Attachment D Score Sheet.xls
XLS spreadsheet 50 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Grounds Maintenance Equipment
- Solicitation number
- KK25-3
- Issued by
- Utah
About this file
This document is a Solicitation Evaluation Scoresheet for a Request for Proposals (RFP) issued by the State of Utah for Grounds Maintenance Equipment. The RFP seeks proposals for a statewide cooperative contract for various types of grounds maintenance equipment such as tractors, tractor-towed implements, off-road utility vehicles, self-propelled riding mowers, turf maintenance equipment, wood/brush chippers, snow removal equipment, and compact excavators. The technical evaluation criteria include customer service, experience and service areas, warranty coverage, and the variety and quality of products offered. Offerors must achieve a minimum of 420 technical points (60% of the available 700 points) to advance to the cost evaluation stage, where the highest proposed discount percentage will receive the maximum 300 cost points.
The document outlines the process for determining the award of contracts, where any offeror that achieves a combined total score of at least 60% of all available points will be eligible for a statewide cooperative contract. The cost points will be allocated based on the percentage by which an offeror's proposed discount is less than the highest proposed discount.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment A Terms and Conditions for Goods & Services (Cooperative Contracts).docx | DOCX document | |
| 1256010-event.pdf | ||
| Claim of Business Confidentiality 12.7.20.pdf | ||
| Changing Your Time Zone 2022.pptx | PPTX presentation | |
| Attachment B Scope of Work.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment C Cost Sheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
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
Score Sheet
| Grounds Maintenance Equipment | |
| SOLICITATION #KK25-3 | |
| RFP EVALUATION SCORESHEET | |
| Score will be assigned as follows: | |
| 0 = Fail, the proposal fails to address the requirements or criteria described in the RFP or cannot be assessed du to missing information | |
| Offeror Name: | 1 = Poor, the proposal inadequately addresses the requirements or criteria described in the RFP or cannot be assessed due to incomplete information |
| 2 = Unsatisfactory, the proposal addresses the requirements or criteria described in the RFP in an unsatisfactory manner | |
| Evaluator: | 3 = Satisfactory, the proposal addresses all requirements or criteria described in the RFP in a minimum satisfactory manner |
| 4 = Good, the proposal addresses all requirements or criteria described in the RFP and in some respects exceeds them | |
| Date: | 5 = Excellent, the proposal addresses and exceeds all of the requirements or criteria described in the RFP |
| The process for determining the awarding of contract(s) is as follows: |
1. Any offeror that achieves a combined total score of at least 60% of all available points will be eligible for a statewide cooperative contract.
2. There are 700 technical points and 300 cost points available for evaluation for each category awarded.
3. Offerors must attain a minimum of 60% in technical criteria points, which is equivalent to 420 points, to advance to the Cost Evaluation stage.
4. In the Cost Evaluation stage, the points assigned to each offeror's cost proposal will be determined based on the highest proposed discount percent.
5. The offeror with the highest proposed discount percent will receive 100% of the price points.
6. All other offerors will receive a portion of the total cost points, calculated based on the percentage by which their proposed discount percent is less than the highest proposed discount percent.
7. The formula for computing the points is: Cost Points x (Proposed Discount/Highest Discount).
| Minimum Mandatory Requirements | RFP Section | Evaluation (Pass/Fail) | ||||||
| 1 | Offeror must upload a proposal in response to the technical criteria listed in Prerequisites Technical Evaluation. | Prerequisites | ||||||
| 2 | Offeror must upload a completed Attachment C Cost Sheet. | Prerequisites | ||||||
| 3 | Offeror must upload a price list or provide a link to a website that provides pricing. | Prerequisites | ||||||
| 0 | ||||||||
| Scoreable Technical Criteria | ||||||||
| RFP Section Prerequisites | Category | Evaluator Score (0-5) | Criteria Weight | % of Technical Criteria | Points Possible | Points |
Earned 1 Customer Service
• How can a user of the contract contact offeror’s customer service representatives? Describe the typical response time for each?
• Does offeror have a physical presence or local representatives in Utah?
| • How does the offeror resolve issues? | All Categories | 26 | 18.6% | 130.0 | 0.0 | ||
| 2 | Experience and Service Areas |
• How long has offeror been in business? What experience does offeror have in providing ground maintenance equipment?
• Does offeror cover the entire state of Utah? Are there any restrictions or limitations on service area?
| • What is the typical lead-time to receive the equipment? | All Categories | 33 | 23.6% | 165.0 | 0.0 | ||
| 3 | Warranty |
• Does the ground maintenance equipment come with warranties?
• What specific components are covered with the warranty?
| • Describe the procedures for warranty claims? | All Categories | 31 | 22.1% | 155.0 | 0.0 | ||
| 4 | Variety and Quality of Products |
(Provide a response for each category the offeror is applying to.)
| • | Offeror to provide details on the equipment being offered, including make, model, and specifications. | |||||||||||||
| • | Provide details on how the equipment complies with all relevant safety, regulatory, and industry standards. | |||||||||||||
| • | Describe any innovative features or advanced technology included in the equipment that might offer additional benefits to eligible users. | Tractors | 50 | 35.7% | 250.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||
| Tractor Towed Implements | 50 | 35.7% | 250.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||||
| Off Road Utility Vehicles | 50 | 35.7% | 250.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||||
| Self-Propelled Riding Mowers | 50 | 35.7% | 250.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||||
| Turf Maintenance | 50 | 35.7% | 250.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||||
| Wood/Brush Chipper | 50 | 35.7% | 250.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||||
| Snow Removal | 50 | 35.7% | 250.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||||
| Compact Excavator | 50 | 35.7% | 250.0 | 0.0 | ||||||||||
| 100.0% | 700.0 | |||||||||||||
| Offeror's Point Evaluation (to be filled out by the Division of Purchasing) | ||||||||||||||
| Technical Evaluation 70% of Points | Cost Evaluation 30% of Points | |||||||||||||
| Category | Minimum Percent | 420 Points Required | Points Earned | Percent Earned | Technical Evaluation | Market Basket Most Competitive Price | Offeror's Market Basket Price | Points Possible | Points Earned | Total Points | Overall Evaluation | |||
| Tractors | 60% | 420.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | 300 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | |||||
| Tractor Towed Implements | 60% | 420.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | 300 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | |||||
| Off Road Utility Vehicles | 60% | 420.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | 300 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | |||||
| Self-Propelled Riding Mowers | 60% | 420.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | 300 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | |||||
| Turf Maintenance | 60% | 420.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | 300 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | |||||
| Wood/Brush Chipper | 60% | 420.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | 300 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | |||||
| Snow Removal | 60% | 420.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | 300 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | |||||
| Compact Excavator | 60% | 420.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0 | 300 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .