New procurement of municipal financial software for the Kirchen (Sieg) municipal association administration

The valuation basis is that of the bidder in point. 7 of the price sheet (Appendix 3) total cost of ownership (TCO) for the bid comparison over a six-year baseline period and all four optional extension years. The TCO results from the sum of price sheet items 7.1 to 7.5 and includes the software license, the implementation project – including project management, installation and customizing, data migration, interfaces, test operation, production setting, hypercare phase and training, the ongoing operation – with maintenance and support over six years, the evaluation amount for optional innovation release and maintenance and support – the four optional extension years. For the innovation releases, a call with a one-time conversion fee and four annual maintenance premiums without discount is set for evaluation purposes only: item 7.4 = item 5a.1 + 4 × item 5a.2. This valuation assumption does not constitute a call obligation. The contractual possibility to call up up to two innovation releases and the billing, term and estate regulations remain unaffected. The TCO does not constitute a binding forecast or cap on the actual costs incurred. The price evaluation is carried out according to the following formula: Points = (lowest TCO of the worthwhile offers ÷ TCO of the offer to be evaluated) × 40 Maximum points are 40 points (40 %). Example: The lowest TCO of the worthwhile offers is 100,000 EUR. This offer gets 40 points. Another offer with a TCO of 125,000 EUR gets (100,000 ÷ …

Compliance with the Can criteria (35 points / 35 %) The catalogue of requirements (Annex 2) contains must criteria (A criteria) and can criteria (B criteria). Must-criteria must be met. Your non-performance leads to the exclusion of the offer. For each must-see and can-see criterion, the bidder must indicate in the catalogue of requirements in the column “Is the bidder fulfilling the requirement?” with “Yes” or “No” whether the criterion is fulfilled with the offered service. Specific proof references in the column “Proof” are exclusively for the criteria answered with “Yes” under point. 1 “Technical requirements” and point. 2 ‘System technical requirements’ is required. For this purpose, reference shall be made to an existing manual, product documentation or a document prepared specifically for the procurement procedure, indicating the title of the document and a specific chapter, digit or page indication indicating compliance directly. A blanket reference to an unequivocal reference shall not be considered as viable evidence in these two paragraphs. If no viable evidence is available, the relevant criterion shall be considered ‘no’; For a must criterion, this leads to the exclusion of the offer, for a can criterion to no points. For the other digits of the catalogue of requirements, the mandatory yes/no indication is sufficient. Missing references to evidence do not lead to an assessment with “no” there. Assessment per May criterion: • “Yes” (with viable proof): 100% of th…

Overall concept (25 points / 25 %) The tenderer must submit an overall concept together with the tender consisting of the following four partial concepts. The subject of the concept evaluation is exclusively the provider-specific implementation methodology – i.e. the “how” of the service provision (procedure model, process planning, risk management, organizational measures). On the other hand, whether the bidder provides a certain function or property is finally checked and evaluated via the must and can criteria of the catalogue of requirements (Annex 2). No double evaluation of the same subject matter shall take place. • Migration and introduction concept (25 %) • Operating concept (25 %) • Maintenance concept (25 %) • Safety concept (25 %) Form specification per sub-concept: maximum four pages DIN A4, font size 12, font Times New Roman, line spacing 1.15. Exceptions beyond this scope are not included in the evaluation. Appendices to sub-designs (e.g. model manuals, certificates) are not counted towards the number of pages, but only in addition. Weighting of the sub-concepts: The 25 points / 25% are distributed evenly among the four sub-concepts with 25% each (equivalent to 6.25% of the overall classification). Assessment measure Global concept Each sub-concept is assessed as a whole on the basis of the following scale: • 10 points – The presentation is complete, project-specific and convinces with special depth of detail. All aspects mentioned in the respective sub-concep…