8-Evaluator Score Sheet.xls
XLS spreadsheet 60 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Point of Interaction (Credit Card Machines)
- Solicitation number
- CS26-18
- Issued by
- Utah
About this file
Summary of RFP Evaluation Scoresheet for Point of Interaction Credit Card Machines
This document is an RFP evaluation scoresheet template used by the State of Utah Division of Purchasing and the Utah State Tax Commission to assess vendor proposals for Point of Interaction (credit card machines). The RFP solicitation (CS26-18) seeks a single contract award for a comprehensive credit card processing solution that includes both hardware and software components with end-to-end encryption (E2EE) capabilities compatible with JP Morgan Chase Commerce Solutions' Safetech Enterprise Point solution. The solution must support EMV, swipe, and contactless payment methods (including mobile wallets such as Apple Pay and Android Pay), integrate with the purchasing entity's existing ERP or point-of-sale systems, and accept a 26-character custom data field for transaction reconciliation. The contract term is five years, with vendors required to guarantee pricing for the first year.
The evaluation scoresheet allocates 700 total technical points across ten scoreable criteria weighted by importance, with the highest weights assigned to hardware solutions (20 points), end-to-end encryption (15 points), ERP/POS system integration (15 points), PCI compliance (20 points), project management and support (15 points), and ongoing maintenance and support (15 points). The vendor's proposal must satisfy ten minimum mandatory requirements, including PCI compliance, hardware and software provision, partnership relationships with acquiring banks/payment processors, daily downloadable reporting capabilities, monthly statement generation, and online dispute/chargeback management. Cost evaluation comprises 30 percent of the total 1,000 evaluation points, with the lowest-cost proposal receiving 100 percent of available cost points and other proposals evaluated using a proportional formula. Six cost scenarios are being evaluated covering the purchase and lease of 10, 100, and 350 Point of Interaction machines, and a minimum technical score threshold of 420 points (60 percent) must be achieved for consideration.
View the file
Other files
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
Instructions
| Instructions for Interactive Scoresheet |
| Description: The interactive scoresheet is designed as a tool to help the evaluation committee organize the minimum mandatory requirements and the scoreable technical criteria that will be used in the RFP. The scoresheet will be filled out in phases and upon completion will become the scoresheet that is published with the RFP and eventually used to score the offers. Data should be entered in shaded cells only. This scoresheet may need to be modified, such as adding more rows and adjusting formulas accordingly, to meet the needs of your RFP. |
| Identify Important Criteria |
| 1. Begin by making a list of all criteria that is important to the eventual solution. The list can be done on the Interactive Scoresheet or any other program you are comfortable with, pen and paper included. The initial list should be a brainstorm. Consider items that would be important later in the life of the solution. For example, compatibility with existing technology, maintenance, service, scaleability, enterprise solutions, emerging technologies, etc. |
| Prioritize Important Criteria |
| 2. When you feel the list is fairly comprehensive, begin to organize the list. You may choose to organize similar items into subcategories, but most importantly, prioritize the criteria by what is most important. |
| Identify "Pass - Fail" Criteria |
| 3. Once you have identified all the criteria and their relative importance, consider which items are mandatory and can be scored with either a "Pass", meaning it meets the criteria, or "Fail", meaning it does not meet the criteria. These criteria can be used for Minimum Mandatory Requirements and an initial evaluation. |
| Insert Minimum Mandatory Requirements |
| 4. Taking the list of criteria, put the Minimum Mandatory requirements in the section labeled "Minimum Mandatory Requirements". You can add lines by clicking on row 20 to highlight the row, right-clicking, and selecting Insert Row. Follow this procedure for any additional lines needed. You will have to fix row numbering and formatting if you insert additional rows. |
| Insert Technical Criteria |
| 5. Copy Scoreable Technical Criteria items into the apprpriate section. You can add lines by clicking on row 46 to highlight the row, Right-clicking, and selecting Insert Row. Follow this procedure for any additional lines needed. You will have to fix row numbering and formatting if you insert additional rows. |
| Develop the RFP Scope of Work |
| 6. It is now time to begin writing the "Detailed Scope of Work" and "Proposal Requirements and Company Qualifications" sections of the RFP. The "Detailed Scope of Work" section is designed to describe each task as carefully and with as much detail as possible. If appropriately done, it will produce responsive Proposals and ease the task of managing the project/contract. |
| Ensure All Scorable Criteria is Included in RFP |
| 7. The "Proposal Requirements and Company Qualifications" section should spell out all of the items on the "Score Sheet". Begin with the "Minimum Mandatory" items and how the offeror will respond and meet the minimums. For example, if the scoresheet says, "Meets minimum wireless technology", this section will state what the minimum wireless technology is, and if necessary, how the offeror will demonstrate compliance. This could be done by stating in the response that the Offeror complies or providing some kind of documentation to establish compliance. |
| Identify RFP Page Numbers or Section Numbers for all Scoreable Criteria |
| 8. As you address each one of the "Minimum Mandatory" and "Scoreable Technical Criteria", put the section and page number of the criteria explanation on the "Score Sheet" in the cells provided. |
| Identify Weights for All Scorable Criteria |
| 9. Enter a weight for each "Scoreable Technical Criteria" in column J. The weight is used to identify the importance of the criteria to the project/contract. The weighting should clearly identify the priority of the "Scoreable Technical Criteria". For example, if you have the criteria "The solution should be blue to match our new furniture" and "The solution will sync with our legacy software", and one is more important than the other, you would identify that by the numbers assigned in the "Criteria Weight" column. For example, you could give weight assignments like the following: 1 and 2, 2 and 3, 1 and 4, or 1 and 6. Don't worry about assigning points. Just worry about the relative importance of each of the criteria against each other. This is important because if you weight one criteria of lesser importance the same as the most important criteria, then you could get a substandard solution. |
| Identify Required Minimum Technical Percentage |
| 10. Enter the technical score minimum threshhold that has to be met to be considered for award. |
| Identify Cost Percentage |
| 11. The last thing to consider before posting the Score Sheet is the percentage amount that will be used in scoring of the cost portion of the response. Cost has to equal a minimum of 30%. Please fill in the cell labeled "Percent of Total" at this time. |
| Filling out the RFP Score Sheet |
| 12. When it is time to score the evaluations, first make a copy of the "Score Sheet" tab by right-clicking on the tab and selecting Move or Copy. There is a check box for Make a Copy and you can select where in the workbook you would like the page to be located. Make a sheet for every offer you will be evaluating. |
| Evaluate Proposals |
| 13. Now is the time to evaluate the offers. First evaluate whether the offer meets each of the Minimum Mandatory Requirements. Use the drop down menu that appears in the cell for "Evaluation" when you click in the cell. If any of the Minimum Mandatory Requirements are not met, you do not need to continue your evaluation. |
| Proposals Passing Minimum Mandatory Requirements |
| 14. For all offers that pass the Minimum Mandatory Requirements, proceed to the Scoreable Technical Criteria. Using the requirements written in the RFP and identified on the Score Sheet, evaluate each criteria on a scale of 1 - 5. The scale is included on the Score Sheet for your reference. When it is time to make an award recommendation, you will need to put together a Justification Statement. You will have the information you need if you fill these sections out while performing the evaluation. |
| Scoresheet Summary |
| 15. The "Scoresheet Summary" tab may be used to make the evaluation score sheet that will be used at the Award Determination meeting. All committee members will have an opportunity to review scores before finalizing the technical scores. Some formulas can be used to facilitate this process, but those can only be written after it has been determined how many offers will be evaluated. For help on this please contact your Purchasing Agent. |
| Bonfire Posting |
| 16. The "U3P Posting" tab illustrates the format to use for the scoresheet summary posted in U3P when the award is made. The Purchasing Agent will complete this information from the Scoresheet Summary grand totals. Firms that have been disqualified will not be included in the U3P Posting document. |
Score Sheet
| TITLE OF PROJECT Point of Interaction (Credit Card Machines) | |||||||||
| SOLICITATION # CS26-18 | |||||||||
| 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 | Offer must provide a PCI compliant E2EE solution | ||||||||
| 2 | Offeror must provide a solution including both hardware and software applications | ||||||||
| 3 | Offeror's solutions must not be stand-alone | ||||||||
| 4 | Offeror's must have a partner relationship with acquiring banks/payment processors. A partner relationship is one in which the offeror will have a secure communication and/or direct connection to the bank. Please specify your partner relationship with acquiring banks/payment processors. | ||||||||
| 5 | Offeror must be able to accept a 26 character custom data field from cashiering systems and credit card readers that will become part of the transaction data for later download. | ||||||||
| 6 | Offeror must provide daily downloadable reports showing all credit transaction activity for each merchant account including the custom data field for reconciliation purposes. | ||||||||
| 7 | Offerors must be able to change separate credit can fees for each merchant account on a monthly basis. | ||||||||
| 8 | Offeror must able to provide a monthly statement for each merchant account that provides: Counts of transactions by card type, detailed fees by card type, chargebacks, etc. | ||||||||
| 9 | Offeror must provide online dispute/chargeback management that makes it possible to identify exactly which transaction is being disputed and/or charged back. | ||||||||
| 10 | Offeror must upload a completed Attachment C -Cost Proposal Form | ||||||||
| 11 | Offeror must upload their respose to Attachment E- Technical Criteria | ||||||||
| 0 | |||||||||
| Scoreable Technical Criteria | RFP Section | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Criteria Weight | % of Tech Criteria | Points Possible | Points | |||
| Earned | Minimum Required | ||||||||
| 1 | Provide End to End Encryption: Offeror to submit a detailed description of how they will meet the following requirements. |
a. Offeror solution must provide a complex encryption algorithm for end-to-end encryption.
b. Offeror must be able to encrypt at swipe/ dip/ tap and maintain encryption all the way to the payment processor.
| c. Must be compatible with JP Morgan Chase Commerce Solutions’ Safetech Enterprise Point solution, must be a PCI P2PE solution. | I.1. | 15 | 10.7% | 75.00 | 0.00 | ||
| 2 | Enable Integration to a Purchasing Entity's ERP/ Point of Sale System: Offeror to submit a detailed description of how they will meet the following requirements. |
a. Offeror must be able to load software that provides semi-integration to point-of-sale software or ERP used by the Purchasing Entity. Semi-integration means that only limited communication between the ERP/POS is allowed as described in 2(c).
b. Offeror software must be deployable on Purchasing Entity owned/ leased terminal hardware.
c. Offeror software must be able to communicate awake and authorization with the point-of-sale system on the local PC without bringing that PC or the point of sale software into PCI scope.
| d. Offeror must provide testing and certification of integration. | I.2. | 15 | 10.7% | 75.00 | 0.00 | ||
| 3 | EMV, Swipe, Contactless: Offeror to submit a detailed description of how they will meet the following requirements. |
a. Offeror solution must be EMV ready.
| b. Offeror solution must accept full array of common RFID and NFC contactless. solutions including, but not limited to: tap and go, mobile wallets, Android Pay, Apple Pay, Samsung Pay. | I.3. | 10 | 7.1% | 50.00 | 0.00 | ||
| 4 | Single Offeror Solution: Offeror to submit a detailed description of how they will meet the following requirements. | ||||||
| a. Solution must be provided by a single Offeror or established hardware software partnership. | I.4. | 10 | 7.1% | 50.00 | 0.00 | ||
| 5 | Hardware Solutions: Offeror to submit a detailed description of how they will meet the following requirements. |
a. Offeror must provide multi-media credit card terminals.
b. Offeror may also supply configurable key-in and/or SRED devices (if devices meet other listed requirements).
c. Offeror must load payment application software.
d. Offeror must inject debit and end-to-end encryption keys.
| e. Offeror must provide both lease and sale options. | I.5. | 20 | 14.3% | 100.00 | 0.00 | ||
| 6 | Project Management / Sales Support: Offeror to submit a detailed description of how they will meet the following requirements. |
a. Offeror must provide post sales project management through full implementation.
b. Offeror project management must be coordinated with the Purchasing Entity.
| c. Offeror must provide necessary engineering and product support as needed by the Purchasing Entity. | I.6. | 15 | 10.7% | 75.00 | 0.00 | ||
| 7 | Ongoing Maintenance and Support: Offeror to submit a detailed description of how they will meet the following requirements. |
a. Offeror must warranty hardware.
b. Application/ Software licenses must cover patches, upgrades and other technical support.
| c. Offeror must provide hardware maintenance including, but not limited to: replacement parts, tampered device replacement or rebuild. | I.7. | 15 | 10.7% | 75.00 | 0.00 | ||
| 8 | PCI Compliance: Offeror to submit a detailed description of how they will meet the following requirements. |
a. Offeror must provide a current PCI AOC for service providers annually.
b. Offeror hardware and applications must maintain PCI compliance including PA-DSS, PTS, and P2PE as applicable.
| c. Offeror must provide documentation describing how the solution may reduce PCI scope for Purchasing Entities. | I.8. | 20 | 14.3% | 100.00 | 0.00 | ||
| 9 | Remote Terminal Tools: Offeror to submit a detailed description of how they will meet the following requirements. |
a. Offeror must have a tool that will allow IT staff to remotely update and manage certain application components of the terminals.
| b. The remote terminal tool must not affect PCI scope and must be secure from unauthorized access. | II.1. | 10 | 7.1% | 50.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| 10 | Tokenization: Offeror to submit a detailed description of how they will meet the following requirements. | |||||||||||
| a. Offeror solution must provide token responses for card storage requirements. | II.2. | 10 | 7.1% | 50.00 | 0.00 | |||||||
| 100.0% | 700.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |||||||||
| Required Technical Point Threshold | RFP Section | Min Percent | Min Points Required | Points Earned | Percent Earned | Evaluation | ||||||
| 420.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | |||||||||
| Cost | RFP Section | Low Cost Option | Offered Cost | Percent of Total | Points Possible | Points Earned | ||||||
| 1 | Scenario 1- Purchase 10 Points of Interaction Machines | 5% | 50.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||
| 2 | Scenario 2-Lease 10 Points of Interaction Machines | 5% | 50.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||
| 3 | Scenario 3- Purchase 100 Points of Interaction Machines | 5% | 50.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||
| 4 | Scenario 4- Lease 100 Points of Interaction Machines | 5% | 50.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||
| 5 | Scenario 5- Purchase of 350 Points of Interaction Machines | 5% | 50.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||
| 6 | Scenario 6-Lease 350 Points of Interaction Machines | 5% | 50.0 | 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 | 70% | 700.0 | 0.0 | |||||||||
| Total Cost Evaluation Points | 30% | 300.0 | 0.0 | |||||||||
| Total Evaluation Points | 100% | 1,000.0 | 0.0 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .