Evaluation and Selection. A selection committee consisting of RIHousing employees (the “Committee”) will review all proposals and make a determination based on the following factors: • Professional capacity to undertake the Scope of Work • Proposed fee structure • Ability to perform within time and budget constraints • Evaluation of potential work plans • Previous work experience and performance with RIHousing and/or similar organizations • Recommendations by references • Firm minority status and affirmative action program or activities • Foreign language capabilities • Other pertinent information submitted. RIHousing may invite one or more finalists to make presentations. In its sole discretion, RIHousing may negotiate with one or more firms who have submitted qualifications to submit more detailed proposals on specific projects as they arise. By this Request for Proposals, RIHousing has not committed itself to undertake the work set forth. RIHousing reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, to rebid the original or amended scope of services and to enter into negotiations with one or more respondents. RIHousing reserves the right to make those decisions after receipt of responses. RIHousing’s decision on these matters is final. For additional information contact: Xxxx Xxxxxxxxx, Assistant Director of Development at xxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx and Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxx, Lead Program Coordinator at xxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx. Proposals should be concise and include all attachments and work samples. Proposals should be presented on business letterhead.
Evaluation and Selection. 3.1 The information furnished by each firm shall be scrutinized and evaluated by the Authority and 1 (one) point shall be awarded for each annual audit of the companies specified in Paragraph 2 above. For the avoidance of doubt and by way of illustration, a firm which has conducted audit of the annual accounts of any such company for 5 (five) years shall be awarded 5 (five) points.
3.2 The Authority shall prepare a list of all the eligible firms along with the points scored by each such firm and 5 (five) firms scoring the highest points shall be identified and included in the draft Panel of Chartered Accountants.
Evaluation and Selection. Proposals shall be reviewed by a technical evaluation committee (“TEC”) comprised of staff from State agencies. The TEC first shall consider technical proposals. Technical proposals must receive a minimum of 60 (85.7%) out of a maximum of 70 points to advance to the cost evaluation phase. Any technical proposals scoring less than the minimum points shall not have the accompanying cost or ISBE participation proposals opened and evaluated. The proposal will be dropped from further consideration. Technical proposals scoring the minimum points or higher will have the cost proposals evaluated and assigned up to a maximum of 30 points in cost category bringing the total potential evaluation score to 100 points. After total possible evaluation points are determined ISBE proposals shall be evaluated and assigned up to 6 bonus points for ISBE participation. The Division of Purchases reserves the right to select the vendor(s) or firm(s) (“vendor”) that it deems to be most qualified to provide the goods and/or services as specified herein; and, conversely, reserves the right to cancel the solicitation in its entirety in its sole discretion. Proposals shall be reviewed and scored based upon the following criteria: Organizational Background: 20 Points Goals and Objectives: 10 Points Approach/Project Work Plan: 25 Points Evaluation and Monitoring: 10 Points Project Staff and Organization: 5 Points Total Possible Technical Points 70 Points Cost Proposal*: 30 Points ISBE Participation** 6 Bonus Points *Cost Proposal: The vendor with the lowest cost proposal shall receive one hundred percent (100%) of the available points for cost. All other vendors shall be awarded cost points based upon the following formula: For example: If the vendor with the lowest cost proposal (Vendor A) bids $65,000 and Vendor B bids $100,000 for monthly costs and service fees and the total points available are thirty (30), Vendor B’s cost points are calculated as follows: **ISBE Participation Evaluation:
a. Calculation of ISBE Participation Rate
1. ISBE Participation Rate for Non-ISBE Vendors. The ISBE participation rate for non-ISBE vendors shall be expressed as a percentage and shall be calculated by dividing the amount of non-ISBE vendor’s total contract price that will be subcontracted to ISBEs by the non-ISBE vendor’s total contract price. For example, if the non-ISBE’s total contract price is $100,000.00 and it subcontracts a total of $12,000.00 to ISBEs, the non-ISBE’s ISBE participation ra...
Evaluation and Selection. Where tests may be required, they shall be conducted individually in a private area. Based upon qualifications, training required and seniority, applications will be reviewed and interviews conducted. The employee's supervisor/manager will be informed once the employee has been selected for an interview. Prior to conducting interviews, applicants not selected for an interview will be notified by the Human Resources Manager or his designate. Selection of the successful applicant for a posted position will normally be made within five
Evaluation and Selection. The evaluation and selection procedures were handled by the coordinating part- ners and the same strict set of rules as they were applied as in regular EU framework proposals. International experts were asked to evaluate the propo- sals, taking potential conflicts of interest into account. Three independent experts acted as evaluators for each proposal in the first evaluation step, which was perfomed remotely using web forms and a blog func- tionality for the discussion between the experts to come to a consolidated assess- ment. In one single physical meeting per call, a subset of the experts involved in the remote evaluations formed a panel with the task of calibrating the individual evaluation reports and scores and to set up a fully ranked list of all proposals which passed the thresholds and were therefore eligible for funding. As the num- ber of these proposals exceeded the indicative budget reserved for each call, only the highest-ranked proposals according to this budget were finally selected for funding.
Evaluation and Selection. 7.1 Technical Proposal
Evaluation and Selection. 1. At the time of bid opening, each bid proposal’s total and any small business and/or micro business information (if applicable) will be read aloud. Bids are considered preliminary pending review and verification of applicable bid requirements such as: small business preference, qualifications, or other requirements as stated in the IFB. Agreements will be awarded to the lowest responsive responsible bidder.
2. Each bid will be checked for the presence or absence of required information in conformance with the submission requirements of this IFB. DGS, PD will check the bid submittal package to verify it received all required documents. Positive verification of required documents will be performed to determine its responsiveness to the State's needs.
3. Bid that contain false or misleading statements, or which provide references which do not support an attribute or condition claimed by the Bidder, may be rejected.
4. Bid Evaluation
a. Items submitted in response to Minimum Bidding Qualifications will be evaluated on a pass or fail basis.
b. Cost Worksheets will be evaluated based on the Cost Baseline methodology shown below.
c. All compliant Bidders that have “Core Services” total costs of at or below the Cost Baseline will be awarded contracts by region and category.
d. The Cost Baseline will be established by averaging the costs for all bidders by Category/Region and multiplying the average by 1.15.
e. A responsive and responsible bidder whose “Core Services” total costs are equal to or less than the baseline are eligible for MSA award. Illustration of Calculating Cost Baseline Score for “Core Services” Bidder Mandatory Total Cost Averaged Cost Baseline Total Compared to Baseline Eligible for Award A $16,781 $16,986.20 $19,534.13 Less than Baseline Yes B $14,875 $16,986.20 $19,534.13 Less than Baseline Yes C $17,450 $16,986.20 $19,534.13 Less than Baseline Yes D $15,075 $16,986.20 $19,534.13 Less than Baseline Yes E $20,750 $16,986.20 $19,534.13 More than Baseline No
i) Bidders A, B, C, and D would be eligible for contract award because their costs were below the calculated 15% Baseline.
ii) Bidder E would not be eligible for contract awards because its costs were more than 15 percent above the Baseline.
f. The costs entered in the "Add-on Services” section of each category will not be included (weighted) in the Cost Baseline Score for contract award purposes. However, once the weighted Cost Baseline Score and evaluation for “Core Services” is completed ...
Evaluation and Selection. 7.1 Applications that do not comply with these contest ground rules, including the submission of all documents that must be attached, will automatically be considered as outside the rules and will not be resubmitted to the evaluation process.
Evaluation and Selection. AECOM shall evaluate proposals in accordance with the County’s procurement rules and in close coordination with the County’s Evaluation Committee to compare and summarize key information. The Evaluation Committee shall be assembled by the County with AECOM’s participation. Deliverables for this phase include a Response Review and Analysis Memo and a Preferred Option Analysis Summary.
Evaluation and Selection. 7.1 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
