EVALUATION COMPARATIVE CRITERIA Sample Clauses

EVALUATION COMPARATIVE CRITERIA. The evaluation of each proposal for STS services will be based upon the five (5) “Comparative Criteria” described in this section. Proposals which meet or exceed the Minimum Criteria will be evaluated and rated on the basis of the following Comparative Criteria. The City reserves the right to ask any proposer to provide additional supporting documentation in order to verify a response. The Evaluation Committee will assign ratings of Highly Advantageous (HA); Advantageous (A); or Not Advantageous (NA) will be given to each of the following criteria for each proposer. A composite rating will then be determined. A composite rating of Highly Advantageous or Advantageous may be assigned only if a proposal has received at least one such rating among the criteria listed below. To the extent that an Evaluation Criterion requires the certification of fact, the proposer’s certification as to that fact shall be an adequate response provided, however, that on request the proposer shall provide to the City such evidence as the City may request to support that fact. The Comparative Criteria are as follows:
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to EVALUATION COMPARATIVE CRITERIA

  • Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)

  • Performance Metrics In the event Grantee fails to timely achieve the following performance metrics (the “Performance Metrics”), then in accordance with Section 8.4 below Grantee shall upon written demand by Triumph repay to Triumph all portions of Grant theretofore funded to and received by Grantee:

  • Performance Measures and Metrics This section outlines the performance measures and metrics upon which service under this SLA will be assessed. Shared Service Centers and Customers will negotiate the performance metric, frequency, customer and provider service responsibilities associated with each performance measure. Measurements of the Port of Seattle activities are critical to improving services and are the basis for cost recovery for services provided. The Port of Seattle and The Northwest Seaport Alliance have identified activities critical to meeting The NWSA’s business requirements and have agreed upon how these activities will be assessed.

  • Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan

  • Targets a) Seller’s supplier diversity spending target for Work supporting the construction of the Project prior to the Commercial Operation Date is ____ percent (___%) as measured relative to Seller’s total expenditures on construction of the Project prior to the Commercial Operation Date, and;

  • Performance Measurement Satisfactory performance of this Contract will be measured by:

  • Metrics The DISTRICT and PARTNER will partake in monthly coordination meetings at mutually agreed upon times and dates to discuss the progress of the program Scope of Work. DISTRICT and PARTNER will also mutually establish criteria and process for ongoing program assessment/evaluation such as, but not limited to the DISTRICT’s assessment metrics and other state metrics [(Measures of Academic Progress – English, SBAC – 11th grade, Redesignation Rates, mutually developed rubric score/s, student attendance, and Social Emotional Learning (SEL) data)]. The DISTRICT and PARTNER will also engage in annual review of program content to ensure standards alignment that comply with DISTRICT approved coursework. The PARTNER will provide their impact data based upon these metrics.

  • Table 7b - Other milestones and targets Reference Number Select stage of the lifecycle Please select target type from the drop-down menu Description (500 characters maximum) Is this a collaborative target? Baseline year Baseline data Yearly milestones (numeric where possible, however you may use text) Commentary on your milestones/targets or textual description where numerical description is not appropriate (500 characters maximum)

  • PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS Upon a particular Commission’s issuance of an Order pertaining to Performance Measurements in a proceeding expressly applicable to all CLECs generally, BellSouth shall implement in that state such Performance Measurements as of the date specified by the Commission. Performance Measurements that have been Ordered in a particular state can currently be accessed via the internet at xxxx://xxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx. The following Service Quality Measurements (SQM) plan as it presently exists and as it may be modified in the future, is being included as the performance measurements currently in place for the state of Tennessee. At such time that the TRA issues a subsequent Order pertaining to Performance Measurements, such Performance Measurements shall supersede the SQM contained in the Agreement. BellSouth Service Quality Measurement Plan‌ (SQM) Tennessee Performance Metrics Measurement Descriptions Version 2.00 Issue Date: July 1, 2003 Introduction

  • Criteria (1) Annual Evaluation Criteria. All performance evaluations shall be based upon assigned duties, and shall carefully consider the nature of the assignment in terms, where applicable, of:

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.