Feasibility of Approach Sample Clauses

The Feasibility of Approach clause defines the requirement for a party, typically a contractor or service provider, to demonstrate that their proposed method or plan for completing a project is practical and achievable. In practice, this clause may require the submission of detailed plans, technical analyses, or proof of resources and capabilities to show that the approach can be successfully implemented within the project's constraints. Its core function is to ensure that only realistic and workable solutions are pursued, thereby reducing the risk of project failure due to unworkable or unproven methods.
Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.
View SourceView Similar (9)
Feasibility of Approach. Proposals will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror’s methods and approach in meeting the requirements in a timely manner provide the Government with a high level of confidence that the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. In the event that enhancements are proposed, the enhancements will be evaluated to determine whether the approach taken is feasible and will result in the solicitation requirements being fully met or exceeded.
View SourceView Similar (3)
Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule. FACTOR 1 - Technical Approach FACTOR 2 – Management Approach FACTOR 3 - Past Performance For Factors 1 and 2, Offerors will be assigned a combined technical/risk rating from the following tables, based on the evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal in accordance with the requirements of the solicitation: TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS 1. FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH The Government will evaluate the proposed technical approach to conduct recurring maintenance and minor repair describing the methodology in performing the following tasks:  The degree that the proposal clearly specifies how to implement all requirements of the PWS.  The degree that the proposal demonstrates a reasonable process and rationale for the number and capability of staff to perform the tasks in a cost effective manner, provide an adequate safety program, comply with regulatory requirements, and maintain the specific performance metrics  How the contractor will determine the frequency of inspections at each facility and schedule resources to meet PWS and UFC requirements.  How the contractor will track, report and schedule service orders at both Installations concurrently, from the management standpoint and from the cost standpoint to ensure all work is conducted within the dollar threshold of the individual line item  The degree that the proposal demonstrates an understanding of the service order process from initiation to close out, to include the methodology used to respond to the service order request within time specified in the PWS; troubleshoot the deficiency; prepare the cost estimates for each individual service order; execute service order repair; perform quality control; document closeout; and invoicing  How the Offeror will use proposed personnel and sub-contractor resources to assure the delivery of quality projects in accordance with contract provisions; and  A Technical Approach that demonstrates the least risk to the operations at DoD fuel facilities. The Government may give additional considerati...
View Source
Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule. All proposals submitted in response to the solicitation will be evaluated by a formally established Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). An overall assessment of the merit of each proposal will be derived from the evaluation of the proposal as it relates to each factor in this solicitation. A narrative explanation will be provided to support the adjectival ratings and risk assessment for the Mission Support, Past Performance, and Price factors.
View Source
Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule. FACTOR 1 - Technical Approach FACTOR 2 – Management Approach FACTOR 3 - Past Performance For Factors 1 and 2, Offerors will be assigned a combined technical/risk rating from the following tables, based on the evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal in accordance with the requirements of the solicitation:
View Source
Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule. The evaluation approach for each factor follows: 3.1 FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL (VOLUME II): The Offeror shall describe their technical approach in meeting the Program, Contract, and Management objectives as stated in the PWS cited in this solicitation. The Offeror shall describe their approach and processes as outlined in the following six subfactors above; the Offeror submits a proposal that clearly outlines their approach to meeting Performance Requirements as outlined in the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP). S ubfactor 1 – TECHNICAL UNDERSTANDING The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of all requirements of the PWS and its approach to meeting these requirements. STANDARD: The Offeror clearly understands the service support requirements of the PWS and demonstrates an understanding of the Army PEO Aviation UAS Project Office mission and programmatic needs. S ubfactor 2 – ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE AND MANAGEMENT APPROACH The Government will evaluate the organizational structure to include subcontractors that comprise the entire contractor team. The Government will evaluate the performance-based approach to managing the contractor team in conducting day-to-day operations, coordinating and collaborating with Government personnel in both management and service delivery functions, and effectively and efficiently meeting all contract requirements. STANDARD: The performance-based management approach and contractor team organizational structure supports effective management of contractor and subcontractor personnel in performing the task requirements defined in the PWS while collocated with Government personnel and at Contractor sites.
View Source
Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven practices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule. The Offerors shall address each of the sub-factors within its technical proposal. Offerors must receive a rating of Acceptable or better in each of the sub-factors to receive an Acceptable rating for this factor. Sub-factor 1b: Management Approach Sub-factor 1c: Recruitment and Retention DRAFT Each sub-factor within Factor 1 will be rated as Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Unacceptable. The ratings for the sub-factors will then be summarized and one overall rating will be given for Factor 1 of either Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Unacceptable. If an Offeror receives a rating of Unacceptable or Marginal for any of the individual sub-factors, the entire factor will be rated as Unacceptable. All Offerors must receive a rating of Acceptable or better in the Technical factor and each sub-factor, to be eligible for award. Factor 1 ratings are defined as follows:
View Source

Related to Feasibility of Approach

  • Technical Feasibility of String While ICANN has encouraged and will continue to encourage universal acceptance of all top-­‐level domain strings across the Internet, certain top-­‐level domain strings may encounter difficulty in acceptance by ISPs and webhosters and/or validation by web applications. Registry Operator shall be responsible for ensuring to its satisfaction the technical feasibility of the TLD string prior to entering into this Agreement.

  • STABILITY OF AGREEMENT No amendment, alteration or variation of the terms or provisions of this Agreement shall bind the parties hereto unless made and executed in writing by the parties hereto.

  • Feasibility Each of the Project Budget, the Project Schedule and the Disbursement Schedule is realistic and feasible.

  • Feasibility Study Buyer is granted the right to conduct engineering and/or market and economic feasibility studies of the Property and a physical inspection of the Property, including studies or inspections to determine the existence of any environmental hazards or conditions (collectively, the “Feasibility Study”) during the period (the “Feasibility Period”) commencing on the Effective Date and ending at 5:00 p.m., Central Time, on the June 3, 2010. With Seller’s permission, after Seller has received advance notice sufficient to permit it to schedule in an orderly manner Buyer’s examination of the Property and to provide at least 24-hours’ advance written notice to any affected tenants, Buyer or its designated agents may enter upon the Property during normal business hours for purposes of analysis or other tests and inspections which may be deemed necessary by Buyer for the Feasibility Study. Buyer or its designated representative must be accompanied by a designated representative of Seller or have received Seller’s written permission prior to entering upon the Property in connection with Buyer’s Feasibility Study; provided, however, Buyer may not enter into any space leased by any tenant without being accompanied by a designated representative of Seller. Seller agrees to make its representative reasonably available during normal business hours. Buyer will not alter the physical condition of the Property or conduct invasive testing without notifying Seller of its requested tests, and obtaining the written consent of Seller to any physical alteration of the Property or invasive testing. Buyer will utilize commercially reasonable diligence to conduct or cause to be conducted all inspections and tests in a manner and at times which will not unreasonably interfere with any tenant’s use and occupancy of the Property. If Buyer determines, in its sole judgment, that the Property is not suitable for any reason for Buyer’s intended use or purpose, or is not in satisfactory condition, then Buyer may terminate this Contract by written notice to Seller prior to expiration of the Feasibility Period, in which case the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Money (other than the Option Money) will be returned to Buyer, and neither party shall have any further right or obligation hereunder other than as set forth herein with respect to rights or obligations which survive termination. If this Contract is not terminated pursuant to this Section 5(a), then after expiration of the Feasibility Period, after Seller has received advance notice sufficient to permit it to schedule in an orderly manner Buyer’s examination of the Property and to provide at least 24-hours’ advance written notice to any affected tenants, Buyer or its designated agents may enter upon the Property during normal business hours. Buyer or its designated representative must be accompanied by a designated representative of Seller or have received Seller’s written permission prior to entering upon the Property; provided, however, Buyer may not enter into any space leased by any tenant without being accompanied by a designated representative of Seller. If this Contract is not timely terminated pursuant to this Section 5(a), Buyer’s right to terminate this Contract pursuant to this Section 5(a) and any and all objections with respect to the Feasibility Study will be deemed to have been waived by Buyer for all purposes.

  • Investment Analysis and Implementation In carrying out its obligations under Section 1 hereof, the Advisor shall: (a) supervise all aspects of the operations of the Funds; (b) obtain and evaluate pertinent information about significant developments and economic, statistical and financial data, domestic, foreign or otherwise, whether affecting the economy generally or the Funds, and whether concerning the individual issuers whose securities are included in the assets of the Funds or the activities in which such issuers engage, or with respect to securities which the Advisor considers desirable for inclusion in the Funds' assets; (c) determine which issuers and securities shall be represented in the Funds' investment portfolios and regularly report thereon to the Board of Trustees; (d) formulate and implement continuing programs for the purchases and sales of the securities of such issuers and regularly report thereon to the Board of Trustees; and (e) take, on behalf of the Trust and the Funds, all actions which appear to the Trust and the Funds necessary to carry into effect such purchase and sale programs and supervisory functions as aforesaid, including but not limited to the placing of orders for the purchase and sale of securities for the Funds.