We use cookies on our site to analyze traffic, enhance your experience, and provide you with tailored content.

For more information visit our privacy policy.

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Sample Clauses

Combined Technical/Risk Rating. The combined technical/risk rating for each subfactor includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. The technical rating evaluates the quality of the offeror’s technical solution for meeting the Government’s requirements and the degree to which the offeror’s proposal meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements. If an offeror’s proposal demonstrates a material failure to meet a Government requirement, this is a deficiency in the offeror’s proposal resulting in a Red/Unacceptable rating and the proposal is not awardable. The severity of the deficiency will determine if the offeror will be able to correct the deficiency through discussions. The combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in Table 3 of the DoD Source Selection Procedures and the risk descriptions set forth in Table 2B.
Sample 1
Combined Technical/Risk Rating. The following combined technical/risk ratings include consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings and will be used for the Technical Capability evaluation.
Sample 1
Combined Technical/Risk Rating. Adjectival Rating Description Adjectival Rating Description Evaluation Term Definition
Sample 1
Combined Technical/Risk Rating. Rating Description
Sample 1
Combined Technical/Risk Rating. Rating Description Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements, contains multiple strengths and risk of unsuccessful performance is very low. Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements, contains at least one strength and risk of unsuccessful performance is low. Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate. Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high. Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.
Sample 1
Combined Technical/Risk Rating. 1. The offeror will be evaluated on offeror’s capability/capacity of schedule planning and understanding of the requirements in order to determine if the offeror will be able to meet the required delivery date. 2. The Technical factor will be rated as follows: Adjectival Rating Description Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach to meeting the required delivery date, with an appropriate planning schedule and it contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low. Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach to meeting the required delivery date, with an appropriate planning schedule and it contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate. Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach to meeting the required delivery date, with an appropriate planning schedule and capacity and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate. Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach to meeting the required delivery date, with an appropriate planning schedule and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high. Proposal is unawardable. Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable. Rating Description Low Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties. Moderate Can potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased costs or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties. High Is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring. 1. As required by DFARS 215.304, Small Business Participation is an evaluation factor in this acquisition. The Offeror shall submit a Small Business Participation plan. Small Business Participation is evaluated in order to support the Government policy that Small Businesses be provided maximum practicable opportunities in Government acquisitions. This section applies to all Offerors (large and small). This is NOT an assessment of a small business subcontracting plan (IAW FAR 19.7)...
Sample 1
Combined Technical/Risk Rating. The Technical proposals will be measured against evaluation criteria at the subfactor and/or aspect level, as applicable. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the excesses, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. In conducting the assessment, the Government will also consider information provided in the proposal as to how the Offeror will manage and mitigate risk. Each subfactor/aspect shall be assigned a color rating, shown below, as defined in the DoD Source Selection Procedures. The aspect color ratings will be rolled up into an overall subfactor color rating; however, the subfactor color ratings will not be rolled up into an overall color rating for the entire Technical Factor. To be eligible for award, all subfactors must receive a minimum color rating of
Sample 1
Combined Technical/Risk Rating. Rating Description Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low. Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate. Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high. Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable. Low Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties. Moderate Proposal contains significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties. High Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring. Unacceptable Proposal contains a material failure or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level.
Sample 1
Combined Technical/Risk Rating. Adjectival Rating Description
Sample 1

Related to Combined Technical/Risk Rating

  • Industry Ratings The City will only accept coverage from an insurance carrier who offers proof that it: a. Is authorized to do business in the State of Kansas; b. Carries a Best's policyholder rating of A- or better; and c. Carries at least a Class VIII financial rating; or d. Is a company mutually agreed upon by the City and Consulting Engineer/Architect.

  • Liquidity Risk Measurement Services Not Applicable.

  • Insurance Carrier Rating Coverages provided by Contractor must be underwritten by an insurance company deemed acceptable to the State of Washington’s Office of Risk Management. Insurance coverage shall be provided by companies authorized to do business within the State of Washington and rated A- Class VII or better in the most recently published edition of Best’s Insurance Rating. Enterprise Services reserves the right to reject all or any insurance carrier(s) with an unacceptable financial rating.

  • Maintenance of Ratings At all times, Borrower shall use commercially reasonable efforts to maintain (x) a corporate family rating issued by Xxxxx’x and a corporate credit rating issued by S&P and (y) public ratings issued by Xxxxx’x and S&P with respect to its senior secured debt.

  • Originating Switched Access Detail Usage Data A category 1101XX record as defined in the EMI Telcordia Practice BR-010-200- 010.

  • Benchmarks for Measuring Accessibility For the purposes of this Agreement, the accessibility of online content and functionality will be measured according to the W3C’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA and the Web Accessibility Initiative Accessible Rich Internet Applications Suite (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 for web content, which are incorporated by reference.

  • Loop Testing/Trouble Reporting 2.1.6.1 Telepak Networks will be responsible for testing and isolating troubles on the Loops. Telepak Networks must test and isolate trouble to the BellSouth portion of a designed/non-designed unbundled Loop (e.g., UVL-SL2, UCL-D, UVL-SL1, UCL-ND, etc.) before reporting repair to the UNE Customer Wholesale Interconnection Network Services (CWINS) Center. Upon request from BellSouth at the time of the trouble report, Telepak Networks will be required to provide the results of the Telepak Networks test which indicate a problem on the BellSouth provided Loop. 2.1.6.2 Once Telepak Networks has isolated a trouble to the BellSouth provided Loop, and had issued a trouble report to BellSouth on the Loop, BellSouth will take the actions necessary to repair the Loop if a trouble actually exists. BellSouth will repair these Loops in the same time frames that BellSouth repairs similarly situated Loops to its End Users. 2.1.6.3 If Telepak Networks reports a trouble on a non-designed or designed Loop and no trouble actually exists, BellSouth will charge Telepak Networks for any dispatching and testing (both inside and outside the CO) required by BellSouth in order to confirm the Loop’s working status. 2.1.6.4 In the event BellSouth must dispatch to the end-user’s location more than once due to incorrect or incomplete information provided by Telepak Networks (e.g., incomplete address, incorrect contact name/number, etc.), BellSouth will xxxx Xxxxxxx Networks for each additional dispatch required to repair the circuit due to the incorrect/incomplete information provided. BellSouth will assess the applicable Trouble Determination rates from BellSouth’s FCC or state tariffs.

  • Debt Rating The Liquidity Provider has a short-term debt ratings of “P-1” from Xxxxx’x and “F1+” from Fitch.

  • Sector Sub-Sector Industry Classification Level of Government Type of Obligation Description of Measure Source of Measure All sectors : : - : Central : National Treatment Senior Management and Board of Directors : National Treatment and the Senior Management and Board of Directors obligations shall not apply to any measure relating to small and medium sized domestic market enterprise2. Foreign equity is restricted to a maximum of 40% for domestic market enterprises with paid-in equity capital of less than the equivalent of USD 200,000 Note: Members of the Board of Directors or governing body of corporation or associations shall be allowed in proportion to their allowable participation or share in the capital of such enterprises. : -1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. - Foreign Investments Act of 1991 (R.A. No. 7042, as amended by R.A. No. 8179). -Presidential and Administrative Issuances. ∞ 2 The concept of a small and medium sized domestic market enterprise is an enterprise with paid in equity capital of less than the equivalent of USD 200,000.00.

  • Royalty Rates In further consideration of the licenses and other rights granted to NVS under this Agreement, during the Royalty Term for a Product in a country (other than for U.S. [***] Products), NVS will pay HMI royalties based on the aggregate Net Sales by NVS, its Affiliates, and its Sublicensees in a Calendar Year of (a) all Ophthalmic Products during the Royalty Term for each such Product in such country at the rates set forth in Table 11.7.1(a) below, (b) all [***] Products in the Ex-Vivo Field during the Royalty Term for each such Product in such country at the rates set forth in Table 11.7.1(b) below, and (c) all In-Vivo [***] Products outside of the U.S. during the Royalty Term for each such Product in such country at the rates set forth in Table 11.7.1(c) below. The royalty payments made pursuant to this Section 11.7.1 (Royalty Rates), the “Royalties” and the rates set forth in Table 11.7.1(a), Table 11.7.1(b), and Table 11.7.1(c), the “Royalty Rates.” (a) Royalty Rates for Ophthalmic Products (b) Royalty Rates for [***] Products in the Ex-Vivo Field Net Sales of all [***] Products in the Ex-Vivo Field Royalty Rate Royalty Floor [***] [ ***]% [ ***]% [***] [ ***]% [ ***]% [***] [ ***]% [ ***]% (c) Royalty Rates for In-Vivo [***] Products Net Sales of all In-Vivo [***] Products outside of the U.S. Royalty Rate Royalty Floor [***] [ ***]% [ ***]% [***] [ ***]% [ ***]% [***] [ ***]% [ ***]% By way of example only, if NVS receives $[***] in Net Sales of all Ophthalmic Products during a given Calendar Year, then the Royalties payable by NVS under this Section 11.7.1 (Royalty Rates) with respect to such Ophthalmic Products during such Calendar Year would be calculated as follows: Royalty = [***] = $[***] + [***] = $[***] + [***] = $[***] = $[***]

Most Referenced Clauses

Most Referenced Definitions