5-SLCI27013 Attachment 4 Score Sheet.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 30 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- SLCI27013
- Issued by
- Salt Lake County, Salt Lake City, Utah
About this file
This is an RFP evaluation score sheet for Salt Lake City Corporation's solicitation SLCI27013 for an AI-enabled non-emergency public safety call handling and assistive solution to be provided to the City's Emergency 911 Department. The evaluation framework establishes four mandatory compliance requirements that offerors must satisfy: adherence to City ethics requirements, successful provision of similar services to at least five different agencies or organizations, disclosure of any generative AI technology or systems being utilized, and certification that all operational activities and data storage will be physically located within the continental United States. The scoresheet indicates that proposals advancing beyond the mandatory requirements phase will be evaluated on six technical criteria: emergency detection and escalation safety (weighted at 30 percent), integration with existing systems (10 percent), AI functionality and accuracy (15 percent), analytics and reporting (10 percent), ease of administration (10 percent), and implementation and support (10 percent), with a total of 425 possible technical points available.
Offerors must achieve a minimum of 297.5 technical points (70 percent threshold) to qualify for the cost evaluation phase, though those achieving 318.75 points will advance to presentations. Cost evaluation comprises 30 percent of the total evaluation points, with the scoring methodology allocating full cost points to the lowest-priced proposal and proportional points to competing proposals based on their price differential relative to the lowest bid. The evaluation process culminates in a total possible score of 607.14 points, combining both technical (70 percent weighting) and cost (30 percent weighting) components to determine the contract award.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 1-Confidential+and+Proprietary+Info+Declaration+Form.pdf | ||
| 2-SLCI27013 Attachment 1 - Sample Agreement.docx | DOCX document | |
| 6-SLCI27013.docx | DOCX document | |
| 3-SLCI27013 Attachment 2 -Scope of Work.docx | DOCX document | |
| 4-SLCI27013 Attachment 3 Cost Sheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
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
| TITLE OF PROJECT: AI Enabled Non-Emergency Public Safety Call Handling and Assistive Solution |
| SOLICITATION # SLCI27013 |
| RFP EVALUATION SCORESHEET |
| 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 du 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 | RFP Section | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | |
| 1 | Compliance with the City Ethics Requirement | Section V.a.i | |
| 2 | Offeror certifies that the proposed team has successfully provided services similar to those described in Attachment 2: Scope of Work for at least five (5) different agencies or organizations. | Section V.a.ii | |
| 3 | Offeror shall indicate if Offeror and/or Offeror’s subcontractor(s) will be using or offering GenAI technology, model(s), service(s), or system(s)s, and provide details. | Section V.a.iii | |
| 4 | Offeror certifies that all operational activities and data storage shall be physically located within the continental United States | Section V.a.iv |
| Scoreable Technical Criteria | RFP Section | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Criteria Weight | % of Tech Criteria | Points Possible | Points | ||||
| Earned | Minimum Required | |||||||||
| 1 | Emergency detection and escalation safety | Section VII.b.1 | 30 | 35.3% | 150.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| 2 | Integration with existing systems | Section VII.b.2 | 10 | 11.8% | 50.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| 3 | AI functionality and accuracy | Section VII.b.3 | 15 | 17.6% | 75.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| 4 | Analytics and reporting | Section VII.b.4 | 10 | 11.8% | 50.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| 5 | Ease of administration | Section VII.b.5 | 10 | 11.8% | 50.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| 6 | Implementation and support | Section VII.b.6 | 10 | 11.8% | 50.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| Scorable Technical Criteria Total | 100.0% | 425.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Possible Points | Points Earned | ||
| Total Technical Points | 100.00% | 425.00 | 0.00 |
| Required Technical Point Threshold | RFP Section | Min Percent | Min Points Required | Points Earned | Percent Earned | Evaluation |
| 70% | 297.5 | 0.0 | 0.0% |
Presentations: Offerors that receive aminimum of 318.75 points will advance to the cost evaluation phase.
| Cost | RFP Section | Low Cost Option | Offered Cost | Percent of Total | Points Possible | Points Earned | |
| $0.00 | $0.00 | 30% | 182.14 | ERROR:#DIV/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. The formula to compute the points is: Cost Points x (Lowest Proposed Price/Proposed Price). |
| Total Evaluation Points | Percent of Total | Points Possible | Points Earned |
| Total Technical Evaluation Points | 70% | 425.00 | 0.0 |
| Total Cost Evaluation Points | 30% | 182.14 | ERROR:#DIV/0! |
| Total Evaluation Points | 100% | 607.14 | ERROR:#DIV/0! |
image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .