Management Capability Clause Samples

Management Capability. The relative importance of the technical sub factors is: Technical Understanding is more important than Personnel Qualification; Personnel Qualifications is more important than Management Capability. Factor 1: Technical Capability, including all subfactors, is more important than Factor 2: Past Performance. All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. However, as non-price factors become closer in perceived value, price considerations will become more important. Trade-off considerations may result in the determination that it is in the best interest of the Government to award to other than the lowest priced Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror.

Management Capability. The provider should demonstrate willingness to collaborate closely with CYPS and address any staffing issues so as to reduce impact on the delivery of services. The provider should make adequate provision for the training and development of staff, particularly the staff involved in the proposed service contract. The provided must demonstrate the ability to conduct a systematic training needs analysis, or adhere to IIP principles.

Management Capability. 5.1 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ left the organisation in September to take up the post of CEO at Sheffield Theatre. ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, our new CEO, who is currently Executive Director of Oldham Coliseum joins us in December. 5.2 As an Investors in People, we have continued the professional development of our staff team by formulating an annual organisational wide training programme. We are currently working toward re-accreditation in September 2010. 5.3 Our Board of Trustees continue to strengthen and challenge the organisation. 5.4 We continue to develop links with the City of York and the Arts Industry and all the Management team are involved with networks, Board memberships and outside bodies including locally with York St ▇▇▇▇ University, Women Without Walls, regionally with Audiences Yorkshire and the Yorkshire Producing Theatres, and nationally with the Theatre Management Association, National Association of Youth Theatres, Arts Marketing Association and the Arts Council.

Management Capability. This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s Management Capability. The offeror will provide the following information to describe its Management Capability to perform the requirements in the PWS: Element 1 Management Structure and Plan, Element 2 Contract Administration Element 3 Human Resources Management Element 4 Transition Phase-In- Property Control

Management Capability. Management Capability has four elements to include the following: 1) Management Structure and Plan, 2) Contract Administration,

Management Capability. The proposal will be evaluated on the offeror’s demonstrated management capability and success in managing projects of similar complexity and duration as that set forth in the SOW. The Offeror shall provide a narrative description of their management strategy for the effort including organizational structure, staffing approach, and contingencies for replacement of personnel for short and long term absences or terminations. The staffing approach shall include how the Offeror intends to recruit, retain and train both key and non-key personnel proposed to support this requirement. In addition, this element will evaluate the Offeror’s approach for cross training, replacement, and backup personnel and for attracting and retaining high quality personnel. M-2-2 FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE: Past performance is a measure of the degree to which the Offeror satisfied its customers in previous relevant contracts and complied with Federal, State, and local laws and regulations.

Management Capability. The proposal will be evaluated on the Offeror’s demonstrated capacity to routinely and rapidly respond to the general science, engineering, and support requirements of a research laboratory. The proposal will be evaluated on the sufficiency of the Offeror’s staff to accommodate program changes within the scope of the SOW. The proposal will be evaluated on the Offeror’s management plan, which should include a description of how the different tasks can be effectively and efficiently managed with minimum demands upon Government personnel. It should include, as applicable: management experience and involvement, quality control, risk management, systems engineering, hardware development, configuration management and subcontract management. The Offeror must also provide a narrative description of its management experience on projects with scientific, engineering and technical efforts similar to those required in the SOW. This description should clearly demonstrate how the contractor’s management plan defines the company’s management efforts resulted in its ability to meet performance requirements, cost, and schedule goals on projects of similar size and complexity. The proposal will also be evaluated on the Offeror’s strategy for assuring a smooth and effective transition between the Offeror’s proposed personnel and the incumbent’s personnel into the ongoing system development, maintenance, and operations efforts. The proposed Transition Plan will be evaluated on:

Management Capability. In relative order of importance, Technical Suitability is slightly more important than Preventative Maintenance Capability and both are substantially more important than Management Capability.

Management Capability. The proposal will be evaluated on the Offerors’ demonstrated capacity to routinely and rapidly respond to the general science, engineering, and support requirements of a research laboratory. The proposal will be evaluated on the sufficiency of the Offerors’ staff to accommodate program changes within the scope of the SOW. The proposal will be evaluated on the Offeror’s management plan, which should include a description of how the different tasks can be effectively and efficiently managed with minimum demands upon Government personnel. The proposal will also be evaluated on the Offeror’s strategy for assuring a smooth and effective transition between the Offeror’s proposed personnel and the incumbent’s personnel into the ongoing system development, maintenance, and operations efforts. The proposed Transition Plan will be evaluated on: 1) a clear staffing and training plan for new personnel; 2) the transfer of work control and information; 3) complying with NRL security regulations; and 4) delineating the method for processing and assigning tasks during the phase-in/phase-out periods. The plan shall address how the Awardee will implement adequate measures to coordinate communications with the Awardee and NRL staff in order to ensure minimal impact during the transition process. The proposal will be evaluated on the Offeror’s ability to complete all the transition activities within 90 days after contract award.