Exhibit G -Evaluation Tool.pdf
PDF 56 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Music Therapy Services for The Blind Children’s Vocational Discovery and Development Program (BCVDDP)
- Solicitation number
- HHS0016728.
- Issued by
- Texas
About this file
This is an Evaluation Tool document prepared by the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) for Request for Proposals No. HHS0016728, which seeks to procure Music Therapy Services for the Blind Children's Vocational Discovery and Development Program (BCVDDP). The RFP solicits proposals from qualified Texas-based contractors to provide individual, group, and optional in-home music therapy sessions to blind and visually impaired individuals from birth to age 22 across four regional service areas. HHSC plans to award four separate contracts. The pre-proposal conference was held on March 20, 2026, with a question deadline of March 23, 2026, and clarification responses posted by April 3, 2026. Proposal responses are due April 17, 2026, at 10:30 a.m. Central Time, with award notification anticipated in August 2026 and contract start date of September 1, 2026. The initial contract term is two years with HHSC holding the option to extend for up to three additional years plus one additional year for immediate operational needs.
The evaluation tool establishes five weighted criteria for proposal assessment: Facility Requirements (10%), Experience providing music therapy to blind and visually impaired individuals (20%), Staffing Plan (20%), Project Work Plan including work plan coordination and proposed processes and methodologies (20%), and Cost including reasonableness and total cost for initial and optional extension terms (30%), for a total of 100 points. Scoring uses a 1-to-10 scale with defined descriptors ranging from unacceptable responses to exceptional responses that far exceed requirements. Minimum qualifications require respondents to demonstrate at least two years of experience providing music therapy to blind and visually impaired individuals, employ at least one Board-Certified Music Therapist (MT-BC), maintain financial solvency, and comply with all submission requirements. Historical compensation for similar contracts has ranged from approximately $40,000 per fiscal year, though HHSC reserves the right to adjust amounts based on state funding availability. Pricing proposals must be submitted in Excel format with active formulas and include all costs for providing required services, including travel expenses for in-home sessions in accordance with Texas Comptroller travel rates.
View the file
Other files
Show all 16
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 how Respondent meets physical facility requirements. 10%
10%
2.1 Evaluate Respondent's experience providing Music Therapy Services to the blind and visually impaired. 20%
20%
3.1 Evaluate Respondent's ability to meet the staffing requirements of the solicitation. 20%
20%
4.1 Evaluate Respondent's work plan in coordinating individual and group sessions in relation to music therapy for Eligible Individual with disabilities.
10%
4.2 Evaluate Respondent's proposed processes and methodologies for providing all components of the Scope of Work. 10%
20%
5.1 Evaluate the reasonableness of the Respondent's proposed cost in accordance with the requirements of the RFP. 15%
5.2 Evaluate the proposed Total Cost for Initial Term and Optional Extension Terms. 15%
30% 100%
RFP No. HHS0016728 Criteria, Subcriteria Sheet
Exhibit G, Evaluation Tool
Staffing Plan
Facility Requirements
Experience
Project Work Plan
Subtotal
TOTAL (%)
Subtotal
Subtotal
Subtotal
Cost
Subtotal
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
Response mentions requirement, but is not responsive to the elements of the requirement.
Exhibit G, Evaluation Tool RFP No. HHS0016728
Evaluation Scoring Guide
Description
Response does not address requirement. Response is completely unacceptable.
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.
Version 1.6 September 2023 2 of 3
No. Best Value Criteria Weight 1 Facility Requirements 10% 2 Experience 20% 3 Staffing Plan 20% 4 Project Work Plan 20% 5 Cost 30%
GRAND TOTAL 100%
Exhibit G, Evaluation Tool RFP No. HHS0016728
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 .