2-26-0196 Evaluation Criteria.pdf

PDF 154 KB Posted

Attached to
Request for Qualifications for Safe Routes to School Master Plan
Solicitation number
RFQ 26-0196
Issued by
Tarrant County, Austin City, Texas

About this file

This is an evaluation criteria document for a Request for Qualifications (RFQ 26-0196) issued by the City of Arlington, Texas, for consulting services related to development of a Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) Master Plan. The City of Arlington Transportation Department and Public Works Department seek qualified consulting firms to complete the SRTS Master Plan and associated Demonstration Projects. The solicitation encourages electronic submission of proposals through the Euna Procurement system, with late proposals not accepted. The City reserves the right to conduct oral presentations and interviews with short-listed proposers, though such presentations are optional at the City's discretion. All costs associated with interviews and presentations are the responsibility of proposers, and proposers should submit complete written responses regardless of whether an oral presentation is requested.

The evaluation committee will score proposals on a 100-point matrix comprising four criteria: Team Experience and Composition (30 points), Project Experience (25 points), Tasks and Methodology (40 points), and Work Schedule (5 points). Only top-ranked respondents will advance to the negotiation phase. The City reserves discretion to create a short-list of highest-scored proposals for further evaluation through interviews or presentations. Following negotiations with the highest-scoring respondent, if agreement cannot be reached, the City will sequentially negotiate with the next highest-scoring respondents until a contract is awarded or the RFP is cancelled. The City reserves the right to consider historical information, past working relationships, firm background, personnel qualifications, financial references, and exceptions to the RFP in its evaluation process.

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

RFQ 26-0196 Request for Qualifications for the Safe Routes to Schools Master Plan

Evaluation Criteria And Proposal Submission

The City will conduct a comprehensive and impartial evaluation of all responsive proposals received in response to this RFQ. The City reserves the right to use any and all reasonable and relevant criteria in making its decision as to the most advantageous proposer. Discussions may be conducted with Vendors determined to be reasonably qualified, and the City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. The City reserves the right to determine the overall qualifications under the RFP.

A committee comprised of various city staff will evaluate all responsive proposals. At the City’s option or in order to make a final determination, proposers may be invited to a second round of scoring which may include oral presentations or interviews. The evaluation committee will determine the responsiveness and acceptability of each proposal according to established criteria.

Vendors shall be treated fairly and equally with respect to any opportunity for discussion and revision of their offer. To obtain the best and final value offers, revisions may be permitted after submissions and before award of the Contract.

The City will evaluate and score each of the proposal submittals received from responsive respondents based on established criteria listed below. Only the top ranked respondents will proceed to the Negotiation Phase. No order of preference is required during this phase.

Evaluation Criteria:

An evaluation committee will assess the information provided by proposers in response to the criteria established below. The scores of all evaluators will be used to determine the ranking of each proposal.

Proposals will be evaluated on a matrix of the following criteria/weights.

Maximum Possible Points Evaluation Criteria

Team Experience and Composition:

• Evaluation will be based on the professional background, qualifications, composition, and experience of the firm’s proposed team.

Project Experience:

• Evaluation will be based on the quality and effectiveness of the firm’s past projects with similar scope.

Tasks and Methodology:

• Evaluation will be based on the detail of the proposed tasks, methodology, and approach to complete the SRTS Master Plan and Demonstration Projects.

Work Schedule:

• Evaluation will be based on the feasibility of the firm’s proposed work schedule and the firm’s capability to meet all deadlines and schedules.

100 TOTAL POINTS

Each vendor is responsible for submitting all relevant, factual, and correct information with their bid. The evaluation committee will assign a ranking score to each vendor based on the available data.

Short-Listing:

The Evaluation Committee at its sole discretion may create a short-list of the highest scored proposals based on the preliminary evaluation against the evaluation criteria. Only those short-listed Proposers would be invited to participate in interviews and/or presentations, demonstrations or product testing. Upon conclusion of any interviews and/or presentations, demonstrations or product testing, the Evaluation Committee will finalize the scoring against the evaluation criteria.

Oral Presentations:

Proposers who submit a PROPOSAL in response to this RFQ may be required to give an oral presentation of their PROPOSAL to the City. The City will schedule the time and location of these presentations. Oral presentations are an option of the City and may or may not be conducted.

Notwithstanding the possibility of a request for an on-site interview and presentation, Proposers shall not rely on the possibility of such a request and shall submit a complete and comprehensive written response to this solicitation. Any costs incurred for the interviews and the oral presentation are the responsibility of the Proposer.

The Evaluation Committee will then discuss the oral presentation results and arrive at an overall score for each respondent. Negotiations with the respondent having the highest overall score will then begin.

Negotiations:

If negotiations do not result in a contract, the city will then begin negotiations with the respondent having the second highest overall score. This process will continue until either a contract is awarded or the RFP is cancelled. Once the city and the respondent determine that an agreement cannot be reached and the decision is made to move on to the next highest scoring respondent, negotiations cannot be reconvened with a respondent with whom agreement previously could not be reached.

Other Considerations:

The City reserves the right to consider historical information and facts, whether gained from the proposal, references, or any other source, in the evaluation process, including Proposer’s past working or business relationship with the City, if any.

The City further reserves the right to consider a Firm’s background, personnel, experience, financial and other references, exceptions to this RFP or subsequent contract, and any working relationships, past or present, a proposer may have with its other clients.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .