Attachment_D_References-OregonBuys Bid Number S-DASOBO-00003117_Statewide Disparity Study.doc
DOC document 40 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Statewide Disparity Study
- Solicitation number
- S-DASOBO-00003117
- Issued by
- Marion County, Oregon
About this file
This document is a Reference Check Form related to a Statewide Disparity Study contract opportunity for the state of Oregon. The contract involves Marion County and the cities of Salem. The form requests references to provide feedback on the proposer's overall quality of services, commitment to diversity and inclusion, responsiveness to customer service, adherence to schedule and budget, and accuracy of work. Respondents are asked to rate these areas on a scale of 0-5, with 5 being extremely satisfied. The form also seeks information on the proposer's strengths, areas for improvement, and processes used to include community members.
The Statewide Disparity Study contract opportunity covers the state of Oregon and the specific jurisdictions of Marion County and the cities of Salem. No other pricing, set aside, incumbent, funding, or contract term details are provided in the document.
View the file
Other files
Show all 13
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
RFP [###-####-##] – [RFP title]
ATTACHMENT F - REFERENCE CHECK FORM
OregonBuys Bid Number S-DASOBO-00003117–Statewide Disparity Study
Att D
ATTACHMENT D - REFERENCE CHECK FORM
Proposer Name:
Reference Entity:
Reference Contact Name:
Contact Telephone Number:
Contact Email Address:
This Reference Check Form must be completed by the Reference Entity and returned to the Proposer:
Completed reference forms must be submitted with Proposer’s Proposal or it will not be scored.
Please respond to the following questions.
Please provide a project name and a brief description of the services provided by Proposer:
What strengths did Proposer bring to your project?
What areas of service does Proposer need to improve?
What processes and practices did Proposer intentionally use to include community members?
Please rate the following questions on a scale of 0-5:
0 = Not satisfied 5 = Extremely satisfied.
1. How would you rate the Proposer’s overall quality of services?
Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________
2. How would you rate the Proposer’s commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion?
Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________
3. How would you rate the Proposer’s responsiveness to customer service issues and special requests (e.g., reported problems, changes billing, etc.)?
Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________
4. How well did Proposer stay on schedule?
Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________
5. How well did Proposer stay within budget?
Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________
6. Considering data and attention to detail, please rate the accuracy of the work provided by Proposer.
Score: __________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ Version 1.0 - November 19, 2014
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .