Evaluation of Responses Sample Clauses

Evaluation of Responses. The WCCA will make the awards based on the quote being: a) compliant to the stated or implied specifications; b) references and background information submitted c) the lowest evaluated cost to the WCCA over projected useful life; and d) administratively compliant, including all required bonds, insurance, established quality of work and general reputation financial responsibility, relevant experience, compliance with federal laws and all relevant District of Columbia laws, including EEOC hiring guidelines and requirements under the American with Disability Act and related criteria.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (4)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Evaluation of Responses. C.1 The WCCA will make the award based on the contractor’s response which is: a. Compliant to the stated or implied specifications; b. Lowest evaluated cost to the WCCA over projected useful life; and c. Administratively compliant including all required bonds, insurance, established quality of work and general reputation financial responsibility, relevant experience, compliance with federal laws and all relevant District of Columbia laws, including EEOC hiring guidelines and requirements under the American with Disabilities Act and related criteria, if applicable.
Sample 1
Evaluation of Responses. 8.1 DECC will select the applicant that provides the most economically advantageous bid to be its preferred supplier.
Sample 1
Evaluation of Responses. The Department shall evaluate the Bidders’ Phase I submissions described in this solicitation, to identify responsive and responsible Bidders who will be invited to participate in the Online Reverse Auction. Responses that do not meet all requirements of the solicitation or fail to provide all required information, documents, or materials may be rejected as non-responsive. Bidders whose responses, past performance, or current performance do not reflect the capability, integrity, or reliability to fully and in good faith perform the requirements of a Contract may be rejected as non- responsible.
Sample 1
Evaluation of Responses. All properly submitted RFQ Packages shall be evaluated by an Evaluation Committee. Each Evaluation Committee Team Member will receive a set of all of the RFQ Packages submitted, a copy of the RFQ Document with all issued Addenda, an Evaluator’s Score Sheet, and Evaluator’s Score Narrative Sheet. The Team shall then evaluate each RFQ Package according to the criteria described herein. Each Evaluation Team Member shall evaluate the RFQ Packages individually, with no communication, coordination, or influence from any other Evaluation Team Member, or any other individual. Scores for each Respondent shall be recorded on the Evaluator’s Score Sheet. A public Evaluation Meeting will be held by the SJC Purchasing Department to record the scores from each Evaluation Committee Member, and rank the firms’ scores highest to lowest. The County desires to avoid the expense to all parties of unnecessary presentations; however, the County may elect to conduct oral interviews or presentations from one or more of the respondents in order to make a final determination of the top rankings. If the County elects to conduct oral interviews or presentations, selected firms will be notified. All such presentations or interviews shall be open to the public. County Staff may consider any evidence available regarding financial, technical, other qualifications and abilities of a respondent, including past performance (experience) with the County prior to recommending approval of award to the St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners. The St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, waive minor formalities or award to / negotiate with the firms whose proposals best serve the interests of the County.
Sample 1
Evaluation of Responses. ‌ The Operating Committee has the final authority and discretion to evaluate the responses from each Prospective ASP that submits a response to the RFP (ASP Proposal), noting that the following criteria (which are not set out in a particular order) are relevant but not binding to the appointment: (a) compliance with the criteria of the RFP as outlined in clause 6.2; (b) agreement to contract on the basis specified in the RFP;
Sample 1
Evaluation of Responses. A. Rejection of Responses - The Miami Parking Authority may reject a response for any of the following reasons: (1) Bidder/Proposer fails to acknowledge receipt of Addenda; (2) Bidder Proposer misstates or conceals any material fact in the Response; (3) Response does not conform to the requirements of the Formal Solicitation; (4) Response requires a conditional award that conflicts with the method of award; (5) Response does not include required samples, certificates, licenses as required and; (6) Response was not executed by the Bidder’s/Proposer’s authorized agent; (7) Bidder/Proposer is not registered in the Florida Division of Corporations; (8) Responses vary from the provided specifications. The foregoing is not an all-inclusive list of reasons for which a Response may be rejected. The MPA may reject and re- advertise for all or any part of the Formal Solicitation whenever it is deemed in the best interest of the MPA.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Evaluation of Responses 
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (4)

Related to Evaluation of Responses

  • Determination of Responsiveness 28.1 The Procuring Entity's determination of a Tender's responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the Tender itself, as defined in ITT28.2.

  • Timing of Response Intermediary agrees to execute instructions as soon as reasonably practicable, but not later than five business days after receipt of the instructions by the Intermediary.

  • Limitation of Responsibility Notwithstanding any other provisions ---------------------------- hereof, Committee Members shall be liable to the parties only for actions constituting bad faith, gross negligence or breach of an express provision of this Agreement (so long as such breach remains uncured after ten (10) days of receiving notice of the nature of such breach). In all other respects, Committee Members shall not be liable for negligence or mistakes of judgment.

  • Areas of Responsibility The lateral and vertical limits of the respective areas of responsibility are as follows:

  • Form and Timing of Response (a) Intermediary agrees to provide, promptly upon request of the Fund or its designee, the requested information specified in paragraph 1 above. If requested by the Fund or its designee, Intermediary agrees to use best efforts to determine promptly whether any specific person about whom it has received the identification and transaction information specified in paragraph 1 is itself a financial intermediary (“indirect intermediary”) and, upon further request of the Fund or its designee, promptly either (i) provide (or arrange to have provided) the information set forth in paragraph 1 for those shareholders who hold an account with an indirect intermediary or (ii) restrict or prohibit the indirect intermediary from purchasing, in nominee name on behalf of other persons, securities issued by the Fund. (b) Responses required by this paragraph must be communicated in writing and in a format mutually agreed upon by the parties. (c) To the extent practicable, the format for any transaction information provided to the Fund should be consistent with the NSCC Standardized Data Reporting Format

  • Scope of Responsibility Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, the Escrow Agent is obligated only to perform the duties specifically set forth in this Escrow Agreement, which shall be deemed purely ministerial in nature. Under no circumstances will the Escrow Agent be deemed to be a fiduciary to any Party or any other person under this Escrow Agreement. The Escrow Agent will not be responsible or liable for the failure of any Party to perform in accordance with this Escrow Agreement. The Escrow Agent shall neither be responsible for, nor chargeable with, knowledge of the terms and conditions of any other agreement, instrument, or document other than this Escrow Agreement, whether or not an original or a copy of such agreement has been provided to the Escrow Agent; and the Escrow Agent shall have no duty to know or inquire as to the performance or nonperformance of any provision of any such agreement, instrument, or document. References in this Escrow Agreement to any other agreement, instrument, or document are for the convenience of the Parties, and the Escrow Agent has no duties or obligations with respect thereto. This Escrow Agreement sets forth all matters pertinent to the escrow contemplated hereunder, and no additional obligations of the Escrow Agent shall be inferred or implied from the terms of this Escrow Agreement or any other agreement.

  • Allocation of Responsibility The City assumes no responsibility for the tax consequences of any VEBA contributions made by or on behalf of any member. Each union that elects to require VEBA contributions for the benefit of its members assumes sole responsibility for insuring that the VEBA complies with all applicable laws, including, without limitation, the Internal Revenue Code, and agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless for any taxes, penalties and any other costs and expenses resulting from such contributions.

  • Extent of Responsibility The Construction Manager shall exercise reasonable care in preparing schedules and estimates. The Construction Manager, however, does not warrant or guarantee estimates and schedules except as may be included as part of the Guaranteed Maximum Price. The Construction Manager is not required to ascertain that the Drawings and Specifications are in accordance with applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules and regulations, or lawful orders of public authorities, but the Construction Manager shall promptly report to the Architect and Owner any nonconformity discovered by or made known to the Construction Manager as a request for information in such form as the Architect may require.

  • PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY (APPLIES TO RNS ONLY 19.01 The parties agree that resident care is enhanced if concerns relating to professional practice and workload are resolved in a timely and effective manner, as set out below; In the event that the Home assigns a number of residents or a workload to an individual employee or group of employees, such that she or they have cause to believe that she or they are being asked to perform more work than is consistent with proper resident care, she or they shall: i) At the time the workload issue occurs, discuss the issue within the Home to develop strategies to meet resident care needs using current resources. If necessary, using established lines of communication, seek immediate assistance from an individual(s) identified by the Home who has responsibility for timely resolution of workload issues. ii) Failing resolution at the time of occurrence of the workload issue, complain in writing to the Union-Management Committee within twenty (20) calendar days of the alleged improper assignment. The chairperson of the Union-Management Committee shall convene a meeting of the Union-Management Committee within twenty (20) calendar days of the filing of the complaint. The Union-Management Committee shall hear and attempt to resolve the complaint to the satisfaction of both parties. The Employer will provide a written response to the Union, with a copy to the ONA representation within ten (10) calendar days. iii) Prior to the complaint being forwarded to the Independent Assessment Committee, the Union may forward a written report outlining the complaint and recommendations to the Director of Resident Care and/or the Administrator. iv) At any time during this process, the parties may agree to the use of a mediator to assist in the resolution of the Professional Practice issues. v) Any settlement arrived at under 19.01 (a) i) – iii) shall be signed by the parties. vi) Failing resolution of the complaint within twenty (20) calendar days of the meeting of the Union-Management Committee, the complaint shall be forwarded to an independent Assessment Committee composed of three (3) registered nurses; one chosen by the Ontario Nurses' Association, one chosen by the Home and one chosen from a panel of independent registered nurses who are well respected within the profession. The member of the Committee chosen from the panel of independent registered nurses shall act as Chairperson. vii) The Independent Assessment Committee shall set a date to conduct a hearing into the complaint, within twenty (20) calendar days of its appointment, and shall be empowered to investigate as is necessary to properly assess the merits of the complaint. The Independent Assessment Committee shall report its findings, in writing, to the parties within twenty (20) calendar days following completion of its hearing. (b) i) The list of Independent Assessment Committee Chairpersons is attached as Appendix “B”. The members of the panel shall sit in rotation as agreed by the parties. If a panel member is unable to sit within the time limit stipulated, the panel member next scheduled to sit will be appointed by the parties.

  • Waiver of responsibility 1. Any appraisal of the Programme undertaken before or after its approval by the FMC, does not in any way diminish the responsibility of the National Focal Point and the Programme Operator to verify and confirm the correctness of the documents and information forming the basis of the programme agreement. 2. Nothing contained in the programme agreement shall be construed as imposing upon the FMC or the FMO any responsibility of any kind for the supervision, execution, completion, or operation of the Programme or its projects. 3. The FMC does not assume any risk or responsibility whatsoever for any damages, injuries, or other possible adverse effects caused by the Programme or its projects including, but not limited to inconsistencies in the planning of the Programme or its projects, other project(s) that might affect it or that it might affect, or public discontent. It is the full and sole responsibility of the National Focal Point and the Programme Operator to satisfactorily address such issues. 4. Neither the National Focal Point, the Programme Operator, entities involved in the implementation of projects, nor any other party shall have recourse to the FMC for further financial support or assistance to the Programme in whatsoever form over and above what has been provided for in the programme agreement. 5. Neither the European Free Trade Association, its Secretariat, including the FMO, its officials or employees, nor the FMC, its members or alternate members, nor the EFTA States, can be held liable for any damages or injuries of whatever nature sustained by the National Focal Point or the Beneficiary State, the Programme Operator, Project Promoters or any other third person, in connection, be it direct or indirect, with this programme agreement. 6. Nothing in this programme agreement shall be construed as a waiver of diplomatic immunities and privileges awarded to the European Free Trade Association, its assets, officials or employees.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!