5-Evaluation Process and Scoring Criteria.pdf

Marion County Procurement Services | Evaluation Process and Scoring Criteria Page 1

EVALUATION PROCESS AND SCORING CRITERIA

1. EVALUATION PROCESS

1.1. Proposals will be evaluated using the criteria and scoring methodology stated in the solicitation.

1.2. The County may recommend award based on the written proposals or may request oral presentations and/or clarification. A request for clarification or presentation does not constitute acceptance of a proposal or indicate that an award is pending.

1.3. If oral presentations are conducted, the Evaluation Committee may shortlist the highest-ranked proposers. Phase 2 criteria will be provided with the presentation invitation, unless otherwise determined during the initial Evaluation Committee meeting (Phase 1). Additionally, unless otherwise stated in the solicitation, Phase 1 numerical scores will not carry forward; except for location points, unless otherwise identified in the solicitation.

1.4. Final ranking will be based on the cumulative scores of the Evaluation Committee. The initial Evaluation Committee Meeting and post-presentation ranking discussion are open to the public. Oral presentation meetings, if conducted, are closed to the public as permitted by section 286.0113, Florida Statutes.

2. SCORING METHODOLOGY

Evaluators assign a whole-number rating from 0 to 10 for each criterion. Each rating is multiplied by the criterion weight, and all weighted scores are added to determine the evaluator’s total score.

WEIGHTED SCORE = RATING (0-10) × CRITERION WEIGHT

5 = Meets Requirements. Scores below 5 reflect increasing weakness or incomplete information; scores above 5 reflect increasing strength or added value.

When criterion weights total 10, the maximum score is 100 points per evaluator. Evaluator totals are combined to determine the proposer’s cumulative score and ranking.

3. SCORE RATING DEFINITIONS

SCORE RATING DEFINITION

0 No Response No usable information is provided for the criterion.

1 Very Poor Minimal response; major deficiencies or omissions.

2 Poor Limited response; significant weaknesses or unsupported information.

3 Below Average Partially addresses the criterion but has material weaknesses.

4 Fair Addresses most requirements but has notable weaknesses or insufficient detail.

5 Meets Requirements Adequately and responsively meets the criterion.

6 Above Average Fully meets the criterion and demonstrates some additional strength.

7 Good Thorough response with clear, relevant strengths.

8 Very Good Strong, well-supported response that meaningfully exceeds the criterion.

9 Excellent Exceptional response with substantial strengths and added value.

10 Outstanding Clearly and materially exceeds the criterion; superior response.

Marion County Procurement Services | Evaluation Process and Scoring Criteria Page 2

4. SCORING CRITERIA

Proposals will be scored using the project-specific criteria and weights listed below.

CRITERION EVALUATION DESCRIPTION WEIGHT MAX POINTS

A. LOCATION

FIRM LOCATION – Location will be scored based on the firm’s physical office location identified in its submittal. A physical office located within Marion County will receive a rating of 10; a physical office located in an immediately surrounding county (Sumter, Citrus, Alachua, Lake, Putnam, Levy, or Volusia) will receive a rating of 6; a physical office located elsewhere within the State of Florida will receive a rating of 4; and a firm with no physical office within Florida will receive a rating of 2. If sufficient location information is not provided, the firm will receive a rating of 0. Weight 1.5 Max points = 15

1.5 15

B. COMPANY/FIRM AND

PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL

QUALIFICATIONS,

CAPABILITIES

COMPANY/FIRM AND PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL

QUALIFICATIONS, CAPABILITIES - The firm demonstrated its ability and capability to perform services as described in this RFQ. That the firm included its organization profile & proposed project management including specific names, functions and resumes of personnel assigned to the project (to include years of experience & years with the submitting company) and specific knowledge with regards to services under this RFQ. Weight 3.5 Max points = 35

3.5 35

C. CLIENT REFERENCES AND

EXPERIENCE FOR SIMILAR

PROJECTS

CLIENT REFERENCES AND EXPERIENCE FOR SIMILAR PROJECTS

– That the firm included a minimum of five (5) favorable, applicable, and comparable references, and they represent the type of work requested for the scope under this RFQ, and for an agency similar in size and type to Marion County. The firm shall identify each similar project description’s list of the proposed team members who worked on the project(s). The firm additionally provided three (3) favorable reference letters for the primary contact. Weight 2 Max points = 20

2 20

D. COST PROPOSAL

Fees for services proposed are within budgeted amounts, appropriate for the services offered, and within acceptable range of comparable service providers. Weight 3 Max points = 30

3 30

TOTAL 10 100

Note: Maximum points for each criterion equal the criterion weight multiplied by 10.