Attachment 3 - Evaluation Criteria.docx
DOCX document 16 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Graduate School Software
- Solicitation number
- MSU-RFP-2027-0864
- Issued by
- Montana
About this file
This is an Evaluation Criteria document for Montana State University's Graduate School RFP MSU-RFP-2027-0864 seeking graduate-specific online e-learning platforms for career exploration and development. The University is soliciting two separate platforms—one for master's students and another for doctoral and post-doctoral students. Proposals are due October 6, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. MDT, with questions required by September 23, 2026. The University reserves the right to require presentations, demonstrations, or interviews with finalists as part of the evaluation process. The contract term and value are not specified in the available source material.
Evaluation will be conducted on a total of 500 points, divided between Scope of Work and Qualifications (300 points on a pass/fail basis) and Offeror Qualifications and Company Experience (100 points). The Cost Proposal category comprises 100 points, awarded to the lowest-cost responsive offer with maximum points, while all other proposals receive points based on a proportional calculation relative to the lowest bid. Responses are scored using a four-tier scale: Superior Response (90-100%), Good Response (75-89%), Fair Response (60-74%), and Failed Response (59% or less). Any proposal receiving a failing score on individual evaluation criteria may result in disqualification at the procurement officer's discretion. Payment terms are Net 30 with no early payment discount. Selected offerors must provide minimum three references from clients using similar services within the last three years and may be required to submit audited financial statements for three consecutive years preceding RFP issuance plus any subsequent quarterly statements. Successful vendors must register in SmartBuyMSU and submit a W-9, standard software/service solution agreement, and designated contact information.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 2 - Cost Proposal.docx | DOCX document | |
| PD-83 Data Security Terms.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1-Scope of Work.docx | DOCX document | |
| DRAFT Contract.docx | DOCX document | |
| 1437543-event.pdf | ||
| PD-80 SOFTWARE University Contract Addendum_11JUN2026.pdf |
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
ATTACHMENT 3: EVALUATION CRITERIA
3.0 Basis of Evaluation
The evaluator/evaluation committee will review and evaluate the offers according to the following criteria based on a total number of 500 points.
The Resumes/Company Profile and Experience, Ability to Meet Supply Specifications, and Method of Providing Services Stability portions of the offer will be evaluated based on the following Scoring Guide or on a pass/fail basis as indicated, with any Offeror receiving a "fail" eliminated from further consideration. The Cost Proposal will be evaluated based on the formula set forth below.
Any response that fails to achieve a passing score per the prerequisites will be eliminated from further consideration. A "fail" for any individual evaluation criterion may result in proposal disqualification at the discretion of the procurement officer.
SCORING GUIDE
In awarding points to the evaluation criteria, the evaluator/evaluation committee will consider the following guidelines:
Superior Response (90-100%): A superior response is a highly comprehensive, excellent reply that meets all of the requirements of the RFP. In addition, the response may cover areas not originally addressed within the RFP and/or include additional information and recommendations that would prove both valuable and beneficial to the department.
Good Response (75-89%): A good response meets all the requirements of the RFP and demonstrates in a clear and concise manner a thorough knowledge and understanding of the project, with no deficiencies noted.
Fair Response (60-74%): A fair response minimally meets most requirements set forth in the RFP. The offeror demonstrates some ability to comply with guidelines and requirements of the project, but knowledge of the subject matter is limited.
Failed Response (59% or less): A failed response does not meet the requirements set forth in the RFP. The offeror has not demonstrated sufficient knowledge of the subject matter.
3.1 Evaluation Criteria
| Scope of Work and Qualifications | Pass/Fail | |
| Category | Point Value |
| A. | Scope of Work | 300 |
| Proposal based on Attachment 1 – Scope of Work |
B. Offeror Qualifications and Company Experience 100
Cost Proposal Category Point Value
A. Cost Proposal 100
Lowest overall cost receives the maximum allotted points. All other proposals receive a percentage of the points available based on their cost relationship to the lowest. Example: Total possible points for cost are 100. Offeror A's cost is $20,000. Offeror B's cost is $30,000. Offeror A would receive 100 points, Offeror B would receive ($20,000/$30,000) = 67% x 100 points = 66.67).
Lowest Responsive Offer Total Cost x Number of available points = Award Points This Offeror's Total Cost
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .