5-Attachment C Scoresheet RegionalManagingDefender.xls

XLS spreadsheet 37 KB Posted

Attached to
Southern Utah Regional Managing Defender
Solicitation number
TR26-9
Issued by
Utah

About this file

This is an evaluation scoresheet for a Request for Proposals (RFP) issued by the State of Utah Division of Purchasing to procure a Southern Utah Regional Managing Defender. The contract is anticipated to result in a single award to the responsive and responsible vendor achieving the highest evaluation score. The contract term is three years. The RFP does not specify response dates, due dates, site visits, or bidder's meetings within this evaluation document.

The scoresheet establishes evaluation criteria weighted across three technical categories: Resume (30 points, 17.6% weight), Management Experience (80 points, 47.1% weight), and Government Official Engagement Experience (60 points, 35.3% weight), for a total of 850 possible technical points. Proposals must meet a minimum mandatory requirement confirming that offerors hold an Active Status Utah State Bar License in good standing and possess prior experience as an Indigent Defense Attorney. A minimum technical point threshold of 60 percent (510 points) is required for a proposal to be considered responsive. The fee schedule is determined by the agency and stated in the scope of work pursuant to 63G-6a-113. The evaluation uses a standardized scoring scale ranging from 0 (Fail) to 5 (Excellent) to assess how well proposals address RFP requirements.

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

Attachment D: Evaluation Score Sheet Southern Utah Regional Managing Defender
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)
1Offerors must confirm they: have an Active Status Utah State Bar License and are in good standing and have prior experience as Indigent Defense Attorney
Scoreable Technical CriteriaEvaluator Score (0-5)Criteria Weight% of Tech CriteriaPoints PossiblePoints
EarnedMinimum Required
1Resume3017.6%150.000.00
2Management Experience8047.1%400.000.00
3Government Official Engagement Experience6035.3%300.000.00
130.0%0.000.00
140.0%0.000.00
150.0%0.000.00
160.0%0.000.00
170.0%0.000.00
180.0%0.000.00
190.0%0.000.00
200.0%0.000.00
210.0%0.000.00
220.0%0.000.00
230.0%0.000.00
100.0%850.000.000.00
Required Technical Point ThresholdMin PercentMin Points RequiredPoints EarnedPercent EarnedEvaluation
60%510.00.00.0%0
The fee schedule is determined by the agency and stated in the scope of work pursuant to 63G-6a-113.
It is anticipated that this RFP will result in a single contract award to the responsive and responsible vendor with the highest score justified by the procurement code.

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