6 points: Clearly fair and competitive pricing; accessible to a wide range of customers.

4–5 points: Mostly fair pricing with some minor concerns.

2–3 points: Pricing may be high, inconsistent, or poorly explained.

0–1 point: Unclear or unreasonable pricing.

3. Dietary Accommodation & Menu Variety (6 Points)

6 points: Broad variety of items with strong inclusion of dietary needs (e.g., vegetarian, vegan, gluten-free).

4-5 points: Some variety and dietary accommodations.

2–3 points: Limited options or minimal attention to dietary needs.

0–1 point: No clear accommodations or variety.

Criteria 4: Compensation to the City Total Points Available: 15 Proposals will be assessed based on the financial value and sustainability of the compensation model offered to the City. This includes a review of both the structure and the rationale behind the proposed payments. Evaluators will consider:

Type of compensation proposed (percentage of gross sales, flat fee, or hybrid) Projected revenue or financial benefit to the City over the term of the agreement Transparency and clarity of the financial model Sales tracking and reporting mechanisms

Proposals that provide a clear, fair, and advantageous financial benefit to the City, supported by a reasonable and transparent revenue methodology, will be rated more favorably.

Criteria 5: DBE/WBE/DVB:

DBE/WBE/DVB certified Business receive full 5 points. Non-certified business receives zero point.

Criteria 6: Local Preference:

Local business receives full 5 points. Non-local business receives zero point.