6-Attachment C Scoresheet.xls
XLS spreadsheet 41 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Video Production Services
- Solicitation number
- JK26-36
- Issued by
- Utah
About this file
This is an evaluation scoresheet for a Request for Statement of Qualifications (RFSQ) issued by the State of Utah Division of Purchasing on behalf of the Department of Cultural & Community Engagement (CCE) for Video Production Services. The procurement seeks to establish a contract with a qualified video production company to serve nine divisions within CCE, including the Arts & Museums, STEM Action Center, Historical Society, UServe, Multicultural Affairs, Indian Affairs, State Historic Preservation Office, State Library, and Pete Suazo Utah Athletic Commission. The contract term is five years, and the procurement is conducted under Utah Procurement Code 63G-6a Part 15 for Design Professional Service Providers and Consultants. Vendors must submit statements of qualifications without pricing information.
The evaluation scoresheet establishes mandatory requirements and scoreable technical criteria totaling 600 possible points. Mandatory requirements include certification of a minimum of three to five years in business producing videos with a portfolio including industry, educational, or governmental work, and demonstrated in-house capability to collect video and audio and edit audiovisual materials. Technical criteria are weighted as follows: quality of reel and past projects (40 points, 33.3 percent), technical capacity and process (30 points, 25 percent), and submission of a portfolio containing three project examples (50 points, 41.7 percent). A minimum threshold of 70 percent of technical points (420 points) is required for advancement. Cost will be negotiated according to Part 15 of the Utah Procurement Code with the highest-ranked vendor; if fair and reasonable compensation cannot be agreed upon, the state may proceed with negotiations with the next highest-ranked vendor.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 5-Attachment B Scope of Work.docx | DOCX document | |
| 4-Att.-A-Agency-Terms-and-Conditions-GS (25).docx | DOCX document | |
| 3-Attachment D Technical Criteria.docx | DOCX document | |
| 1-Claim of Business Confidentiality Updated.pdf.pdf | ||
| 2-Vendor Prerequisites - Part 15.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
| CCE Video Productions Services | ||||||||||
| SOLICITATION JK26-36 | ||||||||||
| RFSQ EVALUATION SCORESHEET | ||||||||||
| DRAFT: This document is intended to be a draft and should not be returned to the Division of Purchasing. Please return this document to the evaluation committee chairperson | ||||||||||
| This document is not subject to GRAMA pursuant to Utah Administrative Code R33-7-702(2). | ||||||||||
| 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 | RFSQ Section | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | ||||||||
| 1 | Offeror certifies that they have a minimum of 3–5 years in business producing videos with a portfolio that includes industry, educational, or governmental work (not just weddings or music videos). | |||||||||
| 2 | Offeror certifies that they have demonstrated ability to collect video and audio in-house, and edit audio/visual materials that are either pre-existing or newly collected. | |||||||||
| 3 | ||||||||||
| 4 | ||||||||||
| 5 | ||||||||||
| 6 | ||||||||||
| 0 | ||||||||||
| Scoreable Technical Criteria | RFSQ Section | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Criteria Weight | % of Tech Criteria | Points Possible | Points | ||||
| Earned | Minimum Required | |||||||||
| 1 | Please describe the Quality of Reel and Past Projects: Storytelling ability, production value, and relevance to government or industry campaigns. Please show that you have demonstrated production of videos of various lengths, short, medium, and long-format materials for various audiences. | 40 | 33.3% | 200.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 2 | Please describe your technical capacity & process: Access to professional camera equipment, lighting, and sound; clarity of the revision and quality control process. | 30 | 25.0% | 150.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 3 | Please submit your portfolio or "reel" containing only three (3) project examples. | 50 | 41.7% | 250.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 4 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| 5 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| 6 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| 7 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| 8 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| 9 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| 10 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| 11 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| 12 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 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% | 600.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| Required Technical Point Threshold | RFSQ Section | Min Percent | Min Points Required | Points Earned | Percent Earned | Evaluation | ||||
| 70% | 420.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | ||||||
| *Cost will be negotiated according to Part 15 of the Utah Procurement Code. | Other cost evaluation methods may be used as long as they are within Procurement Code/Rule. Ensure the method for awarding points is clearly stated on the score sheeet and within the solicitation documents. | |||||||||
| Total Evaluation Points | Percent of Total | Points Possible | Points Earned | |||||||
| Total Technical Evaluation Points | 600.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||
| Total Evaluation Points | 600.0 | 0.0 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .