Review and Evaluation of Proposals/ Vendor Demonstrations Clause Samples

Review and Evaluation of Proposals/ Vendor Demonstrations. After the proposals are received and opened by the County, the County shall review and evaluate all proposals for responsiveness to the RFP in order to determine whether the Proposer possesses the qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required. The County may also investigate qualifications of all Proposers to whom the award is contemplated, and the County may request clarifications of proposals directly from one or more Proposers. Presentations of the Proposers of their products may be scheduled to facilitate evaluation of each proposed solution by a project team based on specified functionality. In reviewing the proposals, the County may consider the following: 1. The functionality of the system and its ability to meet the needs of the County of Sonoma. 2. The qualifications (including education, certifications, experience, and past performance) of the Proposer and its agents, employees and sub- consultants in installing and supporting the system being proposed in an environment of similar size, scope, and complexity as that of the County of Sonoma. 3. The feasibility of the proposal based upon the methodology of the proposed scope of services to meet the County’s needs, the quality of products and services proposed, and the reasonableness of the total project costs. 4. Proposer’s understanding of the work to be completed based upon the clarity of the proposal and responsiveness to this RFP. The County will not assume that a proposer will perform services not specifically detailed in its submitted proposal. 5. Proposer’s willingness to accept the terms and conditions in the County’s standard form Service Agreement described in Section II of this RFP. The proposal with the lowest price will not necessarily be selected; however, price is a component of the evaluation. The County will select the proposal that is most advantageous to the County and will award the Agreement to the most responsible proposer.
View Source

Related to Review and Evaluation of Proposals/ Vendor Demonstrations

  • ADB’s Review of Procurement Decisions 11. All contracts procured under international competitive bidding procedures and contracts for consulting services shall be subject to prior review by ADB, unless otherwise agreed between the Borrower and ADB and set forth in the Procurement Plan.

  • Response/Compliance with Audit or Inspection Findings A. Grantee must act to ensure its and its Subcontractors’ compliance with all corrections necessary to address any finding of noncompliance with any law, regulation, audit requirement, or generally accepted accounting principle, or any other deficiency identified in any audit, review, inspection or investigation of the Grant Agreement and the services and Deliverables provided. Any such correction will be at Grantee’s or its Subcontractor's sole expense. Whether ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇'s action corrects the noncompliance shall be solely the decision of the System Agency. B. As part of the services, Grantee must provide to HHS upon request a copy of those portions of Grantee's and its Subcontractors' internal audit reports relating to the services and Deliverables provided to the State under the Grant Agreement. C. Grantee shall include the requirement to provide to System Agency (and any of its duly authorized federal, state, or local authorities) internal audit reports related to this Grant Agreement in any Subcontract it awards. Upon request by System Agency, Grantee shall enforce this requirement against its Subcontractor. Further, Grantee shall include in any Subcontract it awards a requirement that all Subcontractor Subcontracts must also include these provisions.

  • Evaluation of Proposals All proposals received shall be reviewed to determine whether they meet the format requirements and the standards specified in the request for sealed proposals. The district shall evaluate the qualifications of the proposers based solely upon the criteria and evaluation methodology set forth in the request for sealed proposals, and shall assign a best value score to each proposal. Once the evaluation is complete, all responsive proposals shall be ranked from the highest best value to the lowest best value to the district.

  • Project Monitoring Reporting and Evaluation The Recipient shall furnish to the Association each Project Report not later than forty-five (45) days after the end of each calendar semester, covering the calendar semester.

  • NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC EVENTS AND MEETINGS 17 A. CONTRACTOR shall notify ADMINISTRATOR of any public event or meeting funded in whole 18 or in part by COUNTY, except for those events or meetings that are intended solely to serve Clients or 19 occur in the normal course of business. 20 B. CONTRACTOR shall notify ADMINISTRATOR at least thirty (30) business days in advance of 21 any applicable public event or meeting. The notification must include the date, time, duration, location 22 and purpose of the public event or meeting. Any promotional materials or event related flyers must be 23 approved by ADMINISTRATOR prior to distribution. 24