Mission Suitability Factor Sample Clauses

Mission Suitability Factor. Mission suitability consists of those sub-factors which indicate the ability of the Offeror to furnish excellent services. Proposals will be evaluated and scored numerically based upon the sub-factors set forth below:
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Mission Suitability Factor. The Mission Suitability factor indicates, for each Offeror, the merit or excellence of the work to be performed and the ability of the Offeror to accomplish what is offered, or the product to be delivered. The overall Mission Suitability Factor will be numerically scored, and the Mission Suitability Subfactors will be rated by adjective and numerically weighted and scored in accordance with NFS 1815.305(a)(3), "Technical Evaluation," and the following table:
Mission Suitability Factor. The Mission Suitability factor will consider how well the Offeror’s proposal demonstrates an overall understanding of the requirements. The Mission Suitability evaluation will also consider whether the resources proposed are consistent with the proposed approach. The Offeror’s justification for the proposed resources will be considered in this evaluation. If the Offeror’s proposal demonstrates a lack of resource realism, it will be evaluated as demonstrating a lack of understanding of, or commitment to, the requirements. The Mission Suitability factor includes four sub-factors: Management, Technical, Safety and Health, and Small Business Utilization. Separate adjective rating and point scoring will be accomplished for each sub-factor. There is no further scoring below the sub-factor level. These sub-factors and the topics that will be evaluated are described below. a. Implementation Approach:
Mission Suitability Factor. The Mission Suitability factor indicates, for each Offeror, the merit or excellence of the work to be performed and the ability of the Offeror to accomplish what is offered, or the product to be delivered. The overall Mission Suitability factor will be numerically scored, and the Mission Suitability sub-factors will be adjectivally rated and numerically weighted and scored in accordance with NFS 1815.305(a)(3), "Technical Evaluation," and the following table: Excellent A comprehensive and xxxxxxxx proposal of exceptional merit with one or more significant strengths. No deficiency or significant weakness exists. 91-100 Very Good A proposal having no deficiency and which demonstrates over- all competence. One or more significant strengths have been found, and strengths outbalance any weaknesses that exist. 71-90 Good A proposal having no deficiency and which shows a reasonably sound response. There may be strengths or weaknesses, or both. As a whole, weaknesses not off-set by strengths do not significantly detract from the Offeror's response. 51-70 Fair A proposal having no deficiency and which has one or more weaknesses. Weaknesses outbalance any strengths. 31-50 Poor A proposal that has one or more deficiencies or significant weaknesses that demonstrate a lack of overall competence or would require a major proposal revision to correct. 0-30 Overall, the Offeror’s Mission Suitability proposal will be evaluated based on the Offeror’s ability to fulfill the contract management and technical requirements while meeting quality, schedule, and safety requirements. The compatibility between the proposed management and technical approach and proposed total compensation to accomplish the work will be an important consideration in the evaluation of this factor.

Related to Mission Suitability Factor

  • Experience, Financial Capability and Suitability Subscriber is: (i) sophisticated in financial matters and is able to evaluate the risks and benefits of the investment in the Shares and (ii) able to bear the economic risk of its investment in the Shares for an indefinite period of time because the Shares have not been registered under the Securities Act (as defined below) and therefore cannot be sold unless subsequently registered under the Securities Act or an exemption from such registration is available. Subscriber is capable of evaluating the merits and risks of its investment in the Company and has the capacity to protect its own interests. Subscriber must bear the economic risk of this investment until the Shares are sold pursuant to: (i) an effective registration statement under the Securities Act or (ii) an exemption from registration available with respect to such sale. Subscriber is able to bear the economic risks of an investment in the Shares and to afford a complete loss of Subscriber’s investment in the Shares.

  • Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan A) Every Educator has an Educator Plan that includes, but is not limited to, one goal related to the improvement of practice; one goal for the improvement of student learning. The Plan also outlines actions the Educator must take to attain the goals established in the Plan and benchmarks to assess progress. Goals may be developed by individual Educators, by the Evaluator, or by teams, departments, or groups of Educators who have the similar roles and/or responsibilities. See Sections 15-19 for more on Educator Plans. B) To determine the goals to be included in the Educator Plan, the Evaluator reviews the goals the Educator has proposed in the Self-Assessment, using evidence of Educator performance and impact on student learning, growth and achievement based on the Educator’s self-assessment and other sources that Evaluator shares with the Educator. The process for determining the Educator’s impact on student learning, growth and achievement will be determined after ESE issues guidance on this matter. See #22, below. C) Educator Plan Development Meetings shall be conducted as follows: i) Educators in the same school may meet with the Evaluator in teams and/or individually at the end of the previous evaluation cycle or by October 15th of the next academic year to develop their Educator Plan. Educators shall not be expected to meet during the summer hiatus. ii) For those Educators new to the school, the meeting with the Evaluator to establish the Educator Plan must occur by October 15th or within six weeks of the start of their assignment in that school iii) The Evaluator shall meet individually with Educators with PTS and ratings of needs improvement or unsatisfactory to develop professional practice goal(s) that must address specific standards and indicators identified for improvement. In addition, the goals may address shared grade level or subject matter goals. D) The Evaluator completes the Educator Plan by November 1st. The Educator shall sign the Educator Plan within 5 school days of its receipt and may include a written response. The Educator’s signature indicates that the Educator received the plan in a timely fashion. The signature does not indicate agreement or disagreement with its contents. The Evaluator retains final authority over the content of the Educator’s Plan.

  • Suitability The Dealer Manager will offer Shares, and in its agreement with each Soliciting Dealer will require that the Soliciting Dealer offer Shares, only to Persons that it has reasonable grounds to believe meet the financial qualifications set forth in the Prospectus or in any suitability letter or memorandum sent to it by the Company and will only make offers to Persons in the states in which it is advised in writing by the Company that the Shares are qualified for sale or that such qualification is not required. In offering Shares, the Dealer Manager will comply, and in its agreements with the Soliciting Dealers, the Dealer Manager will require that the Soliciting Dealers comply, with the provisions of all applicable rules and regulations relating to suitability of investors, including without limitation the FINRA Conduct Rules and the provisions of Article III.C. of the Statement of Policy Regarding Real Estate Investment Trusts of the North American Securities Administrators Association, Inc. (the “NASAA Guidelines”). The Dealer Manager agrees that in recommending the purchase of the Shares in the Primary Offering to an investor, the Dealer Manager and each Person associated with the Dealer Manager that make such recommendation shall have, and each Soliciting Dealer in its Soliciting Dealer Agreement shall agree with respect to investors to which it makes a recommendation shall agree that it shall have, reasonable grounds to believe, on the basis of information obtained from the investor concerning the investor’s investment objectives, other investments, financial situation and needs, and any other information known by the Dealer Manager, the Person associated with the Dealer Manager or the Soliciting Dealer that: (i) the investor is or will be in a financial position appropriate to enable the investor to realize to a significant extent the benefits described in the Prospectus, including the tax benefits where they are a significant aspect of the Company; (ii) the investor has a fair market net worth sufficient to sustain the risks inherent in the program, including loss of investment and lack of liquidity; and (iii) an investment in the Shares offered in the Primary Offering is otherwise suitable for the investor. The Dealer Manager agrees as to investors to whom it makes a recommendation with respect to the purchase of the Shares in the Primary Offering (and each Soliciting Dealer in its Soliciting Dealer Agreement shall agree, with respect to investors to whom it makes such recommendations) to maintain in the files of the Dealer Manager (or the Soliciting Dealer, as applicable) documents disclosing the basis upon which the determination of suitability was reached as to each investor. In making the determinations as to financial qualifications and as to suitability required by the NASAA Guidelines, the Dealer Manager and Soliciting Dealers may rely on (A) representations from investment advisers who are not affiliated with a Soliciting Dealer, banks acting as trustees or fiduciaries, and (B) information it has obtained from a prospective investor, including such information as the investment objectives, other investments, financial situation and needs of the Person or any other information known by the Dealer Manager (or Soliciting Dealer, as applicable), after due inquiry. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Dealer Manager shall not, and each Soliciting Dealer shall agree not to, execute any transaction in the Company in a discretionary account without prior written approval of the transaction by the customer.

  • Constructability Review Prepare detailed interdisciplinary constructability review within Fourteen (14) days of receipt of the plans from the District that: 10.1.2.1.6.1 Ensures construction documents are well coordinated and reviewed for errors; 10.1.2.1.6.2 Identifies to the extent known, construction deficiencies and areas of concern; 10.1.2.1.6.3 Back-checks design drawings for inclusion of modifications; and 10.1.2.1.6.4 Provides the District with written confirmation that: 10.1.2.1.6.4.1 Requirements noted in the design documents prepared for the Project are consistent with and conform to the District's Project requirements and design standards. 10.1.2.1.6.4.2 Various components have been coordinated and are consistent with each other so as to minimize conflicts within or between components of the design documents.

  • APPOINTMENT FACTORS Location Perth Accommodation As determined by the WA Country Health Service Policy Allowances/ Appointment Conditions Appointment is subject to: • Completion of a 100 point identification check • Successful Criminal Record Screening clearance • Successful Pre- Placement Health Screening clearance

  • Key Deal Points You are the exclusive, unencumbered owner of the Asset(s), and you have honestly and accurately represented the Asset(s) to the best of your knowledge and ability. §We have agreed with you to a purchase price and form of consideration to be paid for each Asset, as outlined below. §For a period of time from the date of this Purchase Agreement (the “Period”), you grant us the exclusive right to purchase the Asset(s).

  • Selection Based on Consultants’ Qualifications Services estimated to cost less than $100,000 equivalent per contract may be procured under contracts awarded in accordance with the provisions of paragraphs 3.1, 3.7 and 3.8 of the Consultant Guidelines.

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

  • Orientation and In-Service Program The Hospital recognizes the need for a Hospital Orientation Program of such duration as it may deem appropriate taking into consideration the needs of the Hospital and the nurses involved.

  • Presentation of Potential Target Businesses The Company shall cause each of the Initial Shareholders to agree that, in order to minimize potential conflicts of interest which may arise from multiple affiliations, the Initial Shareholders will present to the Company for its consideration, prior to presentation to any other person or company, any suitable opportunity to acquire an operating business, until the earlier of the consummation by the Company of a Business Combination or the liquidation of the Company, subject to any pre-existing fiduciary obligations the Initial Shareholders might have.

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