EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS Sample Clauses

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS a. The State will put each bid through a process of evaluation to determine the responsiveness of bidders to the State's needs. The final selection will be made on the basis of the lowest responsible bid meeting the specifications. b. Bids containing false or misleading statements or providing references that do not support an attribute or condition claimed by the bidder may be rejected. If, in the opinion of the State, information was intended to mislead the State in its evaluation of the bid, and the attribute, condition, or capability is a requirement of this IFB, it will be the basis for rejection of the bid. c. At the time of bid opening, each bid will be checked for the presence or absence of required information in conformance with the submission requirements of this IFB. d. Bids submitted that include option years will be evaluated based on the total bid amount for all years provided for the overall bid ranking. However, the total bid amount, for determining the contract amount will not include the option years. e. The contract will be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder after consideration of any applicable preferences. If there are tied bids, representatives of the State will draw straws to pick the winning bidder. The drawing will be witnessed and documented by two or more State employees.

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS. Evaluation will consist of the review and assessment of the Respondents‘ submittals. Top-scoring Respondents will be invited to participate in Stage 2 of the evaluation process, which will be a formal presentation to the evaluation committee. (See Section 3.16) All areas of evaluation listed in the table below are to be addressed by the Respondent in its submittal. Proposals that are substantially incomplete or lack key information may be rejected as non- responsive. Responses should be concise, summarizing the Respondent‘s pertinent experience and capabilities. Emphasis should be placed on completeness and clarity. Responses that do not provide sufficient content or satisfactory information, as requested in this RFP document, may receive lower scores. Points will be assigned to all categories (see table below for point-allocation per category) and then totaled in order to determine each Respondent‘s ranking: Vendor Responsiveness Pass/Fail Vendor Responsibility Pass/Fail Section 2 PUR 1001 Agree/Disagree Section 3 – Financials 24 Section 4 – PUR 1000 Agree/Disagree Section 5 – References, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Orders, & Environmental 49 Section 6 – Technical Specifications 145 Section 7 – Pricing Models and discounts proposed 260 Section 7 – Vendor Responsibility Questionnaire Pass/Fail Questions to Vendors 320 Except for Cost Information, all evaluation categories will be scored with each response having the opportunity to achieve the maximum total point allocation indicated.

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS. Evaluation will consist of the review and assessment of the Respondents’ submittals. While award will mainly be based upon the best price, the Department reserves the right to invite top scoring respondents to negotiate their offerings and proposed pricing. All areas of evaluation listed in the table below are to be addressed by the Respondent in its submittal. Proposals that are substantially incomplete or lack key information may be rejected as non-responsive by the Department, at its discretion. Responses should be concise, summarizing the Respondent’s pertinent experience and capabilities. Emphasis should be placed on completeness and clarity. Responses that do not provide sufficient content or satisfactory information, as requested in this ITN document, may receive lower scores. Points will be assigned to all categories (see table, below, for point-allocation per category) and then totaled in order to determine each Respondent’s ranking: Vendor Responsiveness Pass/Fail Vendor Responsibility Pass/Fail Section 1 – Respondent is a LAR Pass/Fail Section 2 – PUR 1001 Agree/Disagree Section 3 – Financials 24 Section 3 – Vendor Certifications 100 Section 4 – PUR 1000 Agree/Disagree Section 5 – Special Contract Conditions 75 Section 5 - Track record of Vendor in meeting commitments (verified through references and vendor performance tracking within MFMP) 50 Section 6 – Technical Specifications 60 Section 7 – Pricing Models, Strategies and Commitments proposed 140 Section 7 – Vendor Responsibility Questionnaire Pass/Fail Total Points Possible: 449 pts. All evaluation categories will be scored with each response having the opportunity to achieve the maximum total point allocation indicated.

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS a. The State will put each proposal through a process of evaluation to determine the responsiveness of proposing firms to the State's needs. The final selection will be made on the basis of the highest scoring proposal meeting the specifications. b. Proposals containing false or misleading statements or providing references that do not support an attribute or condition claimed by the proposing firm may be rejected. If, in the opinion of the State, information was intended to mislead the State in its evaluation of the proposal, and the attribute, condition, or capability is a requirement of this RFP, it will be the basis for rejection of the proposal. c. If there are tied proposals, DWR will draw straws to pick the winning proposing firm. The drawing will be witnessed and documented by two or more DWR employees. d. The evaluation process will consist of four phases. i. In Phase One, proposals are reviewed to ensure that all documentation has been submitted in compliance with the requirements of this RFP. DWR will review all of the following documents to determine that each is enclosed and properly completed. Failure to meet these administrative requirements shall cause a proposal to be deemed non-responsive and therefore ineligible for the next step of the RFP evaluation process. 1. Cost Proposal Worksheet (Attachment I) 2. Proposal/Proposer Certification Sheet (Attachment II) 3. References (Attachment III) 4. Darfur Contracting Certification (Attachment IV) 5. California Civil Rights Law Attachment (Attachment VIII) 6. Iran Contracting Act (Attachment IX) 7. Completion of DVBE compliance documentation, DWR 9526 (Attachment V) 8. Std. 843, DVBE Declaration 9. GSPD05-105, Bidder Declaration 10. DVBE firm certification (issued by Office of Small Business and DVBE Services) 11. Work Plan and Work Schedule/Technical Proposal 12. Resumes for all personnel ii. Phase Two will consist of an evaluation of the Contractor’s required minimum qualifications based on the criteria below. Bidder’s will first be evaluated on a pass/fail basis. A passing score will be given to any bidder who provides valid documentation proving the minimum qualification is met. A failing score will be given to any bidder who does not meet the minimum qualification and/or does not provide valid documentation to show evidence of the minimum qualification being met. Failure to meet these required minimum qualifications shall cause a proposal to be deemed non-responsive and therefore ineligible ...

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS. A detailed evaluation of the proposals will be conducted, and the proposals will be ranked. A comparative description of the proposals and evaluation results will be prepared. The evaluation and recommendation will be presented to City Council. The City Council will review the recommendation and approve that recommendation or form an alternative recommendation.

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS. The qualifications-based selection process is used to select consultants for master on- call agreements. Generally, the following information and criteria are used to evaluate and rank the responses to the RFQ:

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS. An Evaluation Committee will have responsibility for reviewing and evaluating all proposals and required documents submitted in response to this RFP. All proposals properly submitted and received will be evaluated against the award criteria outlined in this RFP. The absence of required information may result in exclusion of the proposal from further analysis or evaluation. The County reserves the right to reject all proposals or waive technicalities in order to award a contract, which may be determined to be in the best interest of the County. The County also reserves the right to make the award in whole or part. The County reserves the right to include outside consultants to assist in the evaluation process.

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS. Respondents should have experience in park and open space design and be familiar with all pertinent codes and regulations, including local flood and windstorm/engineering requirements. Each response shall be consistently evaluated and scored in accordance with the following criteria: Qualifications of Firm and experience with projects of a similar scale and scope 30% Demonstrated understanding of the objectives of the project and ability to perform services as requested in the Scope of Services 30% Experience and qualifications of the project team to be assigned to this project 15% Other factors including, but not limited to, the firm’s current workload and potential conflicts of interest 10% The proximity to the City of the firm’s office location where a majority of the work will be performed 10% The firm’s performance on past City of Galveston projects, if any 5% Additional information relevant for consideration Bonus 5% The results of the review and evaluation of the responses to the RFQ will be used to select one or more Respondents to meet with the consultant selection committee for an interview. Upon completion of successful interviews, the consultant selection committee will rank the firms and will subsequently recommend one or more consultants to City Council.

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS. Contract Award