9-26RM02P5 - Attachment G - Evaluation Scoresheet - 04.20.2026.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 17 KB Posted

Attached to
Athletic Uniform and Apparel Discount Incentive for Bingham High School
Solicitation number
26RM02P5
Issued by
Salt Lake County, Utah

About this file

This is an RFP evaluation scoresheet for an athletic uniform and apparel discount incentive agreement between Jordan School District (JSD) and Bingham High School (BHS). The solicitation (26RM02P5) seeks competitive proposals from qualified offerors to provide exclusive uniforms, footwear, and branded apparel to BHS athletic teams in exchange for mutually agreed-upon marketing opportunities and advertising exposure. BHS currently expends approximately $400,000 annually on athletic uniforms and apparel and intends to consolidate purchases through a single contracted offeror while maintaining flexibility to select from multiple brands for non-game-day and miscellaneous apparel items. The school has established a preference for Under Armour based on prior experience with customer service, product quality, and brand alignment; however, offerors may propose Under Armour, Nike, Adidas, or other equivalent high-quality brands capable of meeting the athletic programs' needs. Offerors proposing alternative brands must clearly demonstrate how their customer service and products equal or exceed Under Armour's quality, durability, performance, and breadth of offerings.

The evaluation scoresheet allocates 1,425 total possible points across technical, cost, and mandatory requirements. Technical evaluation comprises 70.18 percent (1,000 points) and includes five primary categories: brand quality and partnership requirements (75 points), service requirements (185 points), and marketing requirements (40 points). A minimum threshold of 75 percent (750 points) of technical points is required for proposal approval. Cost evaluation comprises 29.82 percent (425 points) based on the lowest proposed price. Mandatory requirements in RFP Section 2.1 include State of Utah licensure, experience and references, local representative designation, artwork ownership, and compliance with Utah Code 63G-27 public contract boycott restrictions. All mandatory requirements must be satisfied on a pass/fail basis prior to technical and cost evaluation 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

Score Sheet

ATTACHMENT G
Athletic Uniform and Apparel Discount Incentive for Bingham High School
SOLICITATION # 26RM02P5
RFP EVALUATION SCORESHEET
DRAFT: This document is intended to be a draft. 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
Offeror 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 RequirementsRFP SectionEvaluation (Pass/Fail)
AState of Utah Licensure2.1
BExperience and References2.1
CLocal Representative2.1
DArtwork Ownership2.1
ECompliance with Utah Code 63G-27 Public Contract Boycott Restrictions2.1

Scoreable Technical Criteria RFP Section Evaluator Score (0-5) Criteria Weight % of Tech Criteria Points Possible Points Earned

Brand Quality and Partnership Requirements
A1Partnership(s) with Under Armour or other high-quality brand3.2157.50%75.00.0
A2Offeror serves as liason between BHS and brand partner3.2105.00%50.00.0
A3Sufficient product catalog and continuity plan3.2105.00%50.00.0
A4Product warranty coverage3.2105.00%50.00.0
A5Product range meeting BHS team needs and UHSAA standards3.22512.50%125.00.0
Service Requirements
B1Dedicated account representative and local support3.2105.00%50.00.0
B2Clearly defined ordering process and capabilities3.2105.00%50.00.0
B3Order-by dates for seasonal sports and proactive order placement3.2105.00%50.00.0
B4Collaboration with BHS and customization options for uniform and apparel design3.22010.00%100.00.0
B5Quality assurance process3.2105.00%50.00.0
B6Online portal options, setup, and security3.2157.50%75.00.0
B7Quotes that clearly reflect contract pricing and transparency on additional charges3.2105.00%50.00.0
B8Policies for returns, exchanges, and replacements3.2105.00%50.00.0
B9Issue resolution process3.2105.00%50.00.0
Marketing Requirements
C1Promotional incentive program3.2105.00%50.00.0
C2Marketing or promotional activities requested from BHS3.2157.50%75.00.0
TOTAL:100.0%1,000.00.0
Required Technical Point ThresholdRFP SectionMin PercentMin Points RequiredPoints EarnedPercent EarnedEvaluation
5.175%750.00.00.0%
CostRFP SectionLow Cost OptionOffered CostPercent of TotalPoints PossiblePoints Earned
5.129.82%425.00.0
Cost Formula: Cost Points x (Lowest Proposed Price/Proposed Price)
Total Evaluation PointsPercent of TotalPoints PossiblePoints Earned
Total Technical Evaluation Points70.18%1,000.00.0
Total Cost Evaluation Points29.82%425.00.0
Total Evaluation Points100%1,425.00.0

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .