PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA Clause Samples

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA. The City will review and evaluate all proposals after deemed responsive. To receive proper consideration, the proposal must meet the requirements of this RFP. The evaluation process will provide credit only for those capabilities and advantages that are clearly stated in the written proposal(s). In other words, advantages that are not stated will not be considered in the evaluation process.

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA. A. Administrative Ability - 12 points The applicant demonstrates evidence of administrative capacity to meet federal, state, and county administrative requirements. Applicant demonstrates an ability to provide timely and accurate monthly client and financial reports. Applicant demonstrates an ability to be responsive to crisis situations, including, but not limited to, variations in client referral volume and serving exceptional cases. In scoring proposals, for agencies currently under contract with DHHS, reviewers will consider the on time and accuracy rate of applicant in prior year’s required submissions. For new applicants, reviewers will consider the on time and accuracy rate of applicant as described by the person providing the required Performance Assessment report (item 18c or 18c-2). Additionally, in scoring proposals for Administrative ability, reviewers will consider the accuracy and completeness of the proposal. Inaccurate or incomplete proposals will receive reduced scores. For new applicants (existing agencies without current or recent-within last two years-DHHS contracting experience), the provided Performance Assessment for New Applicant Agency report must attest to the applicant’s level of timeliness and accuracy of required submissions. This letter must be completed by an authorized representative of a prior fundor. For new agencies without an agency contracting history of any kind, the Performance Assessment for New Applicant Leadership report is subject to the same requirements as above, but will be for the head of the organization and senior fiscal and program staff. This document may be completed either by a prior fundor or by prior employer. Performance Assessment reports for agencies with non-DHHS contracting history and for new applicants without any agency contracting history must use Item 18c or 18c-2. The applicant shall describe its history, if any, as well as proposed strategy for handling crisis situations, as defined above, using specific examples. For full points, applicant must have an existing system in place that addresses crisis situations. For applicants without previous experience handling crisis situations, proposal will be scored based on the quality of proposed strategy. Examples of strategies to respond to crisis situations can include, but are not limited to: referral networks, flexible staffing arrangements-such as contingency workers, on call staff, or “pool” workers, and other strategies to expand or reduce ph...

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA. As a general rule, the level of innovation and novelty, the quality of the proposed experiment and of the executing team will play a major role in the selection process. All proposals will be ranked based on general criteria: • Excellence • Impact • Implementation Those general criteria are further elaborated in Table 1. Excellence Impact Implementation Criteria Technical and Innovation Merit Contribution to the creation of a SoftFIRE-based Ecosystem Business Impact and considerations Practical Feasibility on SoftFIRE testbeds Technical Soundness Weight 0,35 0,15 0,20 0,30 P r o p e r t i e s Relevance of the proposal for SoftFire federated testbeds Potential to increase knowledge at the European level and differentiate the proposition Desirability/need of the proposed service/function and market perspective Implementability on the SoftFIRE infrastructure Clarity and quality of the proposal Appropriateness of technical and methodological approach (interoperability, programmability and security) Clarity and Quality of the Technological benefits for an European Ecosystem Alignement of the Project with respect to SoftFIRE constraints Quality of the proposing group Originality and innovative value of the proposed features/tests and their relation to the status of the art Contribution to standards or open interfaces Quality of the workplan Potential of exploitaiton/inclusio n in SoftFire of [proposed functionalities and features (including legal/admin aspects)] Quality of the team The proposals submitted by parties who have not yet been or are not participating in FIRE- projects or Open Calls from FIRE-projects will receive an extra “1” point on top of the criteria “Contribution to the creation of a SoftFIRE- based Ecosystem”. This measure is introduced to positively discriminate such new players and open the SoftFIRE federated testbed to a wider community. Based on the received scores, proposals will be ranked and shortlisted. Shortlisted proposals will be invited to negotiate the final terms of the agreement, including the workplan, budget and relevant results/achievements.

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA. The City of Houston’s goal is to create a fair and uniform basis for the evaluation of the Proposals in compliance with all applicable legal requirements governing this procurement. The City of Houston reserves the right to request that a Proposer clarifies its response, and the right to waive any formalities in considering responses. However, failure to furnish all information requested may disqualify a Proposer. A committee will evaluate/review each Proposal and will give a numerical score for each Proposal according to the evaluation categories. Each area of the evaluation criteria must be addressed in detail in the Proposal (except for the presentation / interview component). The best value determination will be based on the following weighted criteria: 40% Technical Score Technical Score x 0.40 40% Price Score Price Score x 0.40 10% Presentation / Interview Presentation / Interview Score x 0.10 10% References Reference Score x 0.10

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA. The following is the criteria by which Proposals from responsible Proposers will be reviewed and evaluated for purposes of determining which is most advantageous for Authority and to make any selection of a Proposal for potential award of the Agreement. Any exceptions, conditions, reservations or understanding explicitly, fully and separately stated as a Proposal deviation and which does not cause Authority to reject a Proposal will be evaluated according to the evaluation criteria and/or sub-criteria which they affect. The criteria to be used in reviewing and evaluating the Proposals and used to establish a score for the Proposals is as follows:

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA. (a) Quality and cost-based selection criteria will be applied for evaluation of proposals and selection of the Consultant for the Services. This will be based on the respective corporate and personnel capability and experience, the quality of the technical proposals and the corresponding cost of the Services to be provided. (b) The proposals for the Services will be ranked using a combined technical/financial score, as indicated below.

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA. Proposals will be evaluated based on the Company's ability to meet the performance requirements of this RFP. This section provides a description of the evaluation criteria that will be used to evaluate the Proposals. To be deemed responsive, it is important for the Company to provide appropriate detail to demonstrate satisfaction of each criterion and compliance with the performance provisions outlined in this RFP. The Company’s Proposal will be the primary source of information used in the evaluation process. Proposals must contain information specifically related to the proposed Products and Services as requested herein. Failure of any Company to submit information requested may result in the elimination of the Proposal from further evaluation. Proposals will be assessed to determine the most comprehensive, competitive and best value solution for the City taking into consideration as a minimum response, but not limited to the following criteria: 1. Adherence to all requirements of this RFP. 2. Demonstrated knowledge, background, capacity, and ability to sell, deliver, and support all Products and Services offered and in compliance with the requirements of this RFP. 3. Capability of meeting or exceeding current and future needs and requirements of U.S. Communities and U.S. Communities members. 4. Qualifications and Experience; (including past performances, administration, management capabilities). 5. Range and quality of Products and Services offerings including technological advances, and value added related Services. 6. Proposed Approach and Proposed Solution 7. Proposed Playgrounds per Section 6, Form 4– taking into consideration a. Design

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA. Minimum Requirements 1. Demonstrate complete conformance with all submission requirements as previously stated in the RFP. 2. If the building proposed to house the classrooms/offices is determined historically significant, then the proposal must show the historic nature of the structure being preserved. 3. The applicant must be able to provide the Town with approximately 10,000 square feet of office space in one building and up to 20,000 – 30,000 sq. ft. of useable classroom space. The space should include the areas stated in the RFP. 4. The applicant must show the ability of the landlord to prepare the proposed space for occupancy and to provide the services required in the RFP in accordance with the accepted standards. It must be shown that the landlord has the ability and the finances to substantially complete the tenant improvements and any other building improvements required for occupancy by the Public Schools of Brookline by the desired occupancy date as represented in the RFP. The Committee will evaluate each proposal for conformance with the objectives, submission requirements, and threshold criteria outlined in this Request for Proposals. Criteria have been established for the purpose of further distinguishing competitive proposals. In addition, the criteria will be used to compare the relative advantages of each competing proposal. The following criteria must be addressed in the proposal: 1. The Town requires space located in Brookline near currently overcrowded schools. The leased office and/or classroom space should be within close proximity to the following locations: Town Hall and the Brookline Village area, including the ▇▇▇▇▇▇ School Area. The leased classroom space should be within close proximity to the following locations: the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Corner School Area and ▇▇▇▇▇ School Area. Proposed leased space next to, or closer proximity to, these areas is preferred and shall be ranked accordingly.

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA. IFAD will conduct a fair and transparent process to select successful organizations. Below is the scoring that will be used to rank the proposals: