Attachment_B_-_Criteria_for_Awarding_Points.pdf

Attachment B: Criteria for Awarding Points for the Proposal Scoring Rubric

Maximum Score

Scoring Rubric Actual Score

1. PAST PERFORMANCE AND EXPERIENCE

• Has the Proposer successfully delivered on past projects of similar scope and complexity?

•Has the Proposer demonstrated su icient experience on past projects performing the tasks required under the Scope of Work?

•Has the Proposer demonstrated applicable cost savings and schedule improvement methodologies utilized on past projects?

•Has the Proposer demonstrated a successful and repeatable past approach to delivering high-quality products with schedule constraints?

•Has the Proposer verified a minimum of ten (10) years’ experience training Police K-9’s?

•Has the Proposer provided written evidence of at least five (5) years’ experience as a K-9 handler with a POST certified California Law Enforcement Agency of United States Military Department?

•Has the Proposed attested to providing at least five (5) years or more of each of the following: patrol tracking, patrol training and detection training exercises?

18 18 – Meets all criteria on Past Performance and Experience

12 – Meets most criteria on Past Performance and Experience (Either has full years of experience or demonstrated success on past projects, but not both)

6 – Meets some criteria on Past Performance and Experience (Has some experience or some demonstrated success, but neither the required amount)

0- Meets no criteria on Past Performance and Experience (Does not provide any experience or demonstrated success)

2. UNDERSTANDING OF PROJECT REQUIREMENTS

Project Criteria

• Has the Proposer demonstrated a thorough knowledge of the project requirements?

• Is there su icient evidence of analysis to lend credibility to the commitments made?

• Has the Proposer given clear evidence through narratives and examples of prior work that it has the capability to carry out the K9 Patrol and Detection Maintenance Services for a project of this complexity and magnitude with innovation and autonomy?

12 12 – Fully understands project requirements through answering all three questions

8- Mostly understands project requirements, answers some but not all questions

4- Partially understands project requirements, answers one question

0 – Does not demonstrate understanding of project requirements

Organization and Management Plan

• Does the proposed project organization present a clear and logical framework?

• Is the management approach complementary and responsive to the RFP requirements? Does the sta ing plan convey the proper level of response for the work at hand?

• Does it demonstrate a high level of commitment and resource availability?

• Does it address the full expanse of potential tasks in the scope?

5 5 – Organization and Management plan is fully defined and demonstrates ability to carry out SOW

3- Organization and Management plan is defined or demonstrates ability to carry out

SOW

0- Organization and Management Plan is not defined and does not demonstrate ability to carry out SOW

Key Personnel

• Are the personal qualifications and professional skills of the Key Personnel nominees appropriate for the roles assigned?

• Is their past experience applicable and indicative of success on this project?

5 5- Key Personnel are appropriately assigned and have past successful applicable experience

3- Key Personnel are appropriately assigned or have past successful applicable experience

0- Key Personnel are not appropriately assigned and do not have past successful applicable experience

Total Technical Proposal Score 40 Total Cost Proposal Score 30 Lowest Cost Proposal will receive the full

(30) points;

All other cost proposals will be calculated as follows:

(Lowest Cost Proposal/Other Cost Proposal) x 30 points = Other Cost Proposal Score

COMBINED PROPOSAL SCORE (Technical + Cost) 70 Preference and Incentive Points

FINAL PROPOSAL SCORE 70

See Section 5.2.3 of this RFP for calculation of the Cost Proposal Scores.