2-A Evaluation Criteria.pdf
PDF 183 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Water Conservation Strategic Plan
- Solicitation number
- UTIL250803.2
- Issued by
- Yavapai County, Arizona
About this file
This file contains evaluation criteria sheets for the Town of Prescott Valley's Upper Agua Fria Recharge Facility Expansion project, serving as scoring rubrics for the selection committee to assess consultant qualifications and presentations. The evaluation process consists of two phases: first, a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) assessment worth 100 points, followed by an optional interviews/presentations phase also worth 100 points if required by the Selection Committee. The SOQ evaluation focuses on five key areas: Understanding & Approach (20 points), Experience of team members and sub-consultants (25 points), Capacity/Capability/Resource Availability (20 points), Experience with comparable municipal projects and conservation planning for populations over 50,000 (25 points), and Overall Quality of Statement of Qualifications (10 points). The interview evaluation, if conducted, assesses Communication skills (30 points), Presentation quality (30 points), Question/Answer performance (30 points), and Other Relevant Issues including why the firm should be selected (10 points).
The evaluation criteria emphasize technical competence, relevant municipal experience, project delivery capabilities, and the firm's understanding of regulatory requirements and local project-specific needs. Selection committee members are instructed not to minimize the importance of adequate responses in any evaluation area and must complete scoring sheets with comments, signatures, and rankings for each evaluated firm. The forms require detailed assessment of professional backgrounds, past performance quality including cost controls and schedule adherence, current workload capacity, firm stability, and the ability to demonstrate specialized experience with water recharge facility projects in municipal government settings.
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
Town of Prescott Valley Upper Agua Fria Recharge Facility Expansion
Appendix A Evaluation Criteria Sheets
Maximum Points
Points Awarded
Please do not minimize the importance of an adequate response in any area. Total Score: 100
Evaluate the Statement of Qualifications and bring your finished results to the Selection Committee Meeting.
Selection Committee Member Name & Signature Date Name of Firm/Person Evaluated
EVALUATION OF STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
Evaluation Criteria Comments and Notes
1. Understanding & Approach: Grasp of local/Town specific project requirements? Detailed/vague? Preparation? Creativity/Style?
Identification of project challenges that require special attention?
Understanding of regulatory requirements? Commitment to successful working relationship with Town?
2. Experience of each team member & sub-consultant: Description of each persons duties & time allocations. Professional background match project needs? Technical competence? Recent/Similar projects? Specialized Experience? Quality of past performance (i.e.
competent/accurate plans, cost controls, ability to mobilize quickly, adherance to schedule)?
3. Capacity/Capability/Resource Availability: Adequate personnel to perform on schedule? Current work load of firm/team? Stability of Firm? 20
Rank:
4. Experience: Specific experience of firm with comparable projects in municipalities or local governments? Delivery of projects?
Experience: Conservation planning for municipalities of >50,000 population. 25
5. Overall Quality of Statement of Qualifications: Preparation?
Organization (i.e.clear/credible/concise)? Technical concepts? Visual aids? All information readily available and present? Focus is on the project and/or firm and/or design team (hopefully all three)? 10
Town of Prescott Valley Upper Agua Fria Recharge Facility Expansion
Appendix A Evaluation Criteria Sheets
EVALUATION OF INTERVIEWS/PRESENTATIONS
(if required by Selection Committee)
Evaluation Criteria Comments and Notes Maximum Points
1. Communication: Proposed interaction with Town Staff?
Proposed Team cohesion and enthusiasm? Approach to project planning, design, innovative ideas, and cost saving measures?
2. Presentation: Supplementary/complimentary to SOQ?
Observation of existing conditions and grasp of key project information? Relevant to project? Quality of Presentation?
Organization (i.e. clear/credible/concise)? Technical concepts?
Visual aids? All information readily available and present?
3. Question/Answer portion: Clear understanding of questions? Relevant answers? Answers directed to success of project, or only to firm?
4. Other Relevant Issues: Define why their firm should be engaged?
Please do not minimize the importance of an adequate response in any area.
Total Score: 100
Rank:
Selection Committee Member Name & Signature Date Name of Firm/Person Evaluated
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .