6-AS26-46 Score sheet - Informational Only.xls
XLS spreadsheet 71 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- AS26-46
- Issued by
- Utah
About this file
RFP Evaluation Scoresheet: Utah Trails Handbook Authoring Assistance
This is an RFP evaluation scoresheet for procurement AS26-46, issued by the State of Utah Division of Purchasing and conducted by the State of Utah Division of Outdoor Recreation. The project seeks assistance in authoring a Utah Trails Handbook. The scoresheet is formatted to evaluate up to twenty offerors (A through T) and includes provisions for five evaluators to assess proposals across multiple criteria. The contract term extends through February 26, 2027, with vendors required to guarantee pricing for the duration of the contract.
Evaluation of proposals is structured in two primary components: technical criteria worth 900 points (90% of total evaluation) and cost proposals worth 100 points (10% of total evaluation). Technical scoring is divided among five criteria: Executive Summary (100 points), Company Qualifications and Experience (300 points), Project Understanding and Approach (300 points), Preliminary Schedule for Project Completion (100 points), and Key Personnel (100 points). All proposals must meet three mandatory requirements: demonstrable previous experience authoring handbooks or educational materials related to recreational trail systems planning, development, and maintenance; adequate personnel in key disciplines to manage the project; and response length not exceeding five pages (excluding resumes, cover page, and table of contents). A minimum technical score threshold of 630 points (70% of 900 possible points) is required for proposals to advance. Cost points are calculated using a formula in which the lowest-priced offeror receives 100% of cost points, with all other offerors receiving proportional points based on their price differential relative to the lowest bid.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 1-Claim of Business Confidentiality Updated.pdf.pdf | ||
| 2-Vendor Prerequisites - RFP Agency.pdf | ||
| 5-Attachment C Cost.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 4-Attachment B Scope of Work.docx | DOCX document | |
| 3-Att.-A-Agency-Terms-and-Conditions-GS (21).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
Score Sheet
| Utah Trails Handbook Authroing Assistance | |||||||
| #AS26-46 | |||||||
| 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 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 | RFP Section | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | |||||
| 1 | Vendor shall have previous experience in authoring handbooks and/or educational materials related to the planning, development, and maintenance of recreational trail systems. | Att B | |||||
| 2 | Vendor shall have adequiate personnel in key disciplines to effectively manage the project. | Att B | |||||
| 3 | Vendor shall not submit a response more than 5 pages. Does not include resumes, cover page, or table of contents. | Att B | |||||
| 0 | |||||||
| Scoreable Technical Criteria | RFP Section | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Criteria Weight | % of Tech Criteria | Points Possible | Points |
Earned
| 1 | Executive Summary | Att B | 20 | 11.1% | 100.00 | 0.00 | |
| 2 | Company Qualificiations and Experience | Att B | 60 | 33.3% | 300.00 | 0.00 | |
| 3 | Project Understanding and Approach | Att B | 60 | 33.3% | 300.00 | 0.00 | |
| 4 | Preliminary schedule for project completion | Att B | 20 | 11.1% | 100.00 | 0.00 | |
| 5 | Key Personnel | Att B | 20 | 11.1% | 100.00 | 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% | 900.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| Required Technical Point Threshold | Min Percent | Min Points Required | Points Earned | Percent Earned | Evaluation | ||
| 70% | 630.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | |||
| Cost | RFP Section | Low Cost Option | Offered Cost | Percent of Total | Points Possible | Points Earned | |
| Att B | 10% | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| * 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 | 90% | 900.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| Total Cost Evaluation Points | 10% | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| Total Evaluation Points | 100% | 1,000.0 | 0.0 |
Scoresheet Summary
| AS26-46 Utah Trails Handbook Authoring Assistance | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Signatures: | Date: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 1 | __________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 2 | __________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 3 | __________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 4 | __________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 5 | __________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Minimum Mandatory Requirements | Offeror A | Offeror B | Offeror C | Offeror D | Offeror E | Offeror F | Offeror G | Offeror H | Offeror I | Offeror J | Offeror K | Offeror L | Offeror M | Offeror N | Offeror O | Offeror P | Offeror Q | Offeror R | Offeror S | Offeror T | |
| 1 | Vendor shall have previous experience in authoring handbooks and/or educational materials related to the planning, development, and maintenance of recreational trail systems. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | Vendor shall have adequiate personnel in key disciplines to effectively manage the project. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | Vendor shall not submit a response more than 5 pages. Does not include resumes, cover page, or table of contents. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Weight | Technical Scores | Offeror A | Offeror B | Offeror C | Offeror D | Offeror E | Offeror F | Offeror G | Offeror H | Offeror I | Offeror J | Offeror K | Offeror L | Offeror M | Offeror N | Offeror O | Offeror P | Offeror Q | Offeror R | Offeror S | Offeror T |
| Criteria #1 - Executive Summary | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 4 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 5 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Average Score | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 20.0 | Criteria #1 - Total Points (Total Possible Points =100) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Criteria #2 - Company Qualifications and Experience | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 4 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 5 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Average Score | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 60.0 | Criteria #2 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 300) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Criteria #3 - Project Understanding and Approach | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 4 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 5 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Average Score | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 60.0 | Criteria #3 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 300) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Criteria #4 - Preliminary Schedule for Project Completion | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 4 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 5 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Average Score | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 20.0 | Criteria #4 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 100) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Criteria #5 - Key Personnel | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 4 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 5 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Average Score | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 20.0 | Criteria #5 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 100) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Total Technical Points (Total Possible Points = 900) Minimum Threshold = 630 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| Total Cost Points | Cost Scores | Offeror A | Offeror B | Offeror C | Offeror D | Offeror E | Offeror F | Offeror G | Offeror H | Offeror I | Offeror J | Offeror K | Offeror L | Offeror M | Offeror N | Offeror O | Offeror P | Offeror Q | Offeror R | Offeror S | Offeror T |
| Cost | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 100.0 | Cost Points | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Score Summary | Offeror A | Offeror B | Offeror C | Offeror D | Offeror E | Offeror F | Offeror G | Offeror H | Offeror I | Offeror J | Offeror K | Offeror L | Offeror M | Offeror N | Offeror O | Offeror P | Offeror Q | Offeror R | Offeror S | Offeror T | |
| Total Technical Points (Total Possible = 900) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| Total Cost Points (Total Possible = 100) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| Grand Total Points (Total Possible =1000) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .