4-Attachment D - Scoresheet.xls

XLS spreadsheet 37 KB Posted

Attached to
Agency of Record – Outbound Campaigns
Solicitation number
GN27-101
Issued by
Utah

About this file

This scoresheet is an evaluation document used by the State of Utah Division of Purchasing and the Governor's Office of Economic Development (GOED) to assess qualifications for an Agency of Record position focused on outbound marketing campaigns. The procurement seeks a Design Professional Service Provider and Consultant to establish a proof of concept with measurable metrics for outbound marketing and communications designed to attract investment and economic opportunity to Utah. The contract is structured as a one-year engagement under Utah Procurement Code 63G-6a Part 15, with the highest-ranked vendor selected to negotiate final contract terms. The evaluation process follows a qualifications-based selection methodology where vendors are ranked competitively, and if negotiations with the top-ranked firm are unsuccessful regarding fair and reasonable compensation and contract requirements, the state may proceed with negotiations with the next highest-ranked vendor.

The procurement explicitly requires that vendors not include pricing information in their qualifications submissions, indicating that compensation will be negotiated separately after vendor selection based on fair and reasonable pricing standards. No specific information regarding set-asides, incumbent vendors, funding sources, or contract renewal options is detailed in this scoresheet document. The evaluation criteria and scoring methodology contained in this attachment would be used to objectively rank all submitted qualifications and identify the vendor best positioned to support GOED's outbound economic development marketing initiatives.

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

Score Sheet

Agency of Record – Large Outbound Campaigns
SOLICITATION #GN27-101
RFSQ 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 due 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 RequirementsEvaluation (Pass/Fail)
1Vendor must have the ability to travel to Salt Lake City, Utah
2Vendor must agree to an interview with the selection committee (ideally in person, or virtually)
3Vendor must submit any client-initiated litigation, arbitration, or legal proceedings
4Statement of Qualifications is limited to 10 pages. Vendor understands that additional pages and/or textual links will not be reviewed or scored.
Scoreable Technical CriteriaEvaluator Score (0-5)Criteria Weight% of Tech CriteriaPoints PossiblePoints

Earned

1Project and Deliverables Outline3025.0%150.000.00
2Project Schedule and Timeline3025.0%150.000.00
3Agency Background3025.0%150.000.00
4Previous Work Examples3025.0%150.000.00
100.0%600.000.00
Required Technical Point ThresholdMin PercentMin Points RequiredPoints EarnedPercent EarnedEvaluation
70%420.00.00.0%0
Scoreable Technical CriteriaEvaluator Score (0-5)Criteria Weight% of Tech CriteriaPoints PossiblePoints

Earned

1Presentation on the Proposed Plan8066.7%400.000.00
66.7%400.000.00
Required Technical Point ThresholdMin PercentMin Points RequiredPoints EarnedPercent EarnedEvaluation
70%280.00.00.0%0
Total Evaluation PointsPercent of TotalPoints PossiblePoints Earned
Total Technical Evaluation Points0%600.00.0
Total Cost Evaluation Points0%400.00.0
Total Evaluation Points0%1,000.00.0

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