Attachment D - Reference Check Form S-DASOBO-00017788.docx

36 KB Posted

Attached to
Request for Proposal Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Licensing Solution
Solicitation number
S-DASOBO-00017788
Issued by
Oregon

About this file

Written by GovTribe AI ·

This is a Reference Check Form (Attachment D) associated with Oregon's Request for Proposal S-DASOBO-00017788 for a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Licensing Solution, issued by the State Planning Section (SPS) on behalf of the Oregon Department of Administrative Services (ODA). The reference check form is designed to evaluate proposer performance and qualifications through feedback from previous clients. The form requests information about the proposer's service delivery, customer responsiveness, problem resolution methods, project timeline adherence, and cost management relative to initial proposals. References are asked to rate proposers on a 0-10 scale across multiple dimensions including overall quality of services, service delivery, customer service responsiveness, business relationship satisfaction, and likelihood of future engagement.

The Reference Check Form serves as a critical evaluation tool within the RFP process to assess proposer experience and performance history. References must identify the type of services previously provided, describe those services in detail, and provide scored assessments with supporting comments regarding satisfaction levels with various aspects of proposer performance. The form specifically addresses cost performance by comparing final project costs to initial proposals and evaluates schedule performance through questions about timeline adherence. This comprehensive reference evaluation mechanism enables the state to make informed decisions based on documented performance history with previous clients before awarding the contract for CRM licensing solution design, configuration, integration development, data migration, testing, and implementation support services.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Attachment H - OneODA CRM Licensing High-level Solution Requirements S-DASOBO-00017788.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment K- Digital Accessibility Narrative S-DASOBO-00017788.docx DOCX document
Attachment E - Price Proposal S-DASOBO-00017788.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
S-DASOBO-00017788 CRM and Licensing Solution Request for Proposal.docx DOCX document
Attachment C - Proposer Information and Certification Sheet S-DASOBO-00017788.docx DOCX document
Attachment I - OneODA CRM Licensing System Integrations S-DASOBO-00017788.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment A -Sample Contract_S-DASOBO-00017788.docx DOCX document
Attachment J eis-css-oregon-standards-spreadsheet S-DASOBO-00017788.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment G - Responsibility Inquiry.docx DOCX document
Attachment L - OneODA CRM Licensing Oracle Tables S-DASOBO-00017788.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment F - Certified Disadvantage Business Outreach Plan S-DASOBO-00017788.docx DOCX document
Attachment B - Disclosure Exemption Affidavit S-DASOBO-00017788.docx DOCX document
Show all 12

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

RFP [###-####-##] – [RFP title]

ATTACHMENT F - REFERENCE CHECK FORM

RFP S-DASOBO-00017788 Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Licensing Solution Att D

ATTACHMENT D - REFERENCE CHECK FORM

Proposer Name:__________________________________________
Reference Entity:__________________________________________
Reference Contact Name:__________________________________________
Contact Telephone Number:__________________________________________
Contact Email Address:__________________________________________

1. For what type of services did you engage Proposer?

Comments:

Describe the services listed in response to question 1.

Comments:

Please rate the following questions on a scale of 0-10:

0 = Not satisfied 5 = Moderately satisfied 10 = Extremely satisfied.

How would you rate the Proposer’s overall quality of services provided and your overall relationship with the Proposer?

Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ How would you rate the Proposer’s delivery of service?

Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ How would you rate the Proposer’s responsiveness to customer service issues and special requests (e.g., reported problems, changes billing, etc.)?

Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ Describe Proposer’s customer service.

Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ Describe your satisfaction with the business relationship with Proposer Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ Describe Proposer’s methods for problem resolution.

Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ How likely would you be to use Proposer’s services again?

Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ With which aspect(s) of Proposer’s services are you the most satisfied?

Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ With which aspect(s) of Proposer’s services are you the least satisfied?

Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ How well did Proposer stay within the proposed timeline?

Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ How did the final project cost compare to the initial proposed cost?

Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________

Version 1.0 - November 19, 2014Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of 2

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .