Evaluation Method. In order to assure a high quality of teacher performance and to advance the instructional programs of the District, a continuous program for teacher evaluation shall be established, and regular reports shall be made to the Board of Trustees concerning the outcome of these evaluations. The evaluation process shall include:
1. The development and periodic review of techniques and procedures for making evaluations.
Evaluation Method. The performance of all employees shall be evaluated in writing. Such evaluations shall be on the standard form provided by the District, based upon observations, and shall acknowledge the strengths of employees as well as deficiencies. The evaluator will inform the employee of any deficiency in performance in a timely manner. If a deficiency is not corrected it may result in a “Does Not Meet Standards” (DNMS) or Unsatisfactory (U) rating on the annual evaluation. Data used to support the District’s assessment for items marked DNMS or U will be shared with the employee. The evaluator shall take into consideration and note in writing any circumstances which may adversely affect an employee's performance, such as workload or physical facilities. The District’s Classified Employee Evaluation Handbook may be amended in consultation with the ESSA. The District will provide an annual evaluation of each ESSA employee by an evaluator not in the ESSA bargaining unit. A supervisor/lead will draft evaluations as input for employee evaluations. It is expected a supervisor/lead will work collaboratively with the evaluator to prepare a final evaluation. The supervisor/lead is not required to sign the final evaluation.
Evaluation Method. The teacher evaluation instrument shall be included as an appendix to the agreement. It is agreed a committee of teachers, administrators, and trustees will be formed to investigate alternate evaluation methods and forms. (Appendix B) Teachers will be evaluated on their overall performance as an employee of the district, according to the criteria in the teacher evaluation instrument.
Evaluation Method. The evaluation instrument shall be developed by seeking input from classroom teachers, administration, and the Board members. The final selection of the instrument shall be made by the Board. Evaluation of teacher performance shall be done by a properly licensed and endorsed evaluator and must be based on his/her own observations or investigations.
Evaluation Method. Only those applications which are responsive and compliant will be evaluated;
Evaluation Method. The evaluation of the Tenders is carried out in accordance with the description provided in Annex A. The award criteria used are the Economic Most Advantageous Tender by The Best Price- Quality Ration, based on the following criteria and sub-criteria: Quality 80 % - Key Personnel 65% - Resource Base 35% Price 20 %
Evaluation Method. After resolution of minor or clerical errors and/or mistakes, the Government will perform a price analysis on all proposals received. Price analysis will be performed in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, to determine the adequacy of the offer in fulfilling the requirements of the proposal. Completeness addresses the extent to which the elements of the price proposal are consistent with the requirements of the RFP. Reasonableness will be established using historical price information, price competition information, the Independent Government Estimate (IGE) and any other pricing tools necessary. Award cannot be made for project cost for design and construction exceeding the contract cost limitation described herein. Submittal of Section 00101 is not considered for evaluation, but are required as part of the offeror’s proposal of this solicitation. The information requested in this Section needs to be fully completed along with completion of Online Representations and Certifications Application in XXX. The submitted information will be reviewed for completeness by the Contracting Officer. Bid bonds will be reviewed for acceptability. Any offeror whose bid bond is unacceptable, will be eliminated without further consideration unless the Source Selection Authority/Contracting Officer later determines that discussions are necessary and decides that the offeror’s proposal should be included in the competitive range. However it is the intention of the Contracting Officer to award without discussions. Supplemental Price Breakdown. If deemed necessary to evaluate the price proposals, the Government’s will request a Phase 2 price breakdown of the Contract Line items in a sealed envelope marked “Phase 2 Price Breakdown Information”, in Excel format. The Government will provide details on where and how to send the breakdown. This information will not be needed sooner than three working days after the proposal submission due date. This information may be required for the initial Phase 2 proposal and, if requested, for any revised proposals. This information is not an opportunity for an Offeror to revise its non-price or price proposal. REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION In addition to the other Phase 1 and Phase 2 proposal information, the Contracting Officer shall use this information in making an affirmative responsibility determination for award to the Successful Offeror, in accordance with FAR Part 9.
Evaluation Method. Best value for money
Evaluation Method. Bid shall be evaluated according to partial evaluation criteria and their respective weight. Evaluation committee shall evaluate Bids according to the above partial criteria and their weight using a point system and assigning points between 0 and 100 points. Each Bid shall be assigned points reflecting it success within each specific partial criterion. For the numerically expressed partial criterion (Bid price), where the most suitable Bid shall have the minimum value, each Bid shall be assigned a point value, which shall be calculated by multiplying the ratio between the value of the most suitable Bid and the Bid being evaluated by 100 and the weight of the given criterion: Number of Most suitable Bid = 100 x x 55% For the partial criterion, which cannot be expressed numerically (Technical level and quality), the Evaluation committee shall order the Bids as follows: Evaluation committee shall assign points to each Bid according to the evaluation template, as attached hereto in Annex No. 7 - Technical evaluation template. Evaluation committee shall not perform evaluation, if only one Bid by one Supplier is submitted. Evaluation committee shall prepare a report on the Bid evaluation, which shall form a part of the notification on the selection of the Supplier within the meaning of Sec 123 PPA.
Evaluation Method. For all above performance metrics, the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will document the time of verbal notification to the contractor. The COR and NTR will document the official time and date of notification. The COR and NTR will review deliverables against performance standard and document. The COR will confirm and provide feedback to the contractor and KO.
