4-7. Evaluation Criteria (26).docx

DOCX document 21 KB Posted

Attached to
DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN INVESTMENT ADVISORY CONSULTANT SERVICES
Solicitation number
P-005468
Issued by
Philadelphia County, Sugarcreek Borough, Pennsylvania

About this file

This is an evaluation criteria document for the Philadelphia Housing Authority's (PHA) Request for Proposal (RFP) for Defined Contribution Plan Investment Advisory Consultant Services in Pennsylvania. The PHA Pension Board is seeking one or more qualified consultants to provide comprehensive general investment consulting advice and services for the Philadelphia Housing Authority Defined Contribution Pension Plan. Selected consultant(s) will report to the Board, attend quarterly Board meetings at minimum, and participate in additional meetings as reasonably requested. The solicitation contains a full Scope of Work detailing the consultant's responsibilities and functional relationship with the Board.

The evaluation process establishes 80 technical points distributed across six criteria: demonstrated understanding of requirements (20 points), technical approach (20 points), technical capabilities and management plan (20 points), demonstrated successful past performance on substantially similar contract work (10 points), commitment to certified MBE and WBE participation (5 points), and commitment to Section 3 participation (5 points). An additional 20 points are awarded for cost/price following the competitive range determination, for a total of 100 points. The evaluation committee will classify responsive proposals as acceptable, potentially acceptable, or unacceptable, with acceptable and potentially acceptable proposals entering the competitive range. Proposals in the competitive range may receive oral presentations and participate in negotiations regarding technical and price factors. Following negotiations, PHA may request best and final offers, after which a final evaluation round will occur and the award will be made to the proposal providing the best value based on pre-established criteria, not necessarily to the lowest offeror.

View the file

Other files

Show all 12

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

G. EVALUATION CRITERIA

All proposals received by the specified date shall be subject to evaluation by a review committee. The following criteria can be used to rank Offerors. PHA reserves the right to hold discussions with and request Best and Final Offers from the highest rated Offerors determined by PHA to be within the competitive range. Award will be made to the Offeror(s) whose price, technical factors, and level of MBE/WBE and Section 3 participation are most advantageous to PHA.

NUMBER
EVALUATION CRITERIA
POINTS
1
Demonstrated understanding of the requirements
20
2
Technical Approach
20
3
Technical capabilities (in terms of personnel, Equipment, and materials) and management plan (including staffing of key positions, method of assigning work, and procedures for maintaining level of service, etc.)
4
Demonstrated successful past performance of contract work substantially similar to that required by the solicitation as verified by reference checks or other means
5
Commitment to certified MBE and WBE participation
5
6
Commitment to Section 3 participation
Total
80

Post Competitive Range

7
Cost/price (BAFO)
20
Total Points
100

I. Evaluation, Scoring and Selection Criteria:

A. Selection Criteria

PHA will evaluate and select Firm(s) according to the evaluation criteria setforth on page G-1 of this RFP.
B.Evaluation Process
Responsive proposals will be evaluated in the following manner:
1.A technical evaluation committee will review, rate and score all proposals individually on their technical merits and according to evaluation criteria on page G-1.
2.Upon completion of technical evaluation, all Offerors proposals will be classified as acceptable, potentially acceptable, or unacceptable. All Offeror found to be acceptable or potentially acceptable will be deemed to be in the competitive range.
3.All proposals deemed to be in the competitive range may be given an opportunity to present an oral presentation to Evaluation Committee.
4.Those proposals in the competitive range may be asked to participate in negotiations to discuss technical and price factors to ensure a mutual understanding of both PHA requirements and the respondent’s proposal, unless PHA determines that there is no need to hold negotiations and awards are made base on initial proposals received. Negotiations will be conducted either in person or by telephone depending on the nature of each proposal and the evaluation panel’s requirement.
5.After negotiations are completed with those proposals in the competitive range, a date and time will be established for submission of best and final offers if they are considered necessary and in the best interest of PHA. Best and final offers will be submitted only once unless the Contracting Officer makes a written determination that it is in PHA’s best interest to conduct additional negotiations or change PHA requirements and request another submission of best and final offers.
6.After best and final offers are received, a final round of technical and fee proposal evaluation will occur.
7.The Evaluation Committee will recommend the responsible Firm (s) whose proposal(s) is/are most advantageous, with price and technical factors considered, for selection.
8.The selection will be awarded to the proposal that provided PHA with the best value based on the pre-established evaluation criteria and process. Selection will not necessarily be made to the lowest offeror.

G-1

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