B9 - Attachment 2.pdf

Attachment 2

INDIVIDUAL TECHNICAL EVALUATION FORM

SUMMARY EVALUATION FORM

RFP No:

EVALUATOR’S NAME: OFFEROR:

RFP REFERENCES:

FACTOR:

PROPOSAL REFERENCES:

VOLUME/PARAGRAPH:

SUBFACTOR: PAGE NUMBER:

Evaluation Rating:

(Insert appropriate rating from applicable adjectival rating; e.g., Outstanding (O) Good (G) Acceptable (A) Marginal (M) Unacceptable (U))

Evaluator’s Rating:

Initial Rating: (e.g., G/M) Evaluator Initials/ Date: Factor Chairperson Initials/Date:

Discussions: Evaluator Initials/ Date: Factor Chairperson Initials/Date:

Final Rating: Evaluator Initials/ Date: Factor Chairperson Initials/Date:

RATIONALE: Include supporting narrative rationale for the ratings. Using the evaluation rating definitions, state the evaluation results in terms of strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, risks, and uncertainties. Also include any evaluation notices. Identify all comments and questions below with the rating (e.g., Initial Rating (IR), Result of Discussion (RD), or Final Rating (FR). Use continuation sheets or a database as needed and a separate sheet for every factor or subfactor.

STRENGTHS:

(Precede the strength with an (S) if it identifies a significant strength. Address any identified risks associated with the strength.)

WEAKNESSES (identify EN number(s) for each one):

(Precede the weakness with an (S) if it identifies a significant weakness. Address the identified risks associated with the weakness.)

DEFICIENCIES (identify EN number(s) for each one): (Address the identified risks associated with the deficiency.)

UNCERTAINTIES:

EVALUATION NOTICES (ENs) required for each weakness, significant weakness, deficiency, and uncertainty.

Technical Evaluation Team Consensus Report

OFFEROR: __________________________ DATE: _________________________

CONSENSUS AGREEMENT

The Technical Evaluation Team has completed their evaluation for the above named offeror.

An adjectival rating of ________________________ has been assigned to the aforementioned offeror.

The following is a summarization of the team’s findings (including strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies and uncertainties):

Team Member Signature Team Member Signature

Team Member Signature Team Member Signature

Team Member Signature Team Member Signature

Minority Opinion Report

Evaluator Name: _________________________________________

Offeror: ________________________________________________

FACTOR ____________________

To be attached to respective evaluation documentation

FACTOR/SUBFACTOR: PROPOSAL REFERENCES

(Cite Volume/Section/Page(s)/Paragraph(s))

Ratings (mark one): Outstanding (O) Good (G) Acceptable (A) Marginal (M)

Unacceptable (U)

Past Performance Ratings (mark one): Substantial Confidence Satisfactory

Confidence Limited Confidence No Confidence Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

Evaluation (circle one) Initial Interim Final Revised

Date:

I disagree with the SSEB Consensus on the following issue for the reasons/rationale stated below:

My recommended rating for the Factor or Subfactor in question is indicated above. My assessment produced the following findings and results: