SLED Opportunity · MASSACHUSETTS · CITY OF CAMBRIDGE
AI Summary
The City of Cambridge seeks proposals for a Development Economics Consultancy to analyze real estate development economics and zoning impacts. Proposals due May 14, 2026. Evaluation based on experience, references, and presentation. Submission requires technical and price proposals, compliance forms, and references.
The City of Cambridge would like to invite you to submit a proposal for RFP for Development Economics Consultancy for the City of Cambridge. Proposals are to be submitted through the Procurement Portal at https://procurement.opengov.com/portal/cambridgema. Proposals are to be submitted no later than 11:00 am on Thursday, May 14, 2026.
Highly Advantageous (HA): The team members assigned to this project have demonstrable, successful experience of more than 20 years (collectively) conducting similar analyses of real estate development economics.
Advantageous (A): The team members assigned to this project have demonstrable, successful experience of 15-19 years (collectively) conducting similar analyses of real estate development economics.
Not Advantageous (NA): The team members assigned to this project have demonstrable, successful experience of 10-14 years (collectively) conducting similar analyses of real estate development economics.
Unacceptable (U): The team members assigned to this project do not have demonstrable, successful experience of at least 10 years (collectively) conducting similar analyses of real estate development economics.
Highly Advantageous (HA): The Project Manager has demonstrable, successful experience reviewing zoning proposals and working with municipalities on at least 5 analyses similar to those described in the Scope of Services.
Advantageous (A): The Project Manager has demonstrable, successful experience reviewing zoning proposals and working with municipalities on 2-4 analyses similar to those described in the Scope of Services.
Not Advantageous (NA): The Project Manager has demonstrable, successful experience reviewing zoning proposals and working with municipalities on one analysis similar to those described in the Scope of Services.
Unacceptable (U): The Project Manager has no demonstrable, successful experience reviewing zoning proposals or has no demonstrable experience working with municipalities on any analyses similar to those described in the Scope of Services.
Highly Advantageous (HA): All three of the work examples provided are found by the Evaluation Committee to completely exemplify the type of analysis required to satisfy the Scope of Services set forth above in this RFP.
Advantageous (A): One or two of the work examples provided are found by the Evaluation Committee to completely exemplify the type of analysis required to satisfy the Scope of Services set forth above in this RFP.
Not Advantageous (NA): None of the work examples provided are found by the Evaluation Committee to perfectly exemplify the analysis required to satisfy the Scope of Services set forth above in this RFP, but the work examples nonetheless demonstrate that the team members assigned to this project possess the necessary expertise to provide the analysis required to satisfy the Scope of Services set forth above in this RFP.
Unacceptable (U): The work examples provided are found by the Evaluation Committee not to demonstrate that the team members assigned to this project possess the necessary expertise to provide the analysis required to satisfy the Scope of Services set forth above in this RFP.
Advantageous (A): All three of the work examples provided are found by the Evaluation Committee to be entirely clear and understandable to readers with varying levels of technical expertise.
Not Advantageous (NA): The three work examples provided are found by the Evaluation Committee to be clear and understandable overall but one or more work examples has components that are unclear or difficult to understand for readers with varying levels of technical expertise.
Unacceptable (U): None of the three work examples provided are found by the Evaluation Committee to be sufficiently clear or understandable to readers with varying levels of technical expertise.
Highly Advantageous (HA): The team members assigned to this project have at least 15 years (collectively) of experience and knowledge about Cambridge and the Greater Boston area in their areas of expertise as demonstrated in team members’ resumes.
Advantageous (A): The team members assigned to this project have at 10-14 years (collectively) of experience and knowledge about Cambridge and the Greater Boston area in their areas of expertise as demonstrated in team members’ resumes.
Not Advantageous (NA): The team members assigned to this project have 5-9 years (collectively) of experience and knowledge about Cambridge and the Greater Boston area in their areas of expertise as demonstrated in team members’ resumes.
Unacceptable (U): The team members assigned to this project have less than 5 years, collectively, of experience and knowledge about Cambridge and the Greater Boston area in their areas of expertise as demonstrated in team members’ resumes.
Advantageous (A): The applicant’s three references submitted, among them at least two governmental entities, provide on average positive recommendations on their experiences with the proposer, the proposer’s areas of expertise, and the proposer’s ability to complete analyses of similar scope and complexity as described in this RFP.
Not Advantageous (NA): The applicant’s three references submitted, among them at least two governmental entities, provide on average neutral recommendations on their experiences with the proposer, the proposer’s areas of expertise, and the proposer’s ability to complete analyses of similar scope and complexity as described in this RFP.
Unacceptable (U): The applicant’s three references submitted, among them at least two governmental entities, provide on average negative recommendations on their experiences with the proposer, the proposer’s areas of expertise, and the proposer’s ability to complete analyses of similar scope and complexity as described in this RFP.
Advantageous (A): The proposer’s oral presentation or interview is very clear and well organized and clearly demonstrates the proposer’s ability to communicate effectively.
Not Advantageous (NA): The proposer’s oral presentation or interview is not entirely clear or well organized but nonetheless sufficiently demonstrates the proposer’s ability to communicate effectively.
Unacceptable (U): The proposer’s oral presentation or interview is unclear, disorganized, or otherwise does not sufficiently demonstrate the proposer’s ability to communicate effectively.
Please select one
If a corporation, include the State in which you are incorporated in.
If a partnership, include the names of partners.
If an individual, include relevant information.
Please include the name, title, telephone and email address of the authorized representative
The Vendor/Contractor certifies that it has not been and currently is not debarred or suspended by any federal, state, or municipal governmental agency under G. L. c. 29, § 29F or other applicable law, nor will it contract with a debarred or suspended subcontractor on any public contract.
The Awarded Vendor must comply with the City’s request for a current Certificate of Good Standing or current Certificate of Registration from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts provided by the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s Office. Foreign Corporations not registered in the Commonwealth must comply with the City’s request for the Certificate of Good Standing from the state of incorporation.
Please attach only the technical proposal in this section. Do not include pricing information in this section.
Please attach any relevant pricing documentation to this field.
An unchecked response, a failure to respond, or a failure to meet to any of the following Quality Requirements will result in a rejection of your bid. Please check each of the following Quality Requirements as confirmations.
The team members assigned to this project have at least ten (10) years (collectively) of documented experience in real estate development markets, including at least five (5) years (collectively) of documented experience within the Greater Boston area of Massachusetts.
The Consultant can provide three (3) relevant work examples related to economic analysis of real estate development based on zoning allowances and requirements.
The Consultant will assign a significant leadership role to the Project Manager who possesses at least ten (10) years’ experience successfully managing projects of similar size and scope as described in this RFP.
The Consultant can provide positive references from at least two (2) government entities on their experiences with the Consultant in completing projects of similar scope and complexity as described in this RFP.
The Consultant will be the primary contractor for the purposes of implementation and support of services delivered under any contract entered into pursuant to this RFP.
The Consultant can and will allow the City to review documentary evidence of financial solvency upon request.
Bidders shall submit a list of three references for which the bidder has supplied similar services. References shall include contact information including contact name, addresses and telephone numbers for each to inquire as to their satisfaction with the bidders’ product and service. In addition, the City reserves the right to use itself as a reference, to contact references not listed and to otherwise perform its own due diligence when making a responsibility determination. A bid maybe rejected on the basis of one or more references reporting less than excellent past performance.
Include contact name, address and telephone #
Include contact name, address and telephone #
Include contact name, address and telephone #
Please electronically sign and upload the following documents using this URL: https://cambridgema.na4.adobesign.com/public/esignWidget?wid=CBFCIBAA3AAABLblqZhCD4UnZSN3XyfqZi9ZxGyvlhSnIlYThymiofiiHN4CtIXU4t2tYM27cVaMk7bVx6AI*
Bidder certifies that this bid is made without collusion with any other person, firm or corporation making any other bid or who otherwise would make a bid.
Example: Office Supplies
SLED stands for State, Local, and Education. These are solicitations issued by state governments, counties, cities, school districts, utilities, and higher education institutions — as opposed to federal agencies.
SamSearch Platform
AI-powered intelligence for the right opportunities, the right leads, and the right time.