Technical Acceptability Evaluation Process Sample Clauses

Technical Acceptability Evaluation Process. The technical acceptability rating is based on the Offeror’s response to both Factor 1 - General Requirements and Factor 2 -Task Specific Requirements. General Requirements evaluation focuses on the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform work for the City. Evaluation of Task Specific Requirements focuses on the unique requirements of each Work Package. The Offeror’s response to Factor 1 – General Requirements shall be evaluated on a pass/fail basis and rated “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”. If an Offeror’s response to Factor 1 – General Requirements is rated “Unacceptable”, the Proposal shall be eliminated from further consideration. Only Proposals rated “Acceptable” on Factor 1 – General Requirements shall be continued to the Task Specific Requirements phase of the evaluation. The Offeror’s response to Factor 2 - Task Specific Requirements shall be evaluated on a pass/fail basis and rated “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”. Proposals rated “Unacceptable” shall be eliminated from further consideration. Only Proposals rated “Acceptable” for both Factor 1 – General Requirements and Factor 2 – Task Specific Requirements shall be considered for price and performance confidence evaluation.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Technical Acceptability Evaluation Process. The technical acceptability rating is based on the Offeror’s response to both Factor 1 - General Requirements and Factor 2 -Task Specific Requirements. General Requirements evaluation focuses on the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform work for the City. Evaluation of Task Specific Requirements focuses on the unique requirements of each Work Package. The Offeror’s response to Factor 1 – General Requirements shall be evaluated on a pass/fail basis and rated “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”. If an Offeror’s response to Factor 1 – General Requirements is rated “Unacceptable”, the Proposal shall be eliminated from further consideration. Only Proposals rated “Acceptable” on Factor 1 – General Requirements shall be continued to the Task Specific Requirements phase of the evaluation.

Related to Technical Acceptability Evaluation Process

  • Excellent Above Average Satisfactory Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory 5 4 3 2 1 5. The instructor demonstrates knowledge of the subject matter.

  • Project Monitoring Reporting Evaluation A. The Project Implementing Entity shall monitor and evaluate the progress of its activities under the Project and prepare Project Reports in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.08(b) of the General Conditions and on the basis of indicators agreed with the Bank. Each such report shall cover the period of one

  • Loop Testing/Trouble Reporting 2.1.6.1 Think 12 will be responsible for testing and isolating troubles on the Loops. Think 12 must test and isolate trouble to the BellSouth portion of a designed/non- designed unbundled Loop (e.g., UVL-SL2, UCL-D, UVL-SL1, UCL-ND, etc.) before reporting repair to the UNE Customer Wholesale Interconnection Network Services (CWINS) Center. Upon request from BellSouth at the time of the trouble report, Think 12 will be required to provide the results of the Think 12 test which indicate a problem on the BellSouth provided Loop.

  • Completion of Evaluation Cycle 1. The summative evaluation rating shall be based upon a preponderance of the evidence, assessed in a holistic manner, that is aligned to the Ohio Educator Standards. Only evidence gathered during the walkthroughs and formal observations that are conducted for the current school year may be used.

  • Long Term Cost Evaluation Criterion 4. READ CAREFULLY and see in the RFP document under "Proposal Scoring and Evaluation". Points will be assigned to this criterion based on your answer to this Attribute. Points are awarded if you agree not increase your catalog prices (as defined herein) more than X% annually over the previous year for the life of the contract, unless an exigent circumstance exists in the marketplace and the excess price increase which exceeds X% annually is supported by documentation provided by you and your suppliers and shared with TIPS, if requested. If you agree NOT to increase prices more than 5%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you are awarded 10 points; if 6% to 14%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you receive 1 to 9 points incrementally. Price increases 14% or greater, except when justified by supporting documentation, receive 0 points. increases will be 5% or less annually per question Required Confidentiality Claim Form Required Confidentiality Claim Form This completed form is required by TIPS. By submitting a response to this solicitation you agree to download from the “Attachments” section, complete according to the instructions on the form, then uploading the completed form, with any confidential attachments, if applicable, to the “Response Attachments” section titled “Confidentiality Form” in order to provide to TIPS the completed form titled, “CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIM FORM”. By completing this process, you provide us with the information we require to comply with the open record laws of the State of Texas as they may apply to your proposal submission. If you do not provide the form with your proposal, an award will not be made if your proposal is qualified for an award, until TIPS has an accurate, completed form from you. Read the form carefully before completing and if you have any questions, email Xxxx Xxxxxx at TIPS at xxxx.xxxxxx@xxxx-xxx.xxx 8 Choice of Law clauses with TIPS Members If the vendor is awarded a contract with TIPS under this solicitation, the vendor agrees to make any Choice of Law clauses in any contract or agreement entered into between the awarded vendor and with a TIPS member entity to read as follows: "Choice of law shall be the laws of the state where the customer resides" or words to that effect. 9

  • STATEWIDE ACHIEVEMENT TESTING When CONTRACTOR is an NPS, per implementation of Senate Bill 484, CONTRACTOR shall administer all Statewide assessments within the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (“CAASP”), Desired Results Developmental Profile (“DRDP”), California Alternative Assessment (“CAA”), achievement and abilities tests (using LEA-authorized assessment instruments), the Fitness Gram with the exception of the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (“ELPAC”) to be completed by the LEA, and as appropriate to the student, and mandated by XXX xxxxxxxx to LEA and state and federal guidelines. CONTRACTOR is subject to the alternative accountability system developed pursuant to Education Code section 52052, in the same manner as public schools. Each LEA student placed with CONTRACTOR by the LEA shall be tested by qualified staff of CONTRACTOR in accordance with that accountability program. XXX shall provide test administration training to CONTRACTOR’S qualified staff. CONTRACTOR shall attend LEA test training and comply with completion of all coding requirements as required by XXX.

  • Elements Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Proficient Exemplary IV-A-1. Reflective Practice Demonstrates limited reflection on practice and/or use of insights gained to improve practice. May reflect on the effectiveness of lessons/ units and interactions with students but not with colleagues and/or rarely uses insights to improve practice. Regularly reflects on the effectiveness of lessons, units, and interactions with students, both individually and with colleagues, and uses insights gained to improve practice and student learning. Regularly reflects on the effectiveness of lessons, units, and interactions with students, both individually and with colleagues; and uses and shares with colleagues, insights gained to improve practice and student learning. Is able to model this element.

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • Long Term Cost Evaluation Criterion # 4 READ CAREFULLY and see in the RFP document under "Proposal Scoring and Evaluation". Points will be assigned to this criterion based on your answer to this Attribute. Points are awarded if you agree not i ncrease your catalog prices (as defined herein) more than X% annually over the previous year for years two and thr ee and potentially year four, unless an exigent circumstance exists in the marketplace and the excess price increase which exceeds X% annually is supported by documentation provided by you and your suppliers and shared with TIP S, if requested. If you agree NOT to increase prices more than 5%, except when justified by supporting documentati on, you are awarded 10 points; if 6% to 14%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you receive 1 to 9 points incrementally. Price increases 14% or greater, except when justified by supporting documentation, receive 0 points. increases will be 5% or less annually per question Required Confidentiality Claim Form Required Confidentiality Claim Form This completed form is required by TIPS. By submitting a response to this solicitation you agree to download from th e “Attachments” section, complete according to the instructions on the form, then uploading the completed form, wit h any confidential attachments, if applicable, to the “Response Attachments” section titled “Confidentiality Form” in order to provide to TIPS the completed form titled, “CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIM FORM”. By completing this process, you provide us with the information we require to comply with the open record laws of the State of Texas as they ma y apply to your proposal submission. If you do not provide the form with your proposal, an award will not be made if your proposal is qualified for an award, until TIPS has an accurate, completed form from you. Read the form carefully before completing and if you have any questions, email Xxxx Xxxxxx at TIPS at xxxx.xxxxxx@t xxx-xxx.xxx

  • Project Monitoring Reporting and Evaluation The Recipient shall furnish to the Association each Project Report not later than forty-five (45) days after the end of each calendar semester, covering the calendar semester.

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