4-WK2644-EDA - Attachment D - RFP Evaluation Scoresheet.xls
XLS spreadsheet 35 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFP - Employee Drug and Alcohol Testing Services
- Solicitation number
- WK2644-EDA
- Issued by
- Salt Lake County, Salt Lake City, Utah
About this file
This is an RFP Evaluation Scoresheet for the Salt Lake City School District (SLCSD) solicitation WK2644-EDA for Employee Drug and Alcohol Testing Services. The document outlines the evaluation methodology and scoring criteria that will be applied to vendor proposals submitted in response to the district's request for competitive sealed proposals to provide employee drug and alcohol testing and sample collection services. The scoresheet establishes mandatory pass/fail requirements covering laboratory certifications, SAMHSA proficiency testing, laboratory experience, chain of custody reporting, secured records management, quality assurance plans, and monthly statistical reporting capabilities as outlined in RFP Section 2.2.
The evaluation framework allocates 700 points (70 percent of total score) to technical criteria and 300 points (30 percent of total score) to cost evaluation, with a combined maximum of 1,000 points. Technical evaluation is weighted across company experience and key personnel qualifications (28 points, 20 percent), demonstrated ability to meet scope of work including collection and testing services, laboratory services, medical review officer services, substance abuse professional services, and training services (56 points, 40 percent combined), demonstrated technical capability (49 points, 35 percent), and references (7 points, 5 percent). A minimum technical threshold of 525 points (75 percent) is required for an offeror to be considered for award. Cost points are calculated using a lowest-bid formula where the lowest proposal receives 100 percent of cost points, with all other proposals receiving proportional points based on their variance from the lowest price, with proposals exceeding 200 percent of the lowest price receiving zero cost points.
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
| EMPLOYEE DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING | |||||||
| SOLICITATION # WK2644-EDA | |||||||
| RFP EVALUATION SCORESHEET | |||||||
| DRAFT: This document is intended to be a draft and should not be returned to the Purchasing Department. Please return this document to the evaluation committee chairperson | |||||||
| This document is not subject to GRAMA pursuant to Utah Administrative Code R33-7-702(2). | |||||||
| Score will be assigned as follows: | |||||||
| Firm Name: | 1 = Poor, fails to address the requirements in the RFP | ||||||
| 2 = Fair, addresses the requirements in the RFP unsatisfactorily | |||||||
| Evaluator: | 3 = Good, addresses all requirements in the RFP satisfactorily | ||||||
| 4 = Very Good, addresses all requirements in the RFP and may exceed some | |||||||
| Date: | 5 = Superior, addresses all requirements in the RFP and exceeds them | ||||||
| Minimum Mandatory Requirements | RFP Section | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | |||||
| 1 | LABORATORY CERTIFICATIONS | 2.2 | |||||
| 2 | SAMHSA PROFICIENCY TESTING | 2.2 | |||||
| 3 | LABORATORY EXPERIENCE | 2.2 | |||||
| 4 | CHAIN OF CUSTODY REPORTS | 2.2 | |||||
| 5 | LABORATORY SECURED RECORDS | 2.2 | |||||
| 6 | LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN | 2.2 | |||||
| 7 | LABORATORY MONTHLY STATISTICAL REPORTS | 2.2 | |||||
| 0 | |||||||
| Scoreable Technical Criteria | RFP Section | Evaluator Score (1-5) | Criteria Weight | % of Tech Criteria | Points Possible | Points |
Earned
| 1 | COMPANY EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS OF KEY PERSONNEL | 2.3 | 28 | 20.0% | 140 | 0 | |
| 2 | DEMONSTRATED ABILITY TO MEET THE SCOPE OF WORK | 2.3 | |||||
| 2a | Collection and Testing Services | 2.3 | 14 | 10.0% | 70 | 0 | |
| 2b | Laboratory Services | 2.3 | 14 | 10.0% | 70 | 0 | |
| 2c | Medical Review Officer Services | 2.3 | 14 | 10.0% | 70 | 0 | |
| 2d | Substance Abuse Professional Services | 2.3 | 7 | 5.0% | 35 | 0 | |
| 2e | Training Services | 2.3 | 7 | 5.0% | 35 | 0 | |
| 3 | DEMONSTRATED TECHNICAL CAPABILITY | 2.3 | 49 | 35.0% | 245 | 0 | |
| 4 | REFERENCES | 2.3 | 7 | 5.0% | 35 | 0 | |
| 100.0% | 700 | 0 | |||||
| Required Technical Point Threshold | RFP Section | Min Percent | Min Points Required | Points Earned | Percent Earned | Evaluation | |
| 4.2 | 75% | 525.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Cost | RFP Section | Low Cost Option | Offered Cost | Percent of Total | Points Possible | Points Earned | |
| 3.1 | 30% | 300 | 0.0 | ||||
| * 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. An offeror whose Proposed Price is more than double (200%) the Lowest Proposed Price will receive no points. The formula to compute the points is: Cost Points x (2- Proposed Price/Lowest Proposed Price). | |||||||
| Total Evaluation Points | Percent of Total | Points Possible | Points Earned | ||||
| Total Technical Evaluation Points | 70% | 700 | 0 | ||||
| Total Cost Evaluation Points | 30% | 300 | 0 | ||||
| Total Evaluation Points | 100% | 1,000 | 0 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .