9-26TH08P5 Attachment H RFP Evaluation Scoresheet.xls
XLS spreadsheet 66 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFP- Utility Management Software Solution
- Solicitation number
- 26TH08P5
- Issued by
- Utah
About this file
This is an RFP Evaluation Scoresheet for a Utility Management Software Solution solicitation (26TH08P5) issued by Jordan School District in Utah. The scoresheet establishes the evaluation framework for assessing vendor proposals, with scoring based on mandatory requirements and technical criteria. The evaluation process comprises three components: technical criteria worth 53.33% of total points (800 points possible), presentations worth 13.33% (200 points possible), and cost evaluation worth 33.33% (500 points possible), for a total evaluation score of 1,500 points. Technical evaluation includes 16 software requirement criteria and 3 training and support criteria, with individual scores ranging from 0 to 5 (Fail through Excellent). A minimum technical threshold of 75% (600 points) is required for proposal advancement.
The scoresheet implements a weighted scoring methodology where software requirements carry weights between 5.00% and 6.25%, addressing critical functionality such as on-premises or cloud-hosted deployment, system availability, multiple utility type management, data visualization, legacy data handling, ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager integration, role-based access controls, data migration procedures, and cybersecurity measures. Training and technical support criteria include online training options, software support, and data breach response protocols. Cost evaluation applies a formula using the lowest proposed price relative to each offeror's price to determine cost points, with presentations evaluated separately as a distinct evaluation component. The scoresheet notes that the document is a draft and is not subject to disclosure under Utah's Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA).
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 H | ||||||||
| Utility Management Software Solution | ||||||||
| SOLICITATION # 26TH08P5 | ||||||||
| 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 | ||||||||
| 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) | ||||||
| A | Experience and References | 2.1 | ||||||
| B | Existing Filtering Capability, Legacy Data, DP, Multiple | 2.1 | ||||||
| C | Page Limitation | 2.1 | ||||||
| D | Compliance with Public Contract Boycott Restrictions | 2.1 | ||||||
| 0 | ||||||||
| Scoreable Technical Criteria | RFP Section | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Criteria Weight | % of Tech Criteria | Points Possible | Points |
Earned
| Software Requirements | |||||||
| A1 | On-Prem, Web-based, Cloud Hosted SaaS solution | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| A2 | System availability | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| A3 | Software system updates | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| A4 | Comprehensive account management | 3.2 | 10 | 6.25% | 50.0 | 0.0 | |
| A5 | Manage multiple utility types per facility | 3.2 | 10 | 6.25% | 50.0 | 0.0 | |
| A6 | Reporting & Vizualization of Data | 3.2 | 10 | 6.25% | 50.0 | 0.0 | |
| A7 | Public Internet Dashboard to display reports/graphs | 3.2 | 10 | 6.25% | 50.0 | 0.0 | |
| A8 | Document & tracks energy efficiency & conservation | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| A9 | Provides avoided cost functionality- IPMVP compliant | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| A10 | Integration with ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager | 3.2 | 7 | 5.00% | 35.0 | 0.0 | |
| A11 | Provides role-based user access controls | 3.2 | 7 | 5.00% | 35.0 | 0.0 | |
| A12 | Manage & display legacy data | 3.2 | 10 | 5.00% | 50.0 | 0.0 | |
| A13 | Supports school district IT security reviews | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| A14 | Data migration approach- historical and validation & error | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| A15 | Risk identification & mitigation strategies | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| A16 | Remote access requirements by vendor | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| Training and Technical Support | |||||||
| B1 | Online/on-demand training options | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| B2 | Technical support for software | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| B3 | Cybersecurity initiatives/process for data breach | 3.2 | 8 | 5.00% | 40.0 | 0.0 | |
| 100.0% | 800.0 | 0.0 | |||||
| Required Technical Point Threshold | RFP Section | Min Percent | Min Points Required | Points Earned | Percent Earned | Evaluation | |
| 5.1 | 75% | 600.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Presentations | RFP Section | Percent of Total | Points Possible | Points Earned | |||
| 5.1 | 13.33% | 200.0 | |||||
| Cost | RFP Section | Low Cost Option | Offered Cost | Percent of Total | Points Possible | Points Earned | |
| 5.1 | 33.33% | 500.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| Cost Formula: Cost Points x (Lowest Proposed Price/Proposed Price) | |||||||
| Total Evaluation Points | Percent of Total | Points Possible | Points Earned | ||||
| Total Technical Evaluation Points | 53.33% | 800.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| Total Presentation Points | 13.33% | 200.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| Total Cost Evaluation Points | 33.33% | 500.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| Total Evaluation Points | 100% | 1,500.0 | 0.0 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .