4-Attachment C Evaluation AggravatedMurderAppeals.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 73 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Legal Counsel for Aggravated Murder Appeals
- Solicitation number
- TR26-16
- Issued by
- Utah
About this file
This is an evaluation scoresheet for the Legal Counsel for Aggravated Murder Appeals Request for Proposal (RFP) issued by the State of Utah Division of Purchasing under the Governor's Office. The procurement seeks qualified legal counsel to handle aggravated murder appeals, with anticipated multiple contract awards to responsive and responsible vendors meeting the minimum technical score threshold. The contract term is five years, with an end date of January 9, 2030. Firms that currently hold a contract for these services with the same end date are not required to submit a response.
The evaluation scoresheet establishes mandatory minimum requirements that respondents must satisfy, including demonstrated experience as counsel in at least three felony appeals, completion or instruction of an approved Continuing Legal Education course within the past five years with at least eight hours focused on death penalty trial cases, more than five years of active criminal defense practice, current membership on the appellate roster maintained by the Board of Appellate Judges under Utah Rules of Judicial Administration Rule 11-401, and good standing with the Utah State Bar. The scoresheet allocates 500 total technical evaluation points across three criteria: Resume (150 points, 30 percent weight), Statement of Interest (50 points, 10 percent weight), and Prior Capital Defense Representation (300 points, 60 percent weight). A minimum score of 360 points (72 percent) is required to advance beyond the technical evaluation phase. The fee schedule is determined by the agency and stated in the scope of work pursuant to Utah Code Section 63G-6a-113.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 2-Vendor Prerequisites - RFP Agency.pdf | ||
| 5-Attachment B Scope of Work AggravatedMurderAppeals 050526.docx | DOCX document | |
| 1-Claim of Business Confidentiality Updated.pdf.pdf | ||
| 3-Attachment A Terms.pdf |
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
scoresheet
| Aggravated Murder Appeals | |
| EVALUATION SCORESHEET | |
| Score will be assigned as follows: | |
| 0 = Fail, the proposal fails to address the requirements or criteria described in the RFP or cannot be assessed du to missing information | |
| Firm Name: | 1 = Poor, the proposal inadequately addresses the requirements or criteria described in the RFP or cannot be assessed due to incomplete information |
| 2 = Unsatisfactory, the proposal addresses the requirements or criteria described in the RFP in an unsatisfactory manner | |
| Evaluator: | 3 = Satisfactory, the proposal addresses all requirements or criteria described in the RFP in a minimum satisfactory manner |
| 4 = Good, the proposal addresses all requirements or criteria described in the RFP and in some respects exceeds them | |
| Date: | 5 = Excellent, the proposal addresses and exceeds all of the requirements or criteria described in the RFP |
| Minimum Mandatory Requirements | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | |
| 1 | Respondent confirms that they have served as counsel in at least three felony appeals. Respondent has completed or taught within the past five years an approved CLE at least eight hours of which deal, in substantial part, with the trial of death penalty cases. Respondent confirms they have more than five years in the active practice of criminal defense. Respondent confirms that they are currently a member of the appellate roster maintained by the Board of Appellate Judges under rule 11-401 of the Utah Rules of Judicial Administration. Repsondent confirms they are in good standing with the Utah State Bar. | PASS |
| Proceed to Scoring |
| Scoreable Technical Criteria | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Criteria Weight | % of Tech Criteria | Points Possible | Points | ||||
| Earned | Minimum Required | ||||||||
| 1 | Resume | 30 | 30.0% | 150.00 | 0.00 | 4.0 | |||
| 2 | Statement of Interest | 10 | 10.0% | 50.00 | 0.00 | 3.0 | |||
| 3 | Prior Captial Defense Representation | 60 | 60.0% | 300.00 | 0.00 | 4.0 | |||
| 100.0% | 500.00 | 0.00 | 11.00 |
| Required Technical Point Threshold | Min Percent | Min Points Required | Points Earned | Percent Earned | Evaluation |
| 72% | 360.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% |
| Total Evaluation Points | Points Possible | Points Earned |
| Total Technical Evaluation Points | 500.0 | 0.0 |
| Total Evaluation Points | 500.0 | 0.0 |
The fee schedule is determined by the agency and stated in the scope of work pursuant to 63G-6a-113.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .