ESBD_524143_1780607606339_Exhibit H, Evaluation Tool.pdf
PDF 54 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Maven Registries Maintenance and Operations RFO
- Solicitation number
- HHS0017000
- Issued by
- Texas
About this file
This is an evaluation tool exhibit for RFO No. HHS0017000 issued by a Texas state health and human services agency for Maven platform maintenance and support services. The solicitation requires respondents to submit qualifications and experience documentation, staffing plans with organizational charts, narrative proposals addressing all RFO requirements, and technical proposals demonstrating compliance with the Scope of Work.
The evaluation uses a best value methodology with three weighted criteria categories: Qualifications and Experience (30%), Narrative and Technical Proposals (30%), and Cost (40%), totaling 100 points. Within Qualifications and Experience, evaluators assess the respondent's background maintaining the Maven platform and staffing plan alignment with requirements. The Narrative and Technical Proposals section evaluates both the narrative response and technical proposal against all RFO requirements. The Cost section assesses the reasonableness of proposed pricing and the total cost for both the initial term and optional extension term. Scoring uses a 10-point scale ranging from Unacceptable (1-3) to Exceptional (10), with detailed descriptors defining performance at each level. The Master Score Sheet template consolidates subtotals from each evaluation category to determine the overall award recommendation based on best value rather than lowest cost alone.
View the file
Other files
Show all 18
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
Evaluator Respondent
# Criteria Weight Score Comments
1.1 Evaluate the Respondent's qualifications and experience maintaining and supporting the Maven platform. 15%
1.2 Evaluate how the Respondent's proposed staffing plan and organizational chart align with the requirements of the Scope of Work. 15%
30%
2.1 Evaluate the Respondent's narrative proposal in meeting all the requirements in this RFO Solicitation. 15%
2.2 Evaluate the Respondent's technical proposal in meeting all the requirements in this RFO Solicitation. 15%
30%
3.1 Evaluate the reasonableness of Respondent's proposed pricing. 25%
3.2 Evaluate the Respondents Total Cost for the Initial Term and Optional Extension Term. 15%
40%
100%TOTAL (%)
Subtotal
Subtotal
Subtotal
RFO No. HHS0017000 Criteria, Subcriteria Sheet
Exhibit H, Evaluation Tool
Cost
Qualifications & Experience
Narrative and Technical Proposals
Version 1.6 September 2023 1 of 3
Score Level
Unacceptable 1
Unacceptable 2
Unacceptable 3
Marginal. Fails to meet evaluation standards but failures are correctable. 4
Marginal. Fails to meet evaluation standards but failures are correctable. 5
Marginal. Fails to meet evaluation standards but failures are correctable. 6
Acceptable 7
Acceptable 8
Acceptable 9
Exceptional 10
For the purposes of this exhibit, “the agency” means the contracting state agency as specified in the solicitation.
Response satisfies requirements and has some benefits above requirement.
Response far exceeds all aspects of requirement.
Response addresses requirement, but response described does not allow the agency to fulfill mission.
Response meets fundamental requirements, however could not be implemented as described (would require both the agency and Respondent to make significant changes not currently anticipated).
Response meets fundamental requirements, however could not be implemented as described (implementation would require both the agency and Respondent to make minor changes not currently anticipated).
Response meets fundamental requirements, however could not be implemented as described (implementation would require changes to be made by Respondent only).
Response clearly satisfies requirement but has some minor weaknesses.
Response clearly satisfies requirement.
Response mentions requirement, but is not responsive to the elements of the requirement.
Exhibit H, Evaluation Tool RFO No. HHS0017000
Evaluation Scoring Guide
Description
Response does not address requirement. Response is completely unacceptable.
Version 1.6 September 2023 2 of 3
No. Best Value Criteria Weight 1 Qualification & Experience 30% 2 Narrative and Technical Proposals 30% 3 Cost 40%
GRAND TOTAL 100%
Exhibit H, Evaluation Tool RFO No. HHS0017000
Version 1.6 September 2023 3 of 3
| Master Score Sheet Template |
| Scoring Guide |
| Evaluation Criteria |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .