You govern. I'll run the evaluation.

Municipal software 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. Muni IQ is the framework I use to close that gap, and I carry the bulk of the work so your team doesn't have to.


The problem

The experience gap is real, and vendors know it

A vendor sales representative has participated in hundreds of procurement conversations.

They know what questions get asked, how to handle a budget objection, and how to guide a demonstration toward a favorable conclusion.

Your finance director or department head may be encountering a major software decision for the first time.

That is not a fair starting position. And it shows up in the decisions, in contracts signed without exit clauses, in implementations that run twice as long as promised, in annual fees that escalate with no cap.

““This is an administrative and financial decision that happens to involve technology. It deserves to be treated that way.””

Before the process starts

The first question is whether you need new software at all

Before any vendor is contacted, I look at what your municipality is already running.

Platforms get replaced for reasons that do not always hold up under scrutiny. A system that feels broken is sometimes just misconfigured. A gap in capability is sometimes addressable with a module you already own or an integration that costs a fraction of a full replacement.

I have no financial interest in whether you buy new software. If the honest assessment is that your current system can be made to work, that is what I will tell you. A procurement cycle that did not need to happen is not a win for anyone except the vendor who sold it.

If replacement is warranted, we move forward with a structured evaluation. If it is not, you have that answer documented and you have not spent six months of staff time finding out.

A structured process, start to finish

  • 01 Planning

    Define requirements before vendors enter the conversation

  • 02 Discovery

    Screen 5–8 candidates with a standardized RFI

  • 03 Evaluation

    Score finalists against weighted criteria, objectively

  • 04 Decision

    Deliver a brief your council or board can act on

  • 05 Protection

    Review contract terms before anything is signed

Any platform your municipality depends on

  • Financial management and ERP

  • Utility billing

  • Permitting and inspections

  • HR and payroll

  • Court management

  • Public safety and asset management

The framework is the same regardless of what is being evaluated. The functional requirements adapt to the platform. The scoring engine, documentation, and process discipline do not change.

Scope

What you get

  • Your time back

    I carry the evaluation workload. Your team provides input at the right moments.

    Nobody is buried in vendor documents on top of everything else they are responsible for.

  • Experience on your side

    Vendor representatives have done this hundreds of times.

    I have run enough of these evaluations to know where the gaps hide, which questions matter, and what a response that sounds good actually means.

  • Vendor-neutral analysis

    I do not represent vendors. I do not receive referral fees.

    The only outcome I am working toward is a well-informed decision for your municipality, whatever that turns out to be.

  • Contract review

    Before anything is signed, the contract is reviewed against what the vendor actually promised.

    Annual escalation caps, exit rights, data ownership — none of it gets skipped.

If you are facing one of these decisions, it is worth a conversation

I work with municipalities, school boards, departments, etc on an engagement basis.

No pitch deck, no discovery call that turns into a presentation. Just a direct conversation about what you are evaluating and whether this is the right fit.