4-SLCI26093 Attachment 4. Score Sheet.pdf
PDF 248 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- SLCI26093
- Issued by
- Salt Lake County, Salt Lake City, Utah
About this file
This is an RFP evaluation scoresheet for Salt Lake City's 2034 Olympic and Paralympic Legacy Framework Development Plan (Solicitation #SLCI26093). The scoresheet is a template designed to evaluate multiple offerors (up to 20 firms labeled Offeror A through Offeror T) across standardized criteria and methodology. The evaluation process comprises three primary stages: mandatory minimum requirements assessment, technical scoring, and interviews. Mandatory requirements include the City's Ethics Requirement Acknowledgment, Documented Experience, and GenAI Acknowledgement and Documentation. The technical evaluation is divided into three scoreable criteria: Qualifications (weighted 25% of technical score, 125 possible points), Technical Approach and Methodology (weighted 70%, 350 possible points), and Risk Assessment and Mitigation Plan (weighted 5%, 25 possible points). Additionally, two policy criteria are evaluated: Sustainability and Business Certification, together worth 12.5 points (5% of total evaluation). The minimum threshold for advancing past technical evaluation is 307.5 points out of 512.5 total technical points (60% required). Interviews constitute an additional evaluation stage worth 100 points, requiring a minimum of 65 points (65%) for qualification.
Cost evaluation comprises 30% of the total scoring, worth 219.6 points calculated using a comparative formula where the lowest proposed price receives 100% of cost points and all other offerors receive points proportionally based on their price relative to the lowest bid. The total possible evaluation score is 732.1 points (512.5 technical plus 219.6 cost). The scoresheet accommodates evaluation by up to five evaluators per criterion, with scoring on a scale of 0-5 (0=Fail, 1=Poor, 2=Unsatisfactory, 3=Satisfactory, 4=Good, 5=Excellent). The document is structured as a blank template with formula fields for automatic calculation of averages and total scores across all offerors and evaluation stages.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 3-SLCI26093 Attachment 2. Scope of Work.pdf | ||
| 6-SLCI26093 Attachment 1. Sample Agreement.pdf | ||
| 5-SLCI26093 Attachment 3. Cost Proposal Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 2-SLCI26093 RFP.pdf | ||
| 1-SLCI26093 Attachment 5. External Links and Assets.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
Score will be assigned as follows:
0 = Fail, the proposal fails to address the requirements or criteria described in 1 = Poor, the proposal inadequately addresses the requirements or criteria des 2 = Unsatisfactory, the proposal addresses the requirements or criteria describ 3 = Satisfactory, the proposal addresses all requirements or criteria described 4 = Good, the proposal addresses all requirements or criteria described in the 5 = Excellent, the proposal addresses and exceeds all of the requirements or cr
RFP Section Evaluation (Pass/Fail)
1 VII. A. 1.
2 VII. A. 2.
3 VII. A. 3.
RFP Section Evaluator
Score (0-5) Criteria Weight
% of Tech Criteria
Points Possible Points Earned
1 VII. B. 1 25 25.0% 125.0 0.0
2 VII. B. 2. 70 70.0% 350.0 0.0
4 VII. B. 3. 5 5.0% 25.0 0.0
100.0% 500.0 0.0
Policy Criteria RFP Section Evaluator
Score (0-5) Available
Points Possible Points Points Earned
1 VII. C. 1. 0 1.25% 6.25 0.00
2 VII. C. 2. 0 1.25% 6.25 0.00
cy Criteria Total 5.00% 12.50 0.00
Possible Points Points Earned
100.00% 512.50 0.00
RFP Section Min Percent Min Points Required
Points Earned
Percent Earned Evaluation
60% 307.5 0.0 0.0%
RFP Presentation Evaluator
Score (0-5) Criteria Weight
Points Possible Points Earned
RFP 0 20 100.00 0.0
RFP Min Percent Min Points Required
Points Earned
Evaluation
RFP 65% 65.0 0.0
RFP Section Low Cost Option
Offered Cost
Percent of Total Points Possible Points Earned
$0.00 $0.00 30% 219.6 #DIV/0!
Percent of Total Points
Possible Points Earned
60.00% 512.50 0.00 10.00% 100.00 0.00
30.00% 219.60 #DIV/0!
100% #DIV/0!
Total Cost Evaluation Points Total Interview Points
SOLICITATION # SLCI26093
Total Evaluation Points
Cost
Purchasing will use the following cost formula: The points assigned to each offerors cost proposal will be based on the lowest proposal price. The offeror with the lowest Proposed Price will receive 100% of the price points. All other offerors will receive a portion of the total cost points based on what percentage higher their Proposed Price is than the Lowest Proposed Price. The formula to compute the points is: Cost Points x (Lowest Proposed Price/Proposed Price)
City's Ethics Requirement Acknowledgment Documented Experience GenAI Acknowledgement and Dcoumentation
Salt Lake City 2034 Olympic and Paralympic Legacy Framework Development Plan
RFP EVALUATION SCORESHEET
Firm Name:
Evaluator:
Date:
Minimum Mandatory Requirements
Qalifications
Scoreable Technical Criteria
Technical Approach and Methodology
Total Technical Points
Sustainability
Risk Assessment and Mitigation Plan
Total Technical Evaluation Points
Total Evaluation Points
Required Interview Point Threshold
Disadvantaged business enterprise
Scorable Technical Criteria Total
Required Technical Point Threshold
Interviews
Stage 3: Interviews
Instructions:
Signatures: Date:
Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3 Evaluator 4 Evaluator 5
Minimum Mandatory Requirements Offeror A 1 City's Ethics Requirement Acknowledgment 2 Documented Experience 3 GenAI Acknowledgement and Dcoumentation
Weight Technical Scores Offeror A Criteria #1 Qalifications Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3 Evaluator 4 Evaluator 5 Total Average Score 0.0
Enter the solicitation number and name.
Enter each Offeror name.
Enter the Criteria name for each category.
Enter the Weight in column B that corresponds to the Criteria Weight Sheet tab column J for each criterion.
Mandatory Minimum Requirements: Evaluate each offer and enter pa
Ensure that the number of evaluator lines matches the number of eva
Salt La
Offers not meeting the Minimum Mandatory Requirements will not be
Ensure that the Total Average Score formula includes all of the evalu
Technical Scores: Enter each evaluator score for each offer.
Enter the Total Possible Points for each Criterion, Cost Points, and S section.
25.0 Criteria #1 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 125) 0.0 Criteria #2 Technical Approach and Methodology Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3 Evaluator 4 Evaluator 5 Total Average Score 0.0
70.0 Criteria #2 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 350) 0.0 Criteria #3 Risk Assessment and Mitigation Plan Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3 Evaluator 4 Evaluator 5 Total Average Score 0.0
5.0 Criteria #3 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 5) 0.0 Total Technical Points (Total Possible Points =500) 0.0 Policy Criteria Offeror A
Weight Technical Scores Policy Criteria #1: Sustainability Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3 Evaluator 4 Evaluator 5 Total Average Score 0.0
1.250 Criteria #1 - Total Points (Total Possible Points =6.25) 0.00 Policy Criteria #2: Business Certification Evaluator 1 Evaluator 2 Evaluator 3 Evaluator 4 Evaluator 5 Total Average Score 0.0
1.250 Criteria #2 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 6.25) 0.00 Policy Criteria - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 12.5) 0.0 Total Technical Criteria Points (Total Technical Criteria Possible Points = 512.5) Minimum Threshold = 307.5 0.0
Cost Scores Offeror A Cost
219.6 Cost Points 0.0
Score Summary Offeror A Total Technical Points (Total Possible = 512.5) 0.0 Total Cost Points (Total Possible =219.6) 0.0 Grand Total Points (Total Possible = 732.1) 0.0
Total Cost
Points
Offeror B Offeror C Offeror D Offeror E Offeror F Offeror G
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 on the Score ass or fail aluators.
ake City 2034 Olympic and Paralympic Legacy Framework Development Plan
SOLICITATION # SLCI26093
RFP EVALUATION SCORESHEET SUMMARY
evaluated ator line items.
core Summary
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Offeror B Offeror C Offeror D Offeror E Offeror F Offeror G
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offeror B Offeror C Offeror D Offeror E Offeror F Offeror G
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offeror H Offeror I Offeror J Offeror K Offeror L Offeror M
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF!
Offeror H Offeror I Offeror J Offeror K Offeror L Offeror M
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
#REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF!
Offeror H Offeror I Offeror J Offeror K Offeror L Offeror M
#REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF!
Offeror N Offeror O Offeror P Offeror Q Offeror R Offeror S
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
#REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF!
Offeror N Offeror O Offeror P Offeror Q Offeror R Offeror S
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offeror N Offeror O Offeror P Offeror Q Offeror R Offeror S
#REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF!
Offeror T
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
#REF!
Offeror T
0.0
0.00
0.0
0.00
#REF!
Offeror T
#REF!
| Score Sheet |
| Scoresheet Summary |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .