EVALUATION POINTS Clause Samples

EVALUATION POINTS. The Evaluation Committee will evaluate responsive proposals and assign a score in each category, not to exceed the maximum allowed score for that category, as determined through the Offeror’s attention to the criteria, detailed in the following sections. The amount of discussion to be applied to each listed topic is an individual choice of the Offeror, however, discussion should be detailed enough to inform and educate the evaluators. Each Offeror’s Proposal will be scored based upon comparison of the information submitted in the Offeror’s proposal against the evaluation criteria outlined below. Item Evaluation Factor Points Possible Section 1: Backbone Section 2: Last Mile Section 3. Internet B. EVALUATION PROCESS 1. All Offeror proposals will be reviewed for compliance with the mandatory specifications stated within the RFP. Proposals deemed non-responsive will be eliminated from further consideration. 2. The Procurement Manager may contact the Offeror for clarification of the response. 3. The Evaluation Committee may use other sources of information to perform the evaluation. 4. Responsive proposals will be evaluated on the factors in Section 5 that have been assigned a point value. The responsible Offeror(s) whose proposal is most advantageous to the PSFA, taking into consideration the evaluation factors in Section V., and successful negotiations, will be recommended for contract award. Please note, however, that a serious deficiency in the response to any one factor may be grounds for rejection regardless of overall score. In the event of oral presentations, responsible Offerors with the highest scores resulting from the written evaluations will be selected as finalist Offerors. 5. Points awarded from the oral presentations will be added to the previously assigned points from the written evaluations to attain final scores. 6. Ties in ranking shall be scored using the sum of the ranking places, divided by the number of firms in a tie. The following is an example of scoring for a first-place tie: Scoring Numerical Ranking Firm A Tie (1st + 2nd / 2) = 1.5 Firm B Tie (1st + 2nd / 2) = 1.5 Firm C 3rd = 3 A tie for first, at the end of the final rankings after the completion of short listing and interviews, shall be broken by a separate ranking by the committee members, only ranking the firms involved in the tie. If a tie still exists after ranking only the tied firms, the tie shall be broken by the chairman of the PSFA’s SEN Evaluation Committee. Table of ...
View Source
EVALUATION POINTS. QUESTION: Tab 4.h – We’ve made in excess of 3,500 placements over the past four years. Are you seeking the details, behind every placement or a sample of placements?
View Source
EVALUATION POINTS. When creating a response, lenders may create a blended response incorporating multiple discussion points if desired. EXIM suggests combining your response to part i with those for items ii, iv, v, and combining your response to item iii with that of item vi. We encourage you to provide any other information that you feel would be helpful. i Organizational and Ownership Structure We need to “know the customer” and understand the lender and related ownership structure (i.e. holding company). If privately-owned and substantially-owned by a few individuals, we will need detailed owner information. Most lenders provide bios of key individuals in the management chain (background on lender). ii Markets and Communities Served This can be a geographical area or state. iii Commercial Lending Operations Explain the lending portfolio’s size and customer base (i.e. commercial real estate, commercial and industrial).
View Source

Related to EVALUATION POINTS

  • Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan A) Every Educator has an Educator Plan that includes, but is not limited to, one goal related to the improvement of practice; one goal for the improvement of student learning. The Plan also outlines actions the Educator must take to attain the goals established in the Plan and benchmarks to assess progress. Goals may be developed by individual Educators, by the Evaluator, or by teams, departments, or groups of Educators who have the similar roles and/or responsibilities. See Sections 15-19 for more on Educator Plans. B) To determine the goals to be included in the Educator Plan, the Evaluator reviews the goals the Educator has proposed in the Self-Assessment, using evidence of Educator performance and impact on student learning, growth and achievement based on the Educator’s self-assessment and other sources that Evaluator shares with the Educator. The process for determining the Educator’s impact on student learning, growth and achievement will be determined after ESE issues guidance on this matter. See #22, below. C) Educator Plan Development Meetings shall be conducted as follows: i) Educators in the same school may meet with the Evaluator in teams and/or individually at the end of the previous evaluation cycle or by October 15th of the next academic year to develop their Educator Plan. Educators shall not be expected to meet during the summer hiatus. ii) For those Educators new to the school, the meeting with the Evaluator to establish the Educator Plan must occur by October 15th or within six weeks of the start of their assignment in that school iii) The Evaluator shall meet individually with Educators with PTS and ratings of needs improvement or unsatisfactory to develop professional practice goal(s) that must address specific standards and indicators identified for improvement. In addition, the goals may address shared grade level or subject matter goals. D) The Evaluator completes the Educator Plan by November 1st. The Educator shall sign the Educator Plan within 5 school days of its receipt and may include a written response. The Educator’s signature indicates that the Educator received the plan in a timely fashion. The signature does not indicate agreement or disagreement with its contents. The Evaluator retains final authority over the content of the Educator’s Plan.

  • Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)

  • 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.

  • Evaluation 1. The purposes of evaluation provisions include providing employees with feedback, and employers and employees with the opportunity and responsibility to address concerns. Where a grievance proceeds to arbitration, the arbitrator must consider these purposes, and may relieve on just and reasonable terms against breaches of time limits or other procedural requirements.

  • Evaluation Process ‌ A. The immediate supervisor will meet with an employee at the start of their review period to discuss performance expectations. The employee will receive copies of their performance expectations as well as notification of any modifications made during the review period. Employee work performance will be evaluated during probationary, trial service and transition review periods and at least annually thereafter. Notification will be given to a probationary or trial service employee whose work performance is determined to be unsatisfactory. B. The supervisor will discuss the evaluation with the employee. The employee will have the opportunity to provide feedback on the evaluation. The discussion may include such topics as: 1. Reviewing the employee’s performance; 2. Identifying ways the employee may improve their performance; 3. Updating the employee’s position description, if necessary; 4. Identifying performance goals and expectations for the next appraisal period; and 5. Identifying employee training and development needs. C. The performance evaluation process will include, but not be limited to, a written performance evaluation on forms used by the Employer, the employee’s signature acknowledging receipt of the forms, and any comments by the employee. A copy of the performance evaluation will be provided to the employee at the time of the review. A copy of the final performance evaluation, including any employee or reviewer comments, will be provided to the employee. The original performance evaluation forms, including the employee’s comments, will be maintained in the employee’s personnel file. D. If an employee disagrees with their performance evaluation, the employee has the right to attach a rebuttal. E. The performance evaluation process is subject to the grievance procedure in Article 30. The specific content of a performance evaluation is not subject to the grievance procedure. F. Performance evaluations will not be used to initiate personnel actions such as transfer, promotion, or discipline.