5-RFP Q26081225 Score Sheet.docx
DOCX document 27 KB Posted
- Attached to
- DTC Foodservice Point of Sale System
- Solicitation number
- Q26081225
- Issued by
- Utah
About this file
This is an evaluation scoresheet for RFP Solicitation Q26081225 from Davis Technical College in Utah for a new foodservice point of sale (POS) system for its cafe. The system must support comprehensive cafe operations including order placement, back kitchen order processing, and reporting functions. The evaluation process uses a weighted scoring system with ratings from 0-5 across four main categories totaling 100 possible points.
The scoring breakdown allocates 40 points for functionality (including cashier/front-end operations worth 15 points, back kitchen functions worth 15 points, and hardware worth 10 points), 25 points for project management and support (15 points for project management and 10 points for support), 5 points for references, and 30 points for cost evaluation. The cost evaluation uses a competitive formula where the lowest-priced proposal receives full points, with other proposals receiving proportionally fewer points based on how much higher their prices are compared to the lowest bid, with proposals more than double the lowest price receiving zero cost points.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 4-ATTACH C DTC Payment TCs.pdf | ||
| 1-CLAIM OF BUSINESS CONFIDENTIALITY.pdf | ||
| 2-U3P BID INSTRUCTIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS.pdf | ||
| 3-State TCs GoodServices FY18.pdf | ||
| 6-RFP Q26081225 Cafe POS.docx | DOCX document | |
| 7-RFP Q26081225 Award Justification Statement.docx | DOCX document |
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
Error! Main Document Only.
FOODSERVICE POINT OF SALE SYSTEM SOLICITATION # Q26081225
RFP EVALUATION SCORESHEET
Score will be assigned as follows:
0 = Failure, no response 1 = Poor, inadequate, fails to meet requirement 2 = Fair, only partially responsive 3 = Average, meets minimum requirement 4 = Above average, exceeds minimum requirement 5 = Superior
Firm Name:
Evaluator:
Date:
Score (0-5) Weight
Points
1. Functionality (40 points possible)
| ---- |
| ---- |
| ---- |
| Cashier/Front End |
| 15 points possible |
X 3
| Back Kitchen Functions |
| 15 points possible |
X 3
| Hardware |
| 10 points possible |
X 2
2. Project Management/Support (25 points possible)
| ---- |
| ---- |
| ---- |
| Project Management |
| 15 points possible |
X 3
| Support |
| 10 points possible |
X 2
3. References 5 points possible)
| ---- |
| ---- |
| ---- |
| References |
| 5 points possible |
X 1
| 4. Cost (30 points possible) |
| 30 points possible |
* Inserted by Purchasing
TOTAL EVALUATION POINTS
(100 points possible)
Total
* 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.
Error! Main Document Only.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .