Attachment 3 - Evaluation Criteria.pdf
PDF 86 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- MSU-RFP-2025-0712
- Issued by
- Montana
About this file
This document is Attachment 3 for the Great Falls College MSU Pour & Beverage Vending Rights contract opportunity, detailing the comprehensive evaluation process for proposals. The evaluation will be conducted by an evaluation committee using a 500-point scoring system across three primary categories: Scope of Project (60%, 300 points), Offeror Qualifications (10%, 50 points), and Cost Proposal (30%, 150 points). Additional bonus points of up to 50 are available for addressing the "Equal Pay for Montana Women" question.
The scoring methodology includes a detailed evaluation guide with four performance tiers: Superior Response (90-100%), Good Response (75-89%), Fair Response (60-74%), and Failed Response (59% or less). Cost proposals will be evaluated using a comparative calculation where the lowest responsive offer receives maximum points, with other offerors receiving a proportional score. The cost evaluation includes two components: Product Pricing-Market Basket and Donations, with points awarded based on relative cost and incentive offerings. References for offerors will be assessed on a pass/fail basis, and company experience will be scored within the Offeror Qualifications category.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 1 - Scope of Project.pdf | ||
| Appendix 1 - Market Basket.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 1308727-event.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - Cost Proposal.pdf | ||
| Draft Contract GFC Beverage Pour Rights.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 PROCESS
3.1 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 Scope of Project and Offeror Qualifications 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.
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.
3.2 EVALUATION/CRITERIA SCORING
Scope of Project 60% of points for a possible 300 points
Category Point Value
A. Service Methods 200 B. Delivery & Maintenance 100
Offeror Qualifications 10% of points for a possible 50 points
Category Point Value
A. Company Experience 50 B. References Pass/Fail
Cost Proposal 30% of points for a possible 150 points
Category Section of RFP Point Value
A. Product Pricing- Market Basket* Attachment A 100 B. Donations** Attachment A 50
Bonus Points Possible 50 bonus points Category eMACS Question
A. Equal Pay for Montana Women Question 1.9 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 30. Offeror A's cost is $20,000. Offeror B's cost is $30,000. Offeror A would receive 30 points, Offeror B would receive 20 points ($20,000/$30,000) = 67% x 30 points = 20).
Lowest Responsive Offer Total Cost x Number of available points = Award Points This Offeror's Total Cost
**Highest overall incentives receives the maximum allotted points. All other proposals receive a percentage of the points available based on their relationship to the lowest. Example: Total possible points for incentives are 30. Offeror A's incentive is $200,000. Offeror B's cost is $300,000. Offeror B would receive 30 points, Offeror A would receive 20 points ($200,000/$300,000) = 67% x 30 points = 20).
This Offeror’s Total Incentive x Number of available points = Award Points Highest Responsive Offeror’sTotal Incentive
SCORING GUIDE
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .