Relative Order of Importance Sample Clauses

Relative Order of Importance. In making the best value decision, the SSA will consider the following order of importance: In compliance with FAR 15.304(d), Factor 1 (Technical) is more important than Factor 2 (Past Performance). Factor 2 is more important than Factor 3 (Small Business Participation Commitment). Factor 3 is more important than Factor 4 (Price). In compliance with FAR 15.304(d), when combined, all other evaluation factors (Factors 1, 2, and 3) are significantly more important than Factor 4. However, Factor 4 will be carefully considered in the selection decision.
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Relative Order of Importance. In making the best value decision, the source selection authority will consider the following order of importance: In compliance with FAR 15.304(d), Factor 1 (Mission Capability) is more important than Factor 2 (Past Performance). Factor 2 is more important than Factor 3 (Cost). The evaluation factors of Mission Capability, Past Performance, and Cost are listed in descending order of importance. Within the Mission Capability factor, the subfactors are listed in descending order of importance. Cost is significantly less important than all other factors combined. In compliance with FAR 15.304(e), when combined, all other evaluation factors (Factors 1 and 2) are significantly more important than Factor 3. However, Factor 3 (Cost) will be carefully considered in the selection decision. Within Factor 3 (Cost), transition costs are to be priced separately and will not be considered in the selection decision within the most probable cost evaluation.
Sample 1
Relative Order of Importance. The relative order of importance of factors are as follows: Factor 1 (Management Approach) is more important than Factor 2 (Initial TO Approach). Factor 2 (Initial TO Approach) is more important than Factor 3 (Past Performance). Factor 3 (Past Performance) is more important than Factor 4 (Price). Factor 1 (Management Approach) includes 3 Sub-elements. The Sub-elements will not be treated as Sub-Factors, and adjectival ratings will not be assigned for each Sub-element. The Sub- elements are considered of equal importance. Factor 2 (Initial TO Approach) includes 2 Sub-elements. The Sub-elements will not be treated as Sub-Factors, and adjectival ratings will not be assigned for each Sub-element. The Sub-elements are considered of equal importance. Factors 1, 2 and 3, when combined, are significantly more important than Factor 4 (Price). The degree of importance allocated to Factor 4 (Price) may increase as the Offerors’ proposals become more equal in the other evaluation areas. Offerors must achieve a rating of ACCEPTABLE, or higher, for Factors 1 and 2 in order to be considered for award. Subjective judgment against objective criteria is implicit in the evaluation process. Offerors are cautioned that award may be made to other than the lowest-priced proposal if the Government determines that paying a price premium is warranted based on its evaluation.
Sample 1
Relative Order of Importance. Factor 1 – Technical is significantly more important than Factor 2 - Past Performance. Factor 2 - Past Performance is more important than Factor 3 - Cost/Price.
Sample 1
Relative Order of Importance. The relative order of importance of factors are as follows: Factor 1 (Program Management) is more important than Factor 2 (Performance Confidence Assessment). Factor 2 (Performance Confidence Assessment) is more important than Factor 3 (Cost/Price).  The sub-factors under Factor 1 are listed in descending order of importance: o Sub-factor 1 (Recruitment/Retention Plan) o Sub-factor 2 (Staffing) o Sub-factor 3 (Quality Control Plan) o Sub-factor 4 (Task Order 0001 Transition Plan) Factors 1 and 2, when combined, are significantly more important than Factor 3 (Cost/Price). The degree of importance allocated to Factor 3 Cost/Price may increase as the Offerors’ proposals become more equal in the other evaluation areas. Offerors must achieve a rating of ACCEPTABLE, or higher, for Sub-factors 1-4 under Factor 1 in order to be considered for award. Subjective judgment against objective criteria is implicit in the evaluation process. Offerors are cautioned that award may be made to other than the lowest- priced proposal if the Government determines that paying a price premium is warranted based on its evaluation.
Sample 1
Relative Order of Importance. Factor 1 – Technical Approach is significantly more important than Factor 2 - Past Performance and Factor 3 - Small Business when combined. Factor 2- Past Performance is equally important to Factor 3 – Small Business Participation. Factor 2 - Past Performance and Factor 3 - Small Business are individually more important than Factor 4 - Cost/Price.
Sample 1

Related to Relative Order of Importance

  • Protective Order The Settling Defendants cannot, and do not, make any representation that they have, can or will produce such declarations, or a complete set of such responses, and it is understood and agreed that the failure to produce such responses shall not constitute a breach or violation of this Settlement Agreement; and

  • Executive Orders This Contract is subject to the provisions of Executive Order No. Three of Governor Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxxx, promulgated June 16, 1971, concerning labor employment practices, Executive Order No. Seventeen of Governor Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxxx, promulgated February 15, 1973, concerning the listing of employment openings and Executive Order No. Sixteen of Governor Xxxx X. Xxxxxxx promulgated August 4, 1999, concerning violence in the workplace, all of which are incorporated into and are made a part of the Contract as if they had been fully set forth in it. The Contract may also be subject to Executive Order No. 14 of Governor M. Xxxx Xxxx, promulgated April 17, 2006, concerning procurement of cleaning products and services, Executive Order No. 61 of Governor Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxx promulgated December 13, 2017 concerning the Policy for the Management of State Information Technology Projects, as issued by the Office of Policy and Management, Policy ID IT-SDLC-17-04, and Executive Order No. 49 of Governor Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxx, promulgated May 22, 2015, mandating disclosure of certain gifts to public employees and contributions to certain candidates for office in accordance with their respective terms and conditions. If Executive Orders 14, 61 or 49 are applicable, it is deemed to be incorporated into and are made a part of the Contract as if it had been fully set forth in it. At the Contractor’s request, the State shall provide a copy of these orders to the Contractor.

  • RECIPROCITY AND SANCTIONS PROVISIONS Bidders are hereby notified that if their principal place of business is located in a country, nation, province, state or political subdivision that penalizes New York State vendors, and if the goods or services they offer will be substantially produced or performed outside New York State, the Omnibus Procurement Xxx 0000 and 2000 amendments (Chapter 684 and Chapter 383, respectively) require that they be denied contracts which they would otherwise obtain. NOTE: As of May 15, 2002, the list of discriminatory jurisdictions subject to this provision includes the states of South Carolina, Alaska, West Virginia, Wyoming, Louisiana and Hawaii. Contact NYS Department of Economic Development for a current list of jurisdictions subject to this provision.

  • Compliance with Federal Law, Regulations, and Executive Orders This is an acknowledgement that FEMA financial assistance will be used to fund the contract only. The contractor will comply will all applicable federal law, regulations, executive orders, FEMA policies, procedures, and directives.

  • Executive Order Minimum Wage rate (1) The Recipient shall pay to workers, while performing in the United States, and performing on, or in connection with, this agreement, a minimum hourly wage rate of $10.10 per hour beginning January 1, 2015.

  • ANTI-TERRORISM The Contractor agrees to undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that none of the UNDP funds received under the Contract is used to provide support to individuals or entities associated with terrorism and that recipients of any amounts provided by UNDP hereunder do not appear on the list maintained by the Security Council Committee established pursuant to Resolution 1267 (1999). The list can be accessed via xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/sc/suborg/en/sanctions/1267/aq_sanctions_list. This provision must be included in all sub-contracts or sub-agreements entered into under the Contract.

  • Compliance with Executive Orders Concerning Ethics The Contractor warrants that he and his firm have complied in all respects with the Governor’s Executive Orders concerning ethics matters, including, but not limited to, Executive Order dated January 13, 2003 (establishing Code of Ethics for Executive Branch Officers and Employees, including provisions governing former officers and employees); Executive Order dated October 1, 2003 (governing vendors to state agencies and disclosure and registration of lobbyists); and O.C.G.A. Sections 21-5-70(5), 21-5-71 and 21-5-73, all as amended effective January 9, 2006 (requiring registration and disclosure filings by state agency vendor lobbyists). In this regard, the Contractor certifies that any lobbyist employed or retained by the Contractor or his firm has both registered and made the required disclosures required by the Executive Orders, as amended.

  • Anti-slavery and human trafficking 22.1 The Supplier shall:

  • Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 Subrecipient hereby acknowledges and agrees that it must comply with the requirements of the government-wide award term which implements Section 106(g) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) of 2000, as amended (22 U.S.C. 7104). The award term is located at 2 C.F.R. Part 175.15, the full text of which is incorporated here by reference.

  • References to Statutes, Public Acts, Regulations, Codes and Executive Orders All references in this Contract to any statute, public act, regulation, code or executive order shall mean such statute, public act, regulation, code or executive order, respectively, as it has been amended, replaced or superseded at any time. Notwithstanding any language in this Contract that relates to such statute, public act, regulation, code or executive order, and notwithstanding a lack of a formal amendment to this Contract, this Contract shall always be read and interpreted as if it contained the most current and applicable wording and requirements of such statute, public act, regulation, code or executive order as if their most current language had been used in and requirements incorporated into this Contract at the time of its execution.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.