8-26Q-135 Evaluation Process and Scoring Criteria.pdf

Marion County Procurement Services | Evaluation Process and Scoring Criteria Page 1

EVALUATION PROCESS AND SCORING CRITERIA

1. EVALUATION PROCESS

1.1. Proposals will be evaluated using the criteria and scoring methodology stated in the solicitation.

1.2. The County may recommend award based on the written proposals or may request oral presentations and/or clarification. A request for clarification or presentation does not constitute acceptance of a proposal or indicate that an award is pending.

1.3. If oral presentations are conducted, the Evaluation Committee may shortlist the highest-ranked proposers. Phase 2 criteria will be provided with the presentation invitation, unless otherwise determined during the initial Evaluation Committee meeting (Phase 1). Additionally, unless otherwise stated in the solicitation, Phase 1 numerical scores will not carry forward; except for location points, unless otherwise identified in the solicitation.

1.4. Final ranking will be based on the cumulative scores of the Evaluation Committee. The initial Evaluation Committee Meeting and post-presentation ranking discussion are open to the public. Oral presentation meetings, if conducted, are closed to the public as permitted by section 286.0113, Florida Statutes.

2. SCORING METHODOLOGY

Evaluators assign a whole-number rating from 0 to 10 for each criterion. Each rating is multiplied by the criterion weight, and all weighted scores are added to determine the evaluator’s total score.

WEIGHTED SCORE = RATING (0-10) × CRITERION WEIGHT

5 = Meets Requirements. Scores below 5 reflect increasing weakness or incomplete information; scores above 5 reflect increasing strength or added value.

When criterion weights total 100, the maximum score is 1,000 points per evaluator. Evaluator totals are combined to determine the proposer’s cumulative score and ranking.

3. SCORE RATING DEFINITIONS

SCORE RATING DEFINITION

0 No Response No usable information is provided for the criterion.

1 Very Poor Minimal response; major deficiencies or omissions.

2 Poor Limited response; significant weaknesses or unsupported information.

3 Below Average Partially addresses the criterion but has material weaknesses.

4 Fair Addresses most requirements but has notable weaknesses or insufficient detail.

5 Meets Requirements Adequately and responsively meets the criterion.

6 Above Average Fully meets the criterion and demonstrates some additional strength.

7 Good Thorough response with clear, relevant strengths.

8 Very Good Strong, well-supported response that meaningfully exceeds the criterion.

9 Excellent Exceptional response with substantial strengths and added value.

10 Outstanding Clearly and materially exceeds the criterion; superior response.

Marion County Procurement Services | Evaluation Process and Scoring Criteria Page 2

4. SCORING CRITERIA

Proposals will be scored using the project-specific criteria and weights listed below.

CRITERION EVALUATION DESCRIPTION WEIGHT MAX POINTS

A. Ability of Firm and Its Professional Personnel

Responses limited to 2 pages maximum, plus resumes for key personnel.

Attach resumes for key personnel of the Project Team, detailing experience as it relates to projects of a similar size and type.

Submit separate organizational charts delineating personnel assigned to different phases of the project, if applicable. Clearly indicate the role of each member of the proposed project team.

Resumes and organizational charts do not count against the maximum page limit. Indicate that the team has a clear understanding of the County’s project and requirements.

9-10: Project team personnel have exceptional level of experience, and several are uniquely qualified. Project team contains all necessary disciplines. Organization of the project team is superior. Prime Firm has a superior understanding of the proposed project and what will be required to complete it. Prime Firm has superior professional resources to properly provide services.

Proposed Project Manager is uniquely qualified.

7-8: Project team personnel have above average level of experience, and the project manager is uniquely qualified. Project team contains all necessary disciplines. Organization of project team is adequate to the project. Prime Firm has superior professional resources to properly provide services. Prime Firm has an above average understanding of the proposed project.

Propose Project Manager’s qualifications are above average.

5-6: Project team personnel have adequate level of experience.

Project team contains all necessary disciplines. Organization of project team is adequate to the project. Prime Firm has adequate professional resources to properly provide services. Prime Firm has an adequate understanding of the proposed project and what will be required to complete it. Proposed project manager’s qualifications are adequate.

3-4: Some project team personnel have adequate level of qualifications and experience. Project team lacks minor disciplines. Organization of project team is marginal. Prive Firm’s professional resources to properly provide services are marginal.

Prime Firm has a marginal understanding of the proposed project.

Proposed project manager’s qualifications are marginal.

1-2: Project team personnel do not have appropriate level of qualifications and experience. Project team does not contain all critical disciplines. Organization of project team is inappropriate.

Prime Firm lacks adequate professional resources. Prime Firm lacks understanding of the proposed project. Proposed Project Manger is not appropriate.

0: No information was provided for this criterion, or the response is wholly unrelated to the qualifications of the project team.

25 250

Marion County Procurement Services | Evaluation Process and Scoring Criteria Page 3

CRITERION EVALUATION DESCRIPTION WEIGHT MAX POINTS

B. Firm’s Experience with Projects of a Similar Size and Type

Maximum number of projects to be included: 5. Responses limited to 1 page maximum per project.

List a maximum of 5 recent projects, preferably during the past five

(5) years, to indicate proficiency in similar work. For each representative project, indicate your Firm’s role (Prime, Sub- Consultant, etc.), your Firm’s project manager and key personnel, total cost of the project, length of the contract, and a summary of the work performed by your Firm. Show your Firm’s approach to the project and methods used to plan, design, and administer the project.

9-10: Prim Firm has superior past and recent successful experience with projects of similar size and type. Prime Firm’s approach and methods proposed are superior to provide the level of service required for the project. All of the scope of services provided for representative projects are similar to the solicitation scope.

7-8: Prime Firm has more than adequate successful, recent (within past five (5) years) experience with projects of similar size and type. Prime Firm’s approach and methods proposed are above average to provide the level of service required for the project.

Most of the scope of services provided for representative projects are similar to the solicitation scope.

5-6: Prime Firm has adequate successful, recent (within past five

(5) years) experience with projects of similar size and type. Prime Firm’s approach methods proposes are adequate to provide the level of service required for the project. Some of the scope of services provided for representative projects are similar to the solicitation page.

3-4: Prime Firm has minor successful experience with projects of a similar size and type. Prime Firm’s approach and methods proposed are inadequate to provide the level of service required for the project. The scope of services provided for the representative projects varies significantly from the solicitation scope.

1-2: Prime Firm has marginal or no experience with projects of a similar size and type.

0: No information was provided for this criterion, or the response is wholly unrelated to the Firm’s experience.

25 250

Marion County Procurement Services | Evaluation Process and Scoring Criteria Page 4

C. Firm’s Willingness and Ability to Meet Schedule and Budget Requirements

Response limited to 2 pages maximum.

Provide a short narrative outlining how you propose to manage the project in order to meet schedule and budget requirements.

Indicate the controls to be utilized to maintain both schedule and budget for this project. Describe how personnel will be assigned, and tasks effectively handled, in order to provide the most efficient service on the project (during different phases of the project, if applicable). Describe any unique issues and/or items of focus based on your understanding of the project scope. Describe any suggestions on how the proposed project schedule could be further accelerated. Describe your Firm’s unique abilities, innovative approaches, and/or special considerations. Describe your Firm’s ability to provide the required services and provide them within a schedule and budget.

9-10: Submittal shows superior understanding of and approach to scope, schedule, and budget with potential improvements for project delivery and cost savings.

7-8: Submittal shows good understanding of and approach to scope, schedule, and budget. Project budget and schedule can be met.

5-6: Submittal shows adequate schedule approach, understanding of budget control, and understanding of scope.

Project budget and schedule can be met or modified to meet project intent.

3-4: Submittal shows inadequate understanding of scope, schedule, and budget requirements.

1-2: Submittal does not address the schedule requirements or the budget requirements.

0: No information was provided for this criterion, or the response is wholly unrelated to schedule and budget management.

20 200

Marion County Procurement Services | Evaluation Process and Scoring Criteria Page 5

D. Effect of Firm’s Recent, Current, and Projected Workload

Response limited to 3 page maximum, inclusive of a one-age graphic representation of current commitments.

Describe the current workload of all key project team members and your Firm’s daily capacity to handle the scope of services for this project. Provide a graphic representation of current commitments over the next one-year period for key members of the project team. Identify the number of active projects currently assigned to each proposed key staff member, whether for Marion County or other clients (public and private). Address your Firm’s ability to absorb this project without compromising delivery schedules. Indicate backup staffing capability in the event of unforeseen circumstances.

9-10: Submittal shows that consultant’s project team has clearly sufficient staffing available to complete services on schedule across all active client commitments. Submittal includes robust backup staffing capability in the event of unforeseen circumstances. Workload data is transparent, verifiable, and demonstrates a strong commitment to availability for Marion County.

7-8: Submittal shows that consultant’s project team has adequate time and available personnel to complete services on schedule.

Workload graphic clearly demonstrates sufficient capacity. Basic backup staffing capability is identified.

5-6: Submittal shows that while consultant has adequate time and available personnel, prior workload commitments (across all clients) may impact its ability to complete services on schedule.

Limited backup staffing is identified.

3-4: Submittal shows that consultant’s workload commitments will significantly impact its ability to complete services on schedule. Key personnel have limited availability. No backup staffing plan is provided.

1-2: Submittal does not address current workload of key staff. No evidence that the Firm has sufficient available personnel to complete services on schedule. Key staff appear overcommitted across multiple projects or clients.

0: No information was provided for this criterion, ore the response wholly unrelated to the Firm’s workload and staffing capacity.

25 250

E. Location

Location will be scored based on the Firm’s physical office location identified in its submittal.

10: Physical office located within Marion County 6: Physical office located in an immediately surrounding county (Sumter, Citrus, Alachua, Lake, Putnam, Levy, or Volusia) 4: Physical office located elsewhere within the State of Florida 2: No physical office within Florida 0: Sufficient location information is not provided

5 50

TOTAL 1,000

Note: Maximum points for each criterion equal the criterion weight multiplied by 10.