Order of Importance Sample Clauses
The Order of Importance clause establishes a hierarchy among the various provisions within a contract, specifying which terms take precedence in the event of a conflict or inconsistency. In practice, this clause may state that certain sections, such as payment terms or confidentiality obligations, override general terms if discrepancies arise. By clearly defining which provisions are most authoritative, the clause ensures that the parties have a clear method for resolving conflicting interpretations, thereby reducing ambiguity and potential disputes.
Order of Importance. All evaluation factors other than price when combined are significantly more important than price. Past performance is significantly more important than Small Business Participation. Within Past Performance, the importance of all evaluation factors is approximately equal. The Government reserves the right to make the award to an Offeror other than the Offeror that submits the lowest overall evaluated price, using a Best Value trade-off analysis method of procurement. Offerors must receive a rating of Acceptable or better on all factors to be eligible for award. Evaluation Factors and Sub-factors: The Government intends to award to the responsible Offeror that proposes the best value to the Government, based on the evaluation of these factors and sub-factors: • Past Performance Factor o Sub-Factor 1: Quality o Sub-Factor 2: Timeliness of Delivery • Small Business Utilization Factor • Price Factor The Government will find Offerors that do not propose on all above factors and sub-factors non-compliant and remove them from the pool. Offerors will submit proposals in accordance with Section L.
Order of Importance. All evaluation factors other than price when combined are significantly more important the price. Within the non-price factors, Technical is significantly more important than the Small Business Utilization Factor. The Government reserves the right to make the award to an Offeror other than the Offeror that submits the lowest overall evaluated price, using a Best Value trade-off analysis method of procurement. Offerors must receive a rating of Acceptable or better on all factors to be eligible for award.
Order of Importance. All evaluation factors other than price when combined are significantly more important the price. Within the non- price factors, Technical is significantly more important than the Small Business Utilization Factor. The Government reserves the right to make the award to an Offeror other than the Offeror that submits the lowest overall evaluated price, using a Best Value trade-off analysis method of procurement. Offerors must receive a rating of Acceptable or better on all factors to be eligible for award. Offerors are required to provide sufficient information concerning facility capability/capacity in order to demonstrate ability to meet the required delivery date outlined in FAR 52.211-8. The technical proposal must include the following 3 subfactors: (1) current Work in Progress (WIP) report; (2) Milestone Plan, and (3) Subcontractor/Teaming arrangements. The offeror will be evaluated to determine the extent the offeror has the facility capability and capacity to meet the proposed delivery date. The Technical proposals will be rated as follows: Adjectival Rating Description Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional technical approach and understanding of the requirements to meeting the required delivery date, with an appropriate planning schedule and capacity, it contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low. Good Proposal indicates a thorough technical approach and understanding of the requiremnets to meeting the required delivery date, with an appropriate planning schedule and capacity, it contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate. Acceptable Proposal meets the technical requirements and indicates an adequate approach to meeting the required delivery date, with an appropriate planning schedule and capacity and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate. Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate technical approach to meeting the required delivery date, with an appropriate planning schedule and capacity and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high. Proposal is unawardable. Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the technical requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable. Rating Description Low Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government moni...
Order of Importance. Small Business Reserve: Factors A and B (Non-Price), when combined, are significantly more important than Factor C (Price).
Order of Importance. The Technical Factor is more important than the Cost Factor. The Cost Factor is significantly more important than Small Business Participation Factor. The non-Cost Factors, when combined, are significantly more important than the Cost Factor.
Order of Importance. All evaluation factors other than price are significantly more important than price. Within Past Performance, all subfactors are about equal. The Government reserves the right to make an award to other than the Offeror who submits the lowest overall evaluated price, using a Best Value trade-off analysis method of procurement. Offerors must receive a rating of at least Acceptable on all factors to be eligible for award.