6-Interactive-Score-Sheet-NC27-116 - Informational Purposes Only.xls
XLS spreadsheet 82 KB Posted
- Attached to
- NC27-116 Non-Functional Turf Case Study (A)
- Solicitation number
- NC27-116
- Issued by
- Utah
About this file
Summary
This is an RFP evaluation scoresheet for Solicitation NC27-116, issued by the State of Utah Division of Purchasing through the Forestry, Fire, & State Lands department. The procurement seeks a vendor to conduct a study establishing a baseline framework for non-functional turf management in Utah and perform a detailed technical and economic case study on selected public or private institutions within the Great Salt Lake watershed. The contract term is 18 months, with the scope of work required to be completed within 12 months, followed by a 6-month administrative closeout period. Vendors must guarantee pricing for the 12-month performance period.
The evaluation scoresheet utilizes a 1,000-point total scoring system, comprising 800 technical points and 200 cost points. Technical evaluation is divided into four weighted criteria categories worth 200 points each: Statement of Qualifications (25%), Work Plan (25%), Timeline & Deliverables Schedule (25%), and References (25%), each scored on a 0–5 scale by multiple evaluators. Three mandatory pass/fail requirements address vendor experience in urban water management, turfgrass science, spatial analytics/GIS, or environmental policy; proven track record in technical research and policy report drafting; and strong understanding of Great Salt Lake watershed dynamics and Utah water law. The minimum technical threshold for contract award is 560 points (70% of 800 technical points). Cost points are calculated using a formula whereby the lowest-priced proposal receives 100% of the 200 available cost points, with other proposals receiving proportional points based on their price relative to the lowest bid.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 7-Attachment D Technical Criteria.docx | DOCX document | |
| 3-Att.-A-Agency-Terms-and-Conditions-GS.docx | DOCX document | |
| 2-Vendor Prerequisites - RFP Agency.pdf | ||
| 1-Claim of Business Confidentiality Updated.pdf.pdf | ||
| 4-Attachment C - Cost Sheet - list costs.docx | DOCX document | |
| 5-Attachment B Scope of Work.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
| Non-Functional Turf Case Study (A) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| SOLICITATION # NC27-116 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| RFP EVALUATION SCORESHEET | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator: | 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 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Date: | 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 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 = Excellent, the proposal addresses and exceeds all of the requirements or criteria described in the RFP | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Vendor A | Vendor B | Vendor C | Vendor D | Vendor E | Vendor F | Vendor G | Vendor H | Vendor I | Vendor J | |||||||||||
| Minimum Mandatory Requirements | RFP Section | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | |||||||||
| 1 | Vendor must have demonstrated experience in urban water management, turfgrass science, spatial analytics/GIS auditing, or environmental policy analysis | U3P Proposal Data | ||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | Vendor must have proven track record of conducting technical research and drafting public-facing policy reports or scientific syntheses. | U3P Proposal Data | ||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | Vendor must have a strong understanding of Great Salt Lake watershed dynamics, Utah water law, and municipal/institutional water conservation policies. | U3P Proposal Data | ||||||||||||||||||
| 0 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Vendor A | Vendor B | Vendor C | Vendor D | Vendor E | Vendor F | Vendor G | Vendor H | Vendor I | Vendor J | |||||||||||
| Scoreable Technical Criteria | RFP Section | Criteria Weight | % of Tech Criteria | Points Possible | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Points | ||||||||||||||
| Earned | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Points | ||||||||||||||||||
| Earned | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Points | ||||||||||||||||||
| Earned | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Points | ||||||||||||||||||
| Earned | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Points | ||||||||||||||||||
| Earned | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Points | ||||||||||||||||||
| Earned | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Points | ||||||||||||||||||
| Earned | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Points | ||||||||||||||||||
| Earned | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Points | ||||||||||||||||||
| Earned | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Points |
Earned
| 1 | Statement of Qualifications | Response to Att. D | 40 | 25.0% | 200.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 2 | Work Plan | Response to Att. D | 40 | 25.0% | 200.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 3 | Timeline & Deliverables Schedule | Response to Att. D | 40 | 25.0% | 200.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 4 | References | Response to Att. D | 40 | 25.0% | 200.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 13 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| 14 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| 15 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| 16 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| 17 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| 18 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| 19 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| 20 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| 21 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| 22 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| 23 | 0.0% | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| 800.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| Required Technical Point Threshold | RFP Section | Min Percent | Min Points Required | ||||||||||||
| 70% | 560.0 | ||||||||||||||
| * 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 | Points Possible | ||||||||||||||
| Total Technical Evaluation Points | 800.0 | ||||||||||||||
| Total Cost Evaluation Points | 200.0 | ||||||||||||||
| Total Evaluation Points | 1,000.0 |
Scoresheet Summary
| XX##### Solicitation Name Scoresheet Summary | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Instructions: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Enter the solicitation number and name. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Enter each Offeror name. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Enter the Criteria name for each category. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Enter the Weight in column B that corresponds to the Criteria Weight on the Score Sheet tab column J for each criterion. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Enter the Total Possible Points for each Criterion, Cost Points, and Score Summary section. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Mandatory Minimum Requirements: Evaluate each offer and enter pass or fail | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Ensure that the number of evaluator lines matches the number of evaluators. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Offers not meeting the Minimum Mandatory Requirements will not be evaluated further. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Ensure that the Total Average Score formula includes all of the evaluator line items. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Technical Scores: Enter each evaluator score for each offer. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Signatures: | Date: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 1 | __________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 2 | __________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 3 | __________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 4 | __________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Evaluator 5 | __________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Minimum Mandatory Requirements | Vendor A | Vendor B | Vendor C | Vendor D | Vendor E | Vendor F | Vendor G | Vendor 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 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Weight | Technical Scores | Vendor A | Vendor B | Vendor C | Vendor D | Vendor E | Vendor F | Vendor G | Vendor 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 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |
| Criteria #1 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = XX) | 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 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |
| Criteria #2 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = XX) | 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 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |
| Criteria #3 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = XX) | 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 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |
| Criteria #4 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = XX) | 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 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |
| Criteria #5 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = XX) | 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 #6 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |
| Criteria #6 - Total Points (Total Possible XX) | 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 #7 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |
| Criteria #7 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = XX) | 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 = XX) Minimum Threshold = XX | 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 | Vendor A | Vendor B | Vendor C | Vendor D | Vendor E | Vendor F | Vendor G | Vendor 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 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 300.0 | 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 | Vendor A | Vendor B | Vendor C | Vendor D | Vendor E | Vendor F | Vendor G | Vendor 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 = XX) | 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 = XX) | 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 = XX) | 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 .