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
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 2-Vendor Prerequisites - RFP Agency.pdf | ||
| 3-Attachment B SOW RegionalManagingDefender.docx | DOCX document | |
| 4-Attachment A StateTermsandConditions.docx | DOCX document | |
| 1-Claim of Business Confidentiality Updated.pdf.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 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 Requirements | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | |||||||
| 1 | Offerors 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 Criteria | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Criteria Weight | % of Tech Criteria | Points Possible | Points | |||
| Earned | Minimum Required | |||||||
| 1 | Resume | 30 | 17.6% | 150.00 | 0.00 | |||
| 2 | Management Experience | 80 | 47.1% | 400.00 | 0.00 | |||
| 3 | Government Official Engagement Experience | 60 | 35.3% | 300.00 | 0.00 | |||
| 13 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 14 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 15 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 16 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 17 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 18 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 19 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 20 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 21 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 22 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 23 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 100.0% | 850.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| Required Technical Point Threshold | Min Percent | Min Points Required | Points Earned | Percent Earned | Evaluation | |||
| 60% | 510.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 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 .