134-202627-001 RFP Evaluation Matrix - Biopharmaceutical Automated Fill Machine Isolator (10-20-26).xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 26 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 134-202627-001
- Issued by
- Watauga County, North Carolina
About this file
This is an evaluation matrix template document for a state procurement solicitation concerning a Biopharmaceutical Automated Fill Machine Isolator. The template is designed for internal use by evaluation teams and provides customizable frameworks for assessing vendor proposals using either a Point Score Ranking method or a Best Value evaluation approach. The document does not specify particular response dates, due dates, site visits, bidder conferences, award dates, or contract terms, as it functions as a blank template for solicitation authors to populate with solicitation-specific details. The template accommodates evaluation of up to ten vendors across multiple evaluation criteria including technical approach, specifications, tasks and deliverables, service and support, vendor references, vendor experience, financial condition, and cost proposals.
The evaluation matrix template provides flexibility for pricing evaluation through its cost proposal tab, where proposed costs are entered and points are calculated automatically based on the methodology selected. The template does not contain information regarding set-asides, incumbent contractors, funding sources, or amounts, as these elements would be determined by the solicitation author when customizing the document for a specific procurement. The instructions emphasize that evaluators must not edit shaded cells and that all evaluation factors, maximum points, and scoring criteria must align with the specific solicitation requirements before the template is distributed to evaluation team members.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Instructions
| Agency Name | ||
| - This Page For Internal Use Only - | ||
| Template Name: | Evaluation Matrix | IMPORTANT |
| Purpose: | Customizable matrix for collecting evaluation data according to the method and criteria stated in a solicitation | Follow instructions carefully to ensure functions calculate correctly. |
Do not edit gray-shaded cells.
When adding additional rows to the Points Scoring tab, copy entire rows to ensure formulas calculate correctly.
| Intended Template User(s): | Members of the proposal evaluation team |
| Audience | Assigned P&C team, Deputy State Purchasing Officer - Strategic Sourcing, Deputy State Purchasing Officer - Legal, State Purchasing Officer, Governor's Office (Consulting Services) |
| Instructions to Solicitation Author: | Before posting the solicitation, customize this document by following the instructions for the chosen evaluation method below. |
| Point Score Ranking | |
| 1. Delete the Best Value tab. | |
| Note: You can copy tabs to create an evaluation tab for each vendor or use one tab to document all vendors. |
A sample points scoring rubric is on the Points Example tab.
| 2. On the Point Scoring tab, in Cell C3, enter the maximum possible points for cost. |
| 3. On the Point Scoring tab, Column A, change the names of the categories listed to match categories defined in your soliciation. |
Important: Do not edit the Subtotal field. Each category must have a subtotal field for other calculations to work properly.
| a. If you only have one category, such as Technical Approach, delete all rows in the Additional Category (Rows 9-13). |
| b. If you need another category, copy entire Rows 9-13 and paste them on Row 14. |
| 4. On the Point Scoring tab, Column B, name the evaluation factors within each category to match factors defined in your solicitation. |
| a. If you need to delete rows in a category, be sure to delete entire rows. |
| b. If you need to add rows to a category, copy an entire row and insert it before the last row in the category. This will preserve the formulas that calculate Subtotals. |
| 5. On the Point Scoring tab, in Column C, enter the maximum possible points for each of the evaluation factors. Do not edit the subtotal fields in Column C. |
Note that Cell C2 totals the possible points as you enter them. Make sure this total matches the total stated in your solicitation.
| 6. Double check that the categories, evaluation factors, and possible points match what is defined in your solicitation. |
| Best Value |
| 1. Delete the Point Scoring AND Cost Proposal tabs. |
| Note: You can copy tabs to create an evaluation tab for each vendor or use one tab to document all vendors. |
| 2.On the Best Value tab, Column A, edit the default evaluation factors to match what you defined in your solicitation. |
Your headers should be the Evaluation Criteria defined in Section 3. You can add rows for additional sub-criteria for each criterion, by adding additional rows and identifying the section and subject matter. Add as many factors as needed.
| 3. You can add columns for additional factors to be documented (i.e., Significant Strength, Risk/Concern, Negotiation Points, Clarification Points). | |
| 4. On the Best Value Summary tab, edit as needed to document how you intend to compare solutions/responses and provide a summary of award rationale. | |
| Instructions to Evaulators: | Make a copy of the workbook prepared by the solicitation author and fill in the following: |
| Point Score Ranking | |
| 1. Important: Do not edit any cell with shading. | |
| 2. On the Cost Proposal tab, beginning with Cell B2, enter the proposed cost for each vendor. Points will be calculated automatically on the Point Scoring tab. | |
| 3. On the Point Scoring tab, Cell D5, enter the first vendor's score for this evaluation factor between 0 and the value in Cell C5. | |
| 4. In the Comments columns, add supporting comments for strengths, weaknesses, negotiation points and/or clarification points. | |
| 5. On the same row, continue entering scores for each vendor for this evaluation factor. | |
| 6. Move to the next row for an evaluation factor, and enter scores for each vendor. |
Important: Do not enter scores in the shaded Category Subtotal rows.
| 7. After entering your vendor scores for all listed evaluation factors, submit the workbook to the evaluation team lead. | |
| Best Value | |
| 1. On the Best Value tab, Cell B3, enter the strengths of the first vendor's proposal for the evaluation factor in Cell A3. | |
| 2. In Cell C3, enter the weaknesses of the first vendor's proposal for the same evaluation factor. | |
| 3. On the same row and for the same evaluation factor, enter descriptions in the Strengths and Weaknesses columns for each vendor. | |
| 4. In the next row, for the evaluation factor in Cell A4, enter the strengths and weaknesses for each vendor. | |
| 5. After entering vendor proposal strengths and weaknesses for each evaluation factor, submit the workbook to the evaluation team lead. | |
| Instructions to Evaluation Team Lead: | After reviewing evaluation with required stakeholders, calculate the results and record them in a final copy of this workbook. |
| Note - Evaluation Facilitator should only provide one Evaluation Matrix, with agreement from Business Owner. | |
| - This Page For Internal Use Only - | |
| Information that assists or otherwise relates to developing specifications for a solicitation by the State is deemed confidential until award of a contract in connection with such solicitation. |
Best Value
| Vendor 1 | Vendor 2 | Vendor 3 | Vendor 4 | Vendor 5 | ||||||
| Evaluation Factor | Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses |
| Vendor Technical Approach (Section 5.5) | ||||||||||
| Specifications | ||||||||||
| Fill Machine Specifications | ||||||||||
| Tasks/Deliverables | ||||||||||
| A - K | ||||||||||
| Service and Support | ||||||||||
| Vendor References (Section 4.8) | ||||||||||
| Vendor Experience (Section 4.7) | ||||||||||
| Financial Condition (Section 4.10) | ||||||||||
| Cost Proposal (Attachment: Pricing) | ||||||||||
| Clarificaton Needs |
Negotiation Needs
Best Value Summary
| Summary Information | Vendor 1 | Vendor 2 | Vendor 3 | Vendor 4 | Vendor 5 | |||||
| Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses | |
| Summary of Strengths & weaknesses (how do the strengths benefit or provide risk to the project) | ||||||||||
| Vendor 6 | Vendor 7 | Vendor 8 | Vendor 9 | Vendor 10 | ||||||
| Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses | Strengths | Weaknesses | |
| Summary of Strengths & weaknesses (how do the strengths benefit or provide risk to the project) | ||||||||||
| Summary (Where the evaluations strengths and weaknesses align with the project, in comparison to other responses) |
Award Recommendation Rationale:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .