factors specifically set forth herein considered. The University may award a contract on the basis of initial proposals received, without discussions. Therefore, each initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. Discussions or negotiations may be conducted with all offerors in the competitive range. If “Best and Final” offers are requested, they will be evaluated against the same criteria as were the initial proposals. Even if the evaluation criteria listed in the RFP were deficient in some unexplained respect, Gunderson has “failed to demonstrate that such error prejudiced [his] proposal in comparison to others, since each proposal received identical treatment.” King v. Alaska State Hous. Auth., 512 P.2d 887, 894 (Alaska 1973) (<HOLDING>); see also Fairbanks N. Star Borough Sch. Dist.
holding that the denial of enforcement on the basis that the board lacked a proper quorum did not deprive the board of jurisdiction to consider the case anew holding that the record did not belie the claimants iq of 58 where he attended special education classes did not live independently and dropped out of school at a low grade either in the sixth or eighth grade holding agencys failure to assign specific grade to earthquake risk did not deprive evaluation of proposals of reasonable basis holding a higher grade than the employee being searched holding that technical inadequacy in the notice of appeal did not deprive the court of jurisdiction