Property Management Inspection Software

  1. Objectives:
  2. Award to an experienced, licensed, and qualified contractor to provide and maintain a cloud based property management inspection software in order to meet the goal of improved maintenance, REAC and UPCS scoring.
  1. Minimum Qualifications:
  2. The successful proposer system must be a cloud-based system within a secure cloud environment and that will allow use with IOS and Android devices.
  1. Contractor will provide complete online technical support during San Antonio Housing Authority business hours, Monday through Friday 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM CST.
  2. Contractor will provide the appropriate End User License Agreement (EULA) and all other required software license agreements.

Continued on Next Page

Request for Proposals No. 1904-208-76-4918 Property Management Inspection Software _____________________________________________________________________________

  1. Contractor will be a company engaged in the business of providing cloud-based rent reasonableness software for a minimum of three years. Recent start-up businesses do not meet the requirements of this solicitation. NOTE: A start-up business is defined as a new company that has no previous operational history or expertise in the relevant business and is not affiliated with a company that has that history or expertise. Two companies are affiliated if the companies have a common parent company or if one is the parent or subsidiary of the other.
  2. Must have ability to meet all qualifications specified in the Scope of Work (Exhibit A).
  3. Proposer must fill out Table 1 Questionnaire to be considered responsive.
  4. Evaluation: Each proposal submittal will be evaluated based upon the

following information and criteria:

  1. Initial Evaluation-Responsiveness: Each proposal received will first be evaluated for responsiveness (i.e., meeting the minimum requirements as stated in the RFP).
  1. Evaluation-Responsibility: SAHA shall select a minimum of a three-person panel, using the criteria established below, to evaluate each of the proposals submitted in response to this RFP to determine the Respondent’s level of responsibility. SAHA will consider capabilities or advantages that are clearly described in the proposal that may be confirmed by oral presentations, site visits, demonstrations, and references contacted by SAHA. All proposals would be evaluated as to their overall value to SAHA.
  2. Restrictions: All persons having familial (including in-laws) and/or employment relationships (past or current) with principals and/or employees of a Respondent will be excluded from participation on SAHA’s evaluation panel. Similarly, all persons having ownership interest in and/or contract with a Respondents will be excluded from participation on SAHA’s evaluation panel.
  3. Evaluation Criteria: The evaluation panel will use the following criteria to evaluate each proposal: 5 Excellent

4 Above Average 3 Average 2 Below Average 1 Poor 0 Non Responsive


Request for Proposals No. 1904-208-76-4918 Property Management Inspection Software _____________________________________________________________________________

No.. Points Weighted

CRITERION DESCRIPTION Average 1 0-5 15% Relevant Experience, Performance, Capacity 2 0-5 20% Respondent’s Project Management Methodology, Implementation Plan

3 0-5 25% Proposed Costs/Pricing Models 4 0-5 20% Responses to Requirements 5 0-5 15% Security and Acceptance Test Plan 6 0-5 5% Strength of the Contractor’s S/W/MBE Utilization Plan

100% Total Points for Criteria


HUD SECTION 3 POINTS 1 5 Section 3 Preference: A firm may qualify for Section 3 status for up to an

additional 5 points. a 5 Category I: As detailed in Attachment D

b 4 Category II: As detailed in Attachment D c 3 Category III: As detailed in Attachment D

d 2 Category IV: As detailed in Attachment D

E. Competitive Range: Once a competitive range is established from the proposals submitted, SAHA reserves the right to require Respondents within the competitive range to have an interview or make a presentation to the evaluation committee. Presentations and interviews, if requested, shall be a factor in the award recommendation.