Active SLED Opportunity · MASSACHUSETTS · CITY OF CAMBRIDGE
AI Summary
The City of Cambridge seeks proposals for a Social Housing Financial Consultant to conduct financial feasibility and cost benefit analyses, and provide policy recommendations for social housing development. Proposals due August 20, 2026.
The City of Cambridge would like to invite you to submit a proposal for RFP for Social Housing Financial Consultant. 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, August 20, 2026.
Highly Advantageous (HA): The team members assigned to this project have demonstrable, successful experience of more than 20 years (collectively) conducting financial feasibility analysis, cost benefit analysis and making recommendations to local governments.
Advantageous (A): The team members assigned to this project have demonstrable, successful experience of 15-19 years (collectively) conducting financial feasibility analysis, cost benefit analysis and making recommendations to local governments.
Not Advantageous (NA): The team members assigned to this project have demonstrable, successful experience of 10-14 years (collectively) conducting financial feasibility analysis, cost benefit analysis and making recommendations to local governments.
Unacceptable (U): The team members assigned to this project do not have demonstrable, successful experience of less than 10 years (collectively) conducting financial feasibility analysis, cost benefit analysis and making recommendations to local governments.
Highly Advantageous (HA): The Project Manager has demonstrable, successful experience providing financial analysis services and working with municipalities on at least 5 engagements similar to what is described in the Scope of Services.
Advantageous (A): The Project Manager has demonstrable, successful experience providing financial analysis services and working with municipalities on 2-4 projects similar to what is described in the Scope of Services.
Not Advantageous (NA): The Project Manager has demonstrable, successful experience providing financial analysis services and working with municipalities on one project similar to what is described in the Scope of Services.
Unacceptable (U): The Project Manager has no demonstrable, successful experience providing financial analysis services or has no demonstrable experience working with municipalities on any projects similar to what is described in the Scope of Services.
Highly Advantageous (HA): The project team have demonstrable, successful experience of more than 15 years (collectively) working alongside public bodies to provide analysis and recommendations that further policy and program development processes.
Advantageous (A)– The project team have demonstrable, successful experience of 10-15 years (collectively) working alongside public bodies to provide analysis and recommendations that further policy and program development processes.
Not Advantageous (NA) - The project team have demonstrable, successful experience of 5-10 years (collectively) working alongside public bodies to provide analysis and recommendations that further policy and program development processes.
Unacceptable (U) – The project team have demonstrable, successful experience of less than 5 years (collectively) working alongside public bodies to provide analysis and recommendations that further policy and program development processes.
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.
Highly Advantageous (HA): All three of the work examples provided are found by the Evaluation Committee to be entirely clear and understandable to people with varying levels of technical expertise.
Advantageous (A): The three work examples provided are found by the Evaluation Committee to be clear and understandable overall but clarity, especially for people with varying levels of technical expertise, could be improved for one or more work examples.
Not Advantageous (NA): One or two of the work examples provided are found by the Evaluation Committee to be clear and understandable overall, other work examples are not found by the Evaluation Committee to be sufficiently clear or understandable, especially to 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 applicant’s three references submitted, among them at least two governmental entities, provide on completely positive recommendations on their experiences with the proposer, the proposer’s areas of expertise, and the proposer’s ability to complete work of similar scope as described in this RFP.
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 work of similar scope 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 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 as described in this RFP.
Highly Advantageous (HA): The proposer’s oral presentation or interview is very clear, well organized, and clearly demonstrates proposer’s ability to make complex concepts understandable to a broad audience.
Advantageous (A): The proposer’s oral presentation or interview is clear and well organized and 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 Leader/Project Manager has documented experience doing work comparable to what is described in this RFP.
The Project Team has demonstrable capability in the following disciplines: housing development finance, housing policy, economic analysis, public investment, and cost-benefit analysis (it is acceptable for one consultant to have expertise in multiple disciplines).
The Project Team has assigned to this project have at least ten (10) years (collectively) of documented experience in real estate development markets and has completed a similar work involving an analysis of the financial feasibility of new housing development programs and has made policy recommendations to a municipal government taking into consideration local budget constraints and housing needs.
The Consultant has documented experience developing and sharing financial models with multiple, adjustable variable inputs that have been used by clients to evaluate financial feasibility of real estate development.
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 is financially solvent and can and provide documentation 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.