Evaluation of Technical Proposals Sample Clauses

Evaluation of Technical Proposals. 22.1 The Procuring Entity's evaluation committee shall evaluate the Technical Proposals that have passed the eligibility and mandatory criteria, on the basis of their responsiveness to the Terms of Reference and the RFP. The eligibility and mandatory criteria shall include the following and any other that may include in the Data sheet. a) Firm has submitted the required number of copies of the Technical Proposals. b) Firm has submitted a sealed financial proposal. c) The Proposal is valid for the required number of days. d) The Technical Proposal is signed by the person with power of attorney, without material deviation, reservation, or omission. e) The Technical Proposal is complete with all the forms and required documentary evidence submitted. f) A valid tax compliance certificate or tax exemption certificate issued by the Kenya Revenue Authority in accordance with ITT 3.14 for Kenyan firms. g) Key Experts are from eligible countries. h) Key Experts do not appear in more than one proposal, if so required. i) A short-listed firm has not participated in more than one proposal, if so required. j) The Consultant is not insolvent, in receivership, bankrupt or in the process of being wound up. k) The Consultant, its sub-consultants and experts have not engaged in or been convicted of corrupt or fraudulent practices. l) The Consultant is neither precluded from entering into a Contract nor debarred by PPRA. m) The firm has not proposed employing public officials, civil servants and employees of public institutions. n) The Consultant, its sub-consultants and experts have no conflicts of interest. 22.2 Each responsive Proposal will be given a technical score. A Proposal shall be rejected at this stage if it does not respond to important aspects of the RFP or if it fails to achieve the minimum technical score indicated in the Data Sheet.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (4)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Evaluation of Technical Proposals. 1. The Client’s evaluation committee shall evaluate the Technical Proposals on the basis of their responsiveness to the Scope of Services and the RFP, applying the evaluation criteria, sub-criteria, and point system specified in Section 7. Each responsive proposal will be given a technical score. A proposal shall be rejected at this stage if it does not respond to important aspects of the RFP or if it fails to achieve the minimum technical score indicated in Section 7. 28.2. The Client may request any additional information, clarification and/or verification in respect of any item contained in the bids from any of the bidders. Bidders shall be obliged to respond to such request for clarification within such timeframes as may be specified by the Client.
Sample 1Sample 2
Evaluation of Technical Proposals. 2.23.1 Proposals, ZKLFK DUH QRW VXSSRUWHG E\ DGHTXDWH S not accompanied by an EMD will not be evaluated. 2.23.2 The Evaluation Committee shall evaluate the Technical Proposals only for those bidders who satisfy the pre-qualification criteria as referred in Clause No. 3 of Data Sheet. The technical proposals will be evaluated on the basis of their responses to the Terms of Reference, applying the evaluation criteria, sub-criteria, and point system specified in the Data Sheet. Evaluations will be based on documentary evidence submitted by the bidder with respect to pre-qualification / evaluation / selection criteria. Each responsive proposal will be given a technical score (Ts). A Proposal shall be rejected at this stage if it does not respond to important aspects of the RFE, and particularly the Terms of Reference or if it fails to achieve the minimum technical score indicated in the Data Sheet. The Technical proposals, which are unsigned and incomplete shall not be evaluated. 2.23.1 The proposal shall be rejected if bidder does not fulfill the eligibility criteria or the validity period of the proposal is less than 120 days. 2.23.2 During the process of evaluation of the technical proposal, the bidder will be required to make presentation on its Proposal covering Experience/ Technical Proposal including Implementation Methodology, Team Composition and Activity Schedule. The date and time of the presentation will be intimated individually.
Sample 1

Related to Evaluation of Technical Proposals

  • Technical Proposal The technical proposal may be presented in free format. It shall not exceed ten pages, not counting the CVs. It shall respect the following page limit and structure: • Technical methodology (max. 7 pages) • Quality management (max. 1 page) • Project management (max. 1 page) • Resource management (proposal (max. 1 page) + CVs of experts)

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order. (b) The technical evaluation committee may call the responsive bidders for discussion or presentation to facilitate and assess their understanding of the scope of work and its execution. However, the committee shall have sole discretion to call for discussion / presentation. (c) Financial bids of only those bidders who qualify the technical criteria will be opened provided all other requirements are fulfilled. (d) AIIMS Jodhpur shall have right to accept or reject any or all tenders without assigning any reasons thereof.

  • Evaluation of Proposals All proposals received shall be reviewed to determine whether they meet the format requirements and the standards specified in the request for sealed proposals. The district shall evaluate the qualifications of the proposers based solely upon the criteria and evaluation methodology set forth in the request for sealed proposals, and shall assign a best value score to each proposal. Once the evaluation is complete, all responsive proposals shall be ranked from the highest best value to the lowest best value to the district.

  • Evaluation of Tenders 33.1 The Procuring Entity shall use the criteria and methodologies listed in this ITT and Section III, Evaluation and Qualification criteria. No other evaluation criteria or methodologies shall be permitted. By applying the criteria and methodologies, the Procuring Entity shall determine the Lowest Evaluated Tender. This is the Tender of the Tenderer that meets the qualification criteria and whose Tender has been determined to be: a) substantially responsive to the tender documents; and b) the lowest evaluated price. 33.2 Price evaluation will be done for Items or Lots (contracts), as specified in the TDS; and the Tender Price as quoted in accordance with ITT 14. To evaluate a Tender, the Procuring Entity shall consider the following: a) price adjustment due to unconditional discounts offered in accordance with ITT 13.4; b) converting the amount resulting from applying (a) and (b) above, if relevant, to a single currency in accordance with ITT 31; c) price adjustment due to quantifiable nonmaterial non-conformities in accordance with ITT 29.3; and d) any additional evaluation factors specified in the TDS and Section III, Evaluation and Qualification Criteria. 33.3 The estimated effect of the price adjustment provisions of the Conditions of Contract, applied over the period of execution of the Contract, shall not be considered in Tender evaluation. 33.4 Where the tender involves multiple lots or contracts, the tenderer will be allowed to tender for one or more lots (contracts). Each lot or contract will be evaluated in accordance with ITT 33.

  • Technical Feasibility of String While ICANN has encouraged and will continue to encourage universal acceptance of all top-­‐level domain strings across the Internet, certain top-­‐level domain strings may encounter difficulty in acceptance by ISPs and webhosters and/or validation by web applications. Registry Operator shall be responsible for ensuring to its satisfaction the technical feasibility of the TLD string prior to entering into this Agreement.

  • DEVELOPMENT OR ASSISTANCE IN DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIFICATIONS REQUIREMENTS/ STATEMENTS OF WORK

  • Additional proposals If the Company at any time during the continuance of this Agreement desires to modify expand or otherwise vary its activities carried on pursuant to this Agreement beyond those specified in any approved proposal, it shall give notice of such desire to the Minister and within 2 months after giving such notice shall submit to the Minister detailed proposals in respect of such modifications expansions or variations and such other matters as the Minister may require. The provisions of clause 4 and 5 (including (for the avoidance of doubt) clause 5(9)) shall apply, the necessary changes being made, to proposals submitted pursuant to this clause.

  • Technical Consultations If a Party has a significant concern with respect to food safety, plant health, or animal health, or an SPS measure that the other Party has proposed or implemented, that Party may request technical consultations with the other Party. The Party that is the subject of the request should respond to the request without undue delay. Each Party shall endeavour to provide the information necessary to avoid a disruption to trade and, as the case may be, to reach a mutually acceptable solution.

  • Technical Foreign Affairs Training for professional skills of a specialized nature in the methods and techniques of such fields as foreign languages, foreign culture, intelligence (foreign affairs/intelligence), diplomacy, or strategic studies. Technical

  • Review Systems The Asset Representations Reviewer will maintain and utilize an electronic case management system to manage the Tests and provide systematic control over each step in the Review process and ensure consistency and repeatability among the Tests.

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