6-MD27-101 Part 15 Interactive Score Sheet -REFERENCE ONLY.xls
XLS spreadsheet 60 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- MD27-101
- Issued by
- Utah
About this file
This is an evaluation scoresheet for Solicitation MD27-101, a Request for Statement of Qualifications (RFSQ) issued by the State of Utah Division of Purchasing and conducted by the Utah Bureau of Forensic Services (UBFS) for a Firearms and Toolmark Examination Training Program. The procurement seeks professional services to develop and deliver a comprehensive training program in firearms and toolmark examination. The contract term is five years, and the evaluation will be conducted under Utah Procurement Code 63G-6a Part 15 for Design Professional Service Providers and Consultants. The scoresheet is designed to accommodate up to 20 offerors (labeled Offeror A through Offeror T) and incorporates evaluations from five evaluators.
The evaluation scoresheet establishes six minimum mandatory requirements that must be assessed on a pass/fail basis: SOW Compliance, Instructor Qualifications, Training Capacity, Project Timeline, Required Curriculum Topics, and a sixth unnamed requirement. Five scoreable qualifications criteria are weighted and scored on a zero-to-five scale with a total possible score of 1,000 points: Curriculum Equivalence (400 points, 40% weight), Delivery Methods (150 points, 15% weight), Communication and Reporting (150 points, 15% weight), Performance Remediation (150 points, 15% weight), and Competency Verification (150 points, 15% weight). Scoring definitions range from zero (fail) to five (excellent), with three representing satisfactory performance. The highest-scoring qualified vendor will be selected for contract negotiations at compensation deemed fair and reasonable; if negotiations fail with the top-ranked vendor, the procurement officer may proceed with the second or third highest-ranked vendors in sequence.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 4-MD27-101 Attachment B Scope of Work ada.docx | DOCX document | |
| 5-MD27-101 Attachment C Tecnical Criteria ada.docx | DOCX document | |
| 3-MD27-101 Attachment A Terms and Conditions.docx | DOCX document | |
| 2-Vendor Prerequisites - Part 15.pdf | ||
| 1-Claim of Business Confidentiality Updated.pdf.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
| Attachment D- Firearm and Toolmark Examination Training Program | ||||||||||
| SOLICITATION # MD27-101 | ||||||||||
| REQUEST FOR STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS 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 | RFSQ Section | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | ||||||||
| 1 | SOW Compliance | |||||||||
| 2 | Instructor Qualifications | |||||||||
| 3 | Training Capacity | |||||||||
| 4 | Project Timeline | |||||||||
| 5 | Required Ciriculum Topics | |||||||||
| 6 | ||||||||||
| 0 | ||||||||||
| Scoreable Qualifications | RFSQ Section | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Criteria Weight | % of Tech Criteria | Points Possible | Points | ||||
| Earned | Minimum Required | |||||||||
| 1 | Curriculum Equivalence | 80 | 40.0% | 400.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 2 | Delivery Methods | 30 | 15.0% | 150.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 3 | Communication & Reporting | 30 | 15.0% | 150.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 4 | Performance Remediation | 30 | 15.0% | 150.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 5 | Competency Verification | 30 | 15.0% | 150.00 | 0.00 | |||||
| 100.0% | 1000.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| The procurement officer shall award a contract to the qualified professional whose statement of qualifications was awarded the highest score under Subsection 63G-60a-1503(4) by the evaluation committee, at compensation that the procurement officer determines, in writing, to be fair and reasonable to the procurement unit. If the procurement officer is unable to agree to a satisfactory contract with the highest scoring professional, at a price the procurement officer determines to be fair and reasonable to the procurement unit, the procurement officer shall: (a) formally terminate discussions with that design professional; and (b) undertake discussions with the second highest scoring, qualified design professional. If the procurement officer is unable to agree to a satisfactory contract with the highest scoring professional, at a price the procurement officer determines to be fair and reasonable to the procurement unit, the procurement officer shall: (a) formally terminate discussions with that design professional; and (b) undertake discussions with the third highest scoring, qualified design professional. If the procurement officer is unable to award a contract at a fair and reasonable price to any of the highest scoring design professionals, the procurement officer shall: (a) select additional design professionals; and (b) continue discussions in accordance with the part until an agreement is reached. |
Scoresheet Summary
| MD27-101 Firearm and Toolmark Examination Training Program | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Weight | Qualification 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 | ||
| Curriculum Equivalence | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |||
| 80.0 | Criteria #1 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 400) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||
| Delivery Methods | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |||
| 30.0 | Criteria #2 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 150) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||
| Communication and Reporting | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |||
| 30.0 | Criteria #3 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 150) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||
| Performance Remediation | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |||
| 30.0 | Criteria #4 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 150) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||
| Competency Verification | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 | |||
| 30.0 | Criteria #5 - Total Points (Total Possible Points = 150) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 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 Points | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Total Possible Points = 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 | |||
| 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 = 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 | |||
| 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 .