Vendor selection for the Student Lifecycle Project

Dear Sir or Madam,

In relation to the Student Lifecycle Project could you please
answer the following queries:

1. How many vendors tendered for this project?

2. What were your selection criteria? Please provide the model that
you used for comparing and ranking the vendor proposals. This
should include the categories that were important and the weighting
factor for each category.

3. For each vendor please provide the score for each individual
category.

4. What areas were covered during the due diligence phase for the
selected vendor?

In addition I would like further information with regard to two
previous FoI requests.

Your response to the first FoI request was:

"The total costs charged to the Student Lifecycle Project account
to 21/11/08 are £241,171. This breaks down into salary costs of
£88,877(to 31/10/08) and non pay costs of £152,294 (including
travel expenses)."
(see
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/39...)

At a later date, as part of your response to the second request:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/12...
You replied:

"The total cost to the project for staffing costs in this phase
(October 2007 to May 2009) was £272,190. In most cases the costs
related to backfill for departments and services from which team
members were seconded. The only posts which were fully funded by
the project were the fixed term project office posts. The total
cost of external programme management consultancy support during
this phase was £235,483. During the due diligence phase consultancy
was also provided by a specialist IT consultancy working in
partnership with the supplier. The costs of this were £293,982."

This indicates that £560,484 was charged to the Student Lifecycle
Project Account between 21/11/08 and May 2009.

Could you please provide a breakdown of the £560,484? In the
breakdown I would like the following information: the recipient,
the amount, the date of transaction and the purpose of each item. I
understand that salary costs cannot be broken down per individual.

Yours faithfully,

Robert Clark