PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal for the following:
(1) The offeror’s small business size status to determine its eligibility to participate in the eFAST program. To be awarded a functional area, the offeror must document they meet the small business size standard for at least one (1) NAICS code in a functional area.
(2) The offeror, who demonstrates successful experience in a functional area, will qualify in the functional area, as specified in Section L. Qualification is for eligibility purposes only and does not preclude the requirements for demonstrating technical qualifications and successful past performance pursuant to any future contract or task order procurements under eFAST. The offeror will receive a MOA award only for the functional area(s) the offeror was evaluated as qualified. In conducting the evaluation, the Government may use information provided by the offeror in its proposal as well as information obtained from other sources. While the Government may elect to consider information and data obtained from other sources, the Government is under no obligation to do so and the burden is on the offeror to provide a complete and thorough proposal. Missing proposal information or component(s) identified above and/or non-adherence to proposal format instructions are considered incomplete, inadequate and/or grossly deficient. Such proposals will be rejected from further consideration for award.
PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS. The Government will evaluate offeror’s proposal for the following:
(1) The Government will review the offeror’s small business size status to determine its eligibility to participate in the eFAST program. To be awarded a functional area, the offeror must document they meet the small business size standard for at least one NAICS code in a functional area.
(2) The offeror, who demonstrates successful experience in a functional area, will qualify in the functional area, as specified in Section L. Qualification is for eligibility purposes only and does not preclude the requirements for demonstrating technical qualifications and successful past performance pursuant to any future contract/task order procurements under eFAST. The offeror will receive a MOA award only for the functional area(s) the offeror was evaluated as qualified.
(3) The Government will review completed Section K, Dun and Bradstreet Comprehensive Insight Plus Report, Small Business Administration Dynamic Small Business Search (DSBS) and XXX record to determine the business responsibility of the offeror in accordance with Section M.6 of this SIR. Failure to submit a Comprehensive Insight Plus Report may be grounds for eliminating an offeror from consideration for MOA award. In conducting the evaluation, the Government may use information provided by the offeror in its proposal as well as information obtained from other sources. While the Government may elect to consider information and data obtained from other sources, the Government is under no obligation to do so and the burden is on the offeror to provide a complete and thorough proposal. Missing proposal information or component(s) identified above and/or non-adherence to proposal format instructions are considered incomplete, inadequate and/or grossly deficient. Such proposals may be rejected from further consideration.
PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal for the following:
PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS. This section describes the proposed process for evaluating proposals and selecting the collection contractor.
Section 6.1 describes the evaluation process for the contract award recommendation to the City Council.
Section 6.2 presents the evaluation criteria. Note that the CITY reserves the right to modify this process in any way and at any time during the RFP and contractor selection process.
PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS. Stage 1: Initial Review
PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS. Stage 1: Initial Review OEM Minimum Mandatory Requirements RFP Section Stage 2: OEM Evaluated Qualifications Stage 3 Product Qualification Evaluation
PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS. The evaluation process is designed to award the procurement to the Proposer with the best combination of attributes based upon the evaluation criteria. The County reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to request clarifications of proposals or to conduct discussions for the purpose of clarification with any or all Proposers. If clarifications are made as a result of such discussion, the Proposer shall put such clarifications in writing.
PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS. A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the Corps of Engineers, User/Customer, and other required personnel will evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence. Technical proposals will be reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. The number and identities of offerors are not revealed to anyone who is not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is the Tradeoff Process.
PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS. Proposals are received and publicly opened. Only names of Proposers are read at this time. An Evaluation Committee will convene, review and evaluate all proposals submitted based on the factors set forth in the RFP. The Proposer’s complete response will be reviewed and evaluated by the Evaluation Committee. The Evaluation Committee reserves the right to interview any or all Proposers and to require a formal presentation with the key people who will administer and be assigned to work on the contract before recommendation of award. All proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria specified in this document. Information derived by investigation and overall due diligence of District staff will be considered. Based on the proposals received, the District may elect to proceed based on any of the following options, but will not necessarily be limited only to these options: (1) Award to the best initial proposal without any further discussion or negotiation; (2) Negotiate with the highest ranked Proposer; or, (3) Allow the top ranked Proposers make oral presentations. Proposers are advised to provide their respective best offer with the initial proposal because the District reserves the right to award a Contract based on initial proposals without further discussion or negotiation. The proposal most advantageous to the District in its sole discretion will be selected. The District reserves the right to negotiate revisions to or removal of unacceptable clauses or restrictions incorporated within an otherwise acceptable proposal. In the event that a mutually acceptable contract between the District and the selected Proposers cannot be successfully negotiated and executed, then the District reserves the right to discontinue negotiations with such Proposers and to negotiate and execute a Contract with the next-ranked Proposers. Note section 4.4 above, where Proposers are requested to submit questions during the addendum process instead of taking exceptions within the proposal to the terms and conditions in this RFP. The District reserves all rights, in its sole discretion, not to issue an award to any Proposers, to cancel this RFP at any time, to reissue this RFP for any reason, or a combination of any or all of the above. The District will not be liable to any Proposer for any costs incurred in connection with this RFP as a result of any of the above stated actions taken by the District. A recommendation agenda item will be submitted to the S...
PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS. UNTS will select Contractor by using the competitive sealed proposal process described in this Section. UNTS may make the selection of Contractor on the basis of the proposals initially submitted, without discussion, clarification or modification. In the alternative, UNTS may make the selection of Contractor on the basis of negotiation with any of the Proposers. In conducting such negotiations, UNTS will use commercially reasonable efforts to avoid disclosing the contents of competing proposals. At UNTS' sole option and discretion, UNTS may discuss and negotiate elements of proposals submitted with any or all proposers. Furthermore, UNTS may request presentations or system demonstrations from any or all proposers at no cost or obligation to UNTS. After submission of a proposal but before final selection of Contractor is made, UNTS may permit a Proposer to revise its proposal in order to obtain the Proposer's best and final offer. In that event, representations made by Proposer in its revised proposal, including price and fee quotes, will be binding on Proposer. UNTS is not obligated to select the Proposer offering the most attractive economic terms if that Proposer is not the most advantageous to UNTS overall, as determined by UNTS according to the evaluation criteria contained herein. UNTS reserves the right to (a) enter into an agreement for all or any portion of the requirements and specifications set forth in this RFP with one or more Proposers, (b) reject any and all proposals and re-solicit proposals, or (c) reject any and all proposals and temporarily or permanently abandon this selection process, if deemed to be in the best interests of UNTS. Proposer is hereby notified that UNTS will maintain in its files concerning this RFP a written record of the basis upon which a selection, if any, is made by UNTS.
