Municipal Software Evaluation
for Local Government
You govern.
I'll run the evaluation.
Replacing core administrative software is one of the more consequential decisions a city manager or administrator makes. Vendors do this every day. Most municipalities do it once every several years. That gap shows up in the decisions.
- A vendor has been calling for three months and your council is starting to ask for a recommendation.
- You scheduled demos before anyone documented what the system actually needs to do.
- The last contract you signed had an annual increase clause with no cap. You found out a year later.
- Your finance director is the one managing the evaluation on top of everything else she is responsible for.
- A replacement is being discussed but nobody has checked whether the current system is actually the problem.
- You need a recommendation you can put in front of a board and defend if someone asks how you got there.
A structured evaluation, start to finish
Each phase produces documentation. From the initial needs assessment through contract review, there is a complete record of how vendors were evaluated and how every decision was made.
A complete procurement record. Not just a recommendation.
Every engagement produces nine documents. If a public records request comes in a year from now, you have a paper trail showing exactly how vendors were evaluated, how scores were calculated, and why the recommendation was made. That is not an accident. It is the point.
Choose the level of involvement that fits your situation
Some municipalities want to run the process themselves with the right tools in hand. Others want it managed start to finish. Both use the same process and produce the same documentation.
- All nine framework documents
- Evaluation Engine with weighted scoring formulas
- Quick Start Guide and Data Entry Guide
- Direct email access during your process
- Municipality-wide license, five-year term
- Full process ownership, start to finish
- Vendor research and RFI distribution
- Evaluation Engine scoring and analysis
- Reference check coordination
- Executive Decision Brief prepared for presentation
- Contract review prior to signature
Stephen Vasquez
Founder, Harbor Light Strategies
My background is in public policy and administration. For years I worked alongside the owners and operators of organizations navigating complex operational and technology decisions. Muni IQ grew out of that work, adapted specifically for the procurement realities, budget structures, and accountability standards that local government operates under.
I built this framework because the problem is real and it is structural. Vendors operate in procurement every day. Municipalities encounter major software decisions once every several years. That asymmetry does not fix itself. It produces bad contracts, bloated implementations, and decisions that are hard to defend when someone asks how you got there.
I do not represent vendors. I do not receive referral fees. The only outcome I am working toward is the right answer for your municipality, whatever that turns out to be.
Any platform your municipality depends on
The framework adapts to whatever is being evaluated. The functional requirements change to match the platform. The scoring engine, documentation structure, and process discipline do not.
The best time to reach out is before you have talked to a vendor
The second best time is before you have committed to one. If vendors are already calling, you are not too late. But the earlier we talk, the more of the process you control and the less ground you have to recover.
No pitch deck. No discovery call that turns into a presentation. A direct conversation about what you are evaluating and whether this is the right fit.