AWARD EVALUATION Clause Samples

AWARD EVALUATION. 13.1 The bid will be awarded in accordance with section 13.4 of the “Instructions to Bidders” attachment found in Ebid and with consideration given to each of the following factors: 13.1.1 Pricing from the Ebid line items and any additional fees; 13.1.2 Ability, capacity and skill of the Bidder to comply with the specifications and perform the work required and within the time specified for a given project; 13.1.3 Character, integrity, reputation, judgment, work related experience and efficiency of the Bidder;
View SourceView Similar (3)
AWARD EVALUATION. 9.1 The award determination will be made in accordance with section 13. BID EVALUATION AND AWARD, 13.4 of the “Instructions to Bidders” and also with consideration given to the following factors: 9.1.1 Line Item pricing in Ebid for the Market Basket and % of discount submitted in Ebid. 9.1.2 Confirmation of ability to deliver items within the desired timeframes listed herein these Specifications for stock and non-stock items; and 9.1.3 Link to current catalog provided for review by the Owners. 9.2 The Owners reserves the right to award contract(s) to more than one Vendor if it is deemed in the best interest of the Owners to do so as to avoid supply shortages and delivery delays. END OF SPECIFICATIONS Attachment A This chart is a list of other items that are commonly purchased by the Owners. Please complete the last 2 columns and submit with your response in the Supplier Response Attachment section of Ebid. If necessary, include a separate sheet to provide additional information about the proposed item. VENDOR’S RESPONSE Manufacturer Name & Item Description Quantity (approx.) UOM Sizes are (approx.) Color(s) Item Characteristics List Manufacturer Name & Item Number Catalog % Discount 1 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #101K-OR or Equal Orange Watch Cap (stocking cap) 2 DOZ N/A Orange 2 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #C5B or Equal Comb (plastic, pocket) 20 CS 5” Black 3 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #62F or Equal Polypropylene Fork 11 CS Orange Dishwasher safe, Unbreakable 4 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #62TS or Equal Polypropylene Teaspoon 11 CS Orange Dishwasher safe, Unbreakable 5 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #726B or Equal Tumbler Polypropylene 6 CS 12 oz. Buff Dishwasher safe, Unbreakable 6 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #9314-00 or Equal ▇▇▇▇ Hair Clippers 14 SET 6-10 pc N/A Both corded and cordless sets 7 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #BBNR or Equal Basketball Net Replacement 15 EA Standard White 8 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #BT2040-OR or Equal Towel 2 DOZ 20” x 40” Orange 9 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #NEEDLE6 or Equal Inflating Needle 2 CS 10 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #TC12 or Equal Toenail Clippers 1 CS 3.25% Does not contain files 11 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #NSTB or Equal No Shank Toothbrush 3 CS Must be non-shank. Clear -FDA approved translucent material -Reusable-will last as long as a standard toothbrush -Individually wrapped 12 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #SBHK-5000 or Equal Personal Protection Kit 75 KIT N/A N/A Please attach a separate sheet for what your kit contains. 13 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #BHK-100 or Equal Blood Spill Kit 40 KIT N/A N/A Please attach a separate sheet for what your kit contains. 14 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ #82221EE or Equal Steel Toe Boot 10 PR All Sizes,...
View SourceView Similar (2)
AWARD EVALUATION. 5.1 Bid will be awarded based on the following: 5.1.1 The lowest responsible, responsive Bidder whose bid will be most advantageous to the Owners, and as the Owners deems will best serve the requirements and interests of the Owners; 5.1.2 Vendor’s performance from past.
View SourceView Similar (2)
AWARD EVALUATION. 3.1 The lowest responsible, responsive Bidder whose bid will be most advantageous to the City, and as the City deems will best serve the requirements and interests of the City.
View SourceView Similar (2)
AWARD EVALUATION. 13.1 The bid will be awarded in accordance with section 13.4 of the “Instructions to Bidders” attachment found in Ebid and with consideration given to each of the following factors: 13.1.1 Pricing from the Ebid line items and any additional fees; 13.1.2 Ability, capacity and skill of the Bidder to comply with the specifications and perform the work required and within the time specified for a given project; 13.1.3 Character, integrity, reputation, judgment, work related experience and efficiency of the Bidder; 13.1.4 Equipment list submitted by Bidder showing sufficient vehicles, tools and items to perform the services as outlined in the bid; 13.1.5 Quality of the Contractor’s performance of previous projects; and 13.1.6 Favorable information obtained from any reference checks that are performed. 13.2 Contracts resulting from bid responses shall not be on an all-or-none basis, and may be awarded to several bidders. 13.3 The Owners may make any investigation deemed necessary to determine the ability of a Bidder to perform in accordance with the specifications; 13.4 The Owners reserve the right to reject a bid if the pricing is deemed to be not fair and reasonable and/or if there is a lack of equipment to perform the requirements of the resulting contract; and 13.5 The Owners further reserve the right to analyze bid responses in detail and to award contracts which the Owners believe to be in their best interest; City of Lincoln, Nebraska, County of Lancaster, Public Building Commission
View Source
AWARD EVALUATION. 10.1 The lowest responsible, responsive Bidder whose bid will be most advantageous to the City, and as the City deems will best serve the requirements and interests of the City. 10.2 The Owners reserves the right to award contract(s) to more than one Vendor if it is deemed in the best interest of the Owners to do so as to avoid supply shortages and delivery delays. PROPRIETARY INFORMATION – City of Lincoln and/or Lancaster County, NE Issued 2/21/2017 In furtherance of Neb. Rev. Stat. §84-712 et seq., all proposals or responses received may be subject to a public records request. Responses to public records requests may include the entire proposal or response. Bidders must request that proprietary information be excluded from the posting. The bidder must identify the proprietary information, mark the proprietary information according to state law, and submit the proprietary information in a separate container or envelope marked conspicuously in black ink with the words "PROPRIETARY INFORMATION". The bidder must submit a detailed written showing that the release of the proprietary information would give a business advantage to named business competitor(s) and explain how the named business competitor(s) will gain an actual business advantage by disclosure of information. The mere assertion that information is proprietary or that a speculative business advantage might be gained is not sufficient. (See Attorney General Opinion No. 92068, April 27, 1992) THE BIDDER MAY NOT ASSERT THAT THE ENTIRE PROPOSAL IS PROPRIETARY. COST PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED PROPRIETARY AND ARE A PUBLIC RECORD IN THE STATE OF NEBRASKA. The City and/or County will then determine, in its discretion, if the interests served by nondisclosure outweighs any public purpose served by disclosure. (See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 84-712.05(3)) The Bidder will be notified of the agency's decision. Absent a City and/or County determination that information is proprietary, the City and/or County will consider all information a public record subject to release regardless of any assertion that the information is proprietary. If the agency determines it is required to release proprietary information, the bidder will be informed. It will be the bidder's responsibility to defend the bidder's asserted interest in nondisclosure. To facilitate such public postings, with the exception of proprietary information, the City of Lincoln and/or Lancaster County reserves a royalty- free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable...
View Source
AWARD EVALUATION. The Award criteria have been designed to assess the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT), taking into account a combination of Quality, Social Value and Price. The top scoring Applicant will be considered to have been successful.
View Source
AWARD EVALUATION. 4.1 Owner’s award based on the language stated in the “Instructions to Bidders”, Section
View Source

Related to AWARD EVALUATION

  • Performance Evaluation The Department may conduct a performance evaluation of Contractor’s Services, including Contractor’s Subcontractors. Results of any evaluation may be made available to Contractor upon request.

  • Performance Evaluations Employee performance shall be evaluated and communicated on a yearly basis as required under County policy. Performance evaluations are used to demonstrate to employees that they are valued; record how an employee’s performance meet the requirements of the job; create a job history record; identify employee strengths and areas for enhancement; assist the employee and supervisor in an effort to attain the highest level of performance; and reinforce performance standards. Every effort will be made to include substantiated information within an employee’s performance evaluation. Non-recurring discipline history which is more than two (2) years old will not be referenced in performance evaluations. The County shall ensure employee performance evaluations are conducted in accordance with County and departmental policy. Performance evaluations and disciplinary matters shall only be conducted by County employees. When an employee who does not agree with the overall rating he/she receives on his/her written performance evaluation, he/she shall discuss and attempt to resolve the differences with his/her immediate supervisor. If discussion with his/her immediate supervisor does not result in resolution of the differences, the employee may file a written request to meet with the next level of management. Said request shall state the unresolved issues and the specific changes in the written performance evaluation the employee is seeking. The appropriate manager shall meet with the employee to discuss the unresolved issues. If the issues are not resolved to the employee’s satisfaction following discussion with the appropriate manager, the employee may within thirty (30) working days file a written request for a meeting with the department head. Within fourteen (14) working days of receipt of a written request stating the unresolved issues and the desired changes in the written performance evaluation, the department head shall meet with the employee to discuss the issues. Within ten (10) working days of said meeting, the department head shall respond in writing to the employee. The decision of the Department Head shall be final and not subject to the grievance procedure. An employee may submit a written response to his/her evaluation that shall be placed in his/her personnel file.

  • JOC EVALUATION If any materials being utilized for a project cannot be found in the RS Means Price Book, this question is what is the markup percentage on those materials? When answering this question please insert the number that represents your percentage of proposed markup. Example: if you are proposing a 30 percent markup, please insert the number "30". Remember that this is a ceiling markup. You may markup a lesser percentage to the TIPS Member customer when pricing the project, but not a greater percentage. EXAMPLE: You need special materials that are not in the RS Means Unit Price Book for a project. You would buy the materials and ▇▇▇▇ them up to the TIPS Member customer by the percentage you propose in this question. If the materials cost you, the contractor, $100 and you proposed a markup on this question for the material of 30 percent, then you would charge the TIPS Member customer $130 for the materials. TIPS/ESC Region 8 is required by Texas Government Code § 791 to be compensated for its work and thus, failure to agree shall render your response void and it will not be considered. Vendor agrees to remit to TIPS the required administration fee or, if resellers are named, guarantee the fee remittance by or for the reseller named by the vendor?

  • EMPLOYEE EVALUATION A. Formal evaluation of employees shall be in writing and shall be for the purpose of establishing a record of the employee’s work performance. The evaluation may include but is not limited to: establishing performance standards and outcome measures, recognition of an employee’s efforts, as well as planning for improvement. Issues of attendance and punctuality may be addressed if they have previously been discussed with the employee. The employee’s job description shall be a basis for the evaluation. B. The evaluator shall review the written evaluation with the employee and provide the employee with a copy. The employee shall sign the evaluation acknowledging receipt. If the employee has objections to the evaluation, s/he, may within twenty (20) working days following receipt of the evaluation put such objections in writing and have them attached to the evaluation report and placed in his/her personnel file. C. The frequency of evaluations shall be determined by the District and generally occur every other year by April 1st for bargaining unit employees. If the District chooses to do so, it may conduct formal evaluations on an annual basis. An employee may request to receive one (1) annual evaluation. Such request shall be in writing to the employee’s supervisor with a copy to the Human Resources Department. D. The Human Resources Department will consult with the Federation in developing an outline of best practices to be used in conducting employee evaluations. E. When the District determines that an employee’s work performance is unsatisfactory, it shall inform the employee in writing of any deficiency and the improvement expected and provide the employee with the opportunity to correct the unsatisfactory performance within a reasonable time period established by the District. F. The judgment of an employee’s work performance by an evaluating supervisor shall not be the subject of a grievance. A grievance concerning an evaluation shall be limited to an allegation that the evaluation was done in bad faith or clearly untrue. The burden of proof shall rest with the grievant. Such grievance shall be filed at the next administrative level above that of the evaluator and that administrator shall provide a written decision within ten (10) working days of any hearing. If the grievance is not resolved, it may be appealed by submitting a written statement to the Human Resources Department within ten (10) working days following receipt of the administrative written decision. The written statement must clearly set forth why the previous decision is in error regarding the allegation of bad faith or being clearly untrue. The Director of Labor Relations, or designee, may review the record of the grievance and/or conduct a hearing and shall issue a written decision within ten (10) working days following such review or hearing. Such decision shall be final. G. Effective July 1, 2013, Sign Language Interpreters will be evaluated using the Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment (EIPA) pursuant to OAR 581-015-2035 and/or the District’s evaluation form.

  • Annual Performance Evaluation On either a fiscal year or calendar year basis, (consistently applied from year to year), the Bank shall conduct an annual evaluation of Executive’s performance. The annual performance evaluation proceedings shall be included in the minutes of the Board meeting that next follows such annual performance review.