EPC_VI_-_Draft_Technical_Evaluation_Criteria.pdf

1. TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA WEIGHT

NOTE: evaluation sub factors listed under the main headings are not prioritized or weighted based on order.

Understanding and Technical Approach………………………………………………………………………… 50 points

The proposal shall be evaluated on the Offeror’s understanding and technical approach, specifically:

• Identification of benefits and limitations of evidence synthesis for improving health care practice and delivery and the role of stakeholders within the EPC Program

• Effectiveness of approaches to synthesize and present data for challenging situations

• Effectiveness and innovation of approaches to searching, applying study inclusion/exclusion, and data abstraction to ensure reports are efficient and timely

• Effectiveness and innovation of example provided to ensure reports are easy for the intended audience to understand and use

• Appropriateness of proposed approaches to address methodological challenges particular to specific topic areas.

Personnel and Management Plan ..……………………………………………………… 50 points

The proposal shall be evaluated on:

The appropriate expertise, qualifications and experience of personnel for the following essential core team roles:

• Senior Leadership

• Project Management

• Librarian or Information specialist

• Statistician/Data analytic personnel

• Medical editor/writer, Knowledge Translation/Data Visualization

The breadth and depth of expertise of personnel across:

• clinical topic areas

• methodological topic areas

The ability of the Offeror to appropriately identify potential conflicts of interest and appropriateness of the mitigation plan(s).

The effectiveness of management plan to:

• ensure methodological, procedural, and presentational consistency within individual projects despite input from multiple clinical experts or particular methodological expertise who may only devote limited part-time effort to projects

• Identify problems or challenges and implement timely solutions

• manage any subcontractors, consultants or other individuals not part of the core team, including division of roles, communication and decision strategies, and quality control measures to ensure quality and timeliness of subcontractor or consultant work

• ensure methodological, procedural, and presentational consistency across individual projects, particularly for individual projects that may be led by investigators who work on an ad hoc basis

• ensure continuity and timeliness of EPC reports given the need to incorporate multiple clinical expert perspectives or particular methodological expertise with only limited part-time effort and competing interests, or in situations where individual may become unavailable due to extraordinary circumstances

• ensure consistent clinical/content expertise and relevant and useful EPC reports despite the need for multiple clinical perspectives and limited time from individual clinical experts

• ensure scientifically rigorous EPC reports through methodological review

• ensure mentoring and professional development of the core team to keep up with methodological and technological advances in the field of evidence synthesis

The institutional capacity and ability to scale up personnel and management to take on multiple awards.

TOTAL TECHNICAL REVEW………………………... ……………………………………100 points

NOTE: evaluation sub factors listed under the main headings are not prioritized or weighted based on order.