Attachment 3 Evaluation Criteria.pdf
PDF 90 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- MSU-RFP-26-07
- Issued by
- Gallatin County, Montana
About this file
This is an Evaluation Criteria document for Montana State University Billings' Student Services process Redesign Initiative consulting procurement (RFP MSU-RFP-26-07). The RFP was released on November 19, 2025, with proposals due December 19, 2025, at 2:00 PM MST. Prospective offerors must submit questions by December 2, 2025. The university seeks consulting services to enhance student experience and success across enrollment, admissions, registration, advising, financial aid, implementation, remediation, and academic redesign initiatives. Qualified firms must demonstrate at least three higher education case studies showing process redesign or student services optimization experience within the past five years with documented measurable results. Required submissions include a current W-9, detailed pricing using a provided cost proposal template, and a comprehensive work plan detailing methodology, timeframes, and deliverables. The procurement evaluation will assess current processes, identify operational barriers and redundancies, and recommend improvements leveraging Ellucian Banner software capabilities.
Evaluation will be conducted on a total of 1,000 points distributed across four categories: References (pass/fail), Resumes/Company Profile and Experience (200 points, 20%), Ability to Meet Specifications (600 points, 60%), and Cost Proposal (200 points, 20%). The Cost Proposal scoring awards maximum points to the lowest responsive offer, with all other proposals receiving points proportional to their cost relationship to the lowest bid. The procurement includes a 50-point bonus for compliance with Montana Executive Order No. 12-2016 regarding equal pay for women. Financial stability may be assessed through requests for audited financial statements covering three years preceding RFP issuance. Payment terms are Net 30 with 0% financing. All procurement must be processed through SmartBuyMSU, Montana State University's e-procurement platform, and the selected vendor must comply with stringent data security requirements and specific insurance requirements.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Draft Contract-Student Experience Improvement.docx | DOCX document | |
| 1354051-event.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 Cost Proposal.pdf | ||
| PD-83 Data Security Terms.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 1 Scope of Services.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 1000 points.
The Requirements, References, Résumés/Company Profile and Experience, and 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 requirements in 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
References Pass/Fail
Category Point Value
A. References Pass/Fail
Résumés/Company Profile and Experience 20% of points for a possible 200 points
A. Offeror Qualifications 200
Ability to Meet Specifications 60% of points for a possible 600 points
A. Strategic Phase A - Enrollment, Admissions & Registration 150 B. Strategic Phase B – Advising & Financial Aid 150 C. Strategic Phase C – Implementation & Remediation 100 D. Academic and Student Experience Redesign Initiative Approach 150 E. Mandatory Requirements Pass/Fail F. Preferred Requirements 50
Cost Proposal 20% of points for a possible 200 points
Category Point Value
A. Total Scope of Services Cost 200
Bonus Points 50 points
Equal Pay for Montana Women 50
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 200. Offeror A's cost is $20,000. Offeror B's cost is $30,000. Offeror A would receive 200 points, Offeror B would receive 134 points ($20,000/$30,000) = 67% x 200 points = 134).
Lowest Responsive Offer Total Cost x Number of available points = Award Points This Offeror's Total Cost
| SCORING GUIDE |
| 3.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .