Exhibit K, Consensus Scoring Rubric.pdf

PCS 546 CONSENSUS SCORING RUBRIC

SOLICITATION #: HHS0016867

SOLICITATION TITLE: Enrollment Broker

RESPONDENT:

DATE:

PCS 546 Version 1.10 Review Date: 07/02/2024

Instructions: The purpose of this form is to record all evaluation notes and scoring that is obtained through consensus discussions among the full evaluation team for this Solicitation. The Facilitator should complete this form and maintain the only copy. This form should reflect the full team’s consensus discussions and justifications for score selection. Please remember to have the CQC FA review and approve this rubric before posting and review and approve the calculations after evaluations. Please consult CQC on all cost evaluation strategies.

SUMMARY PAGE

Solicitation Criteria Solicitation Response

Score:

Criteria I. Project Work Plan (Max: 30 Points)

Criteria II. Technical Proposal (Max: 30 Points)

Criteria III: Qualifications and Demonstrated Relevant Experience (Max: 20 Points)

Criteria IV: Cost Approach (Max: 10 Points)

Criteria V. Total Cost (Max: 10 Points)

Final Written Response Score = Sum of all Solicitation Response Score

Oral Presentation Score (Max: 10 Additional Points) *Oral Presentation Score is 0 where a Respondent was not invited to participate due to failure to meet the Advancement Criteria in the Solicitation.

Total Score = Final Written Response Score + Oral Presentation Score

RFP HHS0016867 Exhibit K

SOLICITATION TITLE: Enrollment Broker

RESPONDENT:

DATE:

PCS 546 Version 1.10 Review Date: 07/02/2024

SCORING GUIDE FOR EACH CRITERION

Use the guidance in the table below to determine the number of points awarded for each criterion. Point ranges are provided as a reference for each criterion in accordance with the table below.

Excellent Respondent’s response addresses the criterion in a high level of detail.

The Respondent’s response relates directly to the needs of this criterion. The Evaluation Team has a high degree of confidence in Respondent’s ability to fulfill the requirements of this criterion.

81-100% of applicable points applied

Acceptable Respondent’s response addresses the criterion in a moderate level of detail. Response relates generally to the needs of this criterion. The Respondent does not address minor considerations. The Evaluation Team has a medium degree of confidence in Respondent’s ability to fulfill the requirements of this criterion.

61-80% of applicable points applied

Marginal Respondent’s response addresses the criterion in general terms. The Respondent may address some major considerations; however the response may not address specific needs of this criterion. The Evaluation Team has a somewhat low degree of confidence in Respondent’s ability to fulfill the requirements of this criterion.

41-60% of applicable points applied.

Unacceptable Respondent’s response addresses the criterion in general terms. The Respondent does not address major considerations or Respondent does not address specific needs of this criterion. The Evaluation Team has a very low degree of confidence in Respondent’s ability to fulfill the requirements of this criterion.

21%-40% of applicable points applied

Nonresponsive Respondent’s response does not address the criterion. The Evaluation Team has no confidence in Respondent’s ability to fulfill the requirements of this criterion.

0%-20% of applicable points applied

SOLICITATION TITLE: Enrollment Broker

RESPONDENT:

DATE:

PCS 546 Version 1.10 Review Date: 07/02/2024

EVALUATION OF CRITERIA I

Project Work Plan

Total Points Available: 30 POINTS Score: _____

Excellent= ~ 24 - 30 points Acceptable= ~ 18 - 24 points Marginal= ~ 12 - 18 points

Unacceptable= ~ 6 - 12 points Nonresponsive= ~ 0 - 6 points

Evaluation Team Topics for Consideration and Discussion:

Topics for Consideration Discussion Notes

a. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to providing the transition phase services as outlined in the SOW, including the proposed Transition Work Plan, Systems Readiness Plan, and Operations Readiness Plan.

b. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to providing the operations management services as outlined in the SOW.

c. Evaluate the Respondent’s key personnel and staffing profiles for all key staff who will be responsible for the performance of the Services requested under the Solicitation, including the proposed process for meeting the requirements of the SOW.

d. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to providing outreach and enrollment services as outlined in the SOW.

e. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to providing the call center operations services as outlined in the SOW.

f. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to providing the Enrollment Broker financial services as outlined in the SOW.

g. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to providing turnover services as outlined in the SOW.

SOLICITATION TITLE: Enrollment Broker

RESPONDENT:

DATE:

PCS 546 Version 1.10 Review Date: 07/02/2024

h. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to providing future enhancement projects as outlined in the SOW.

Evaluation Team Scoring Selection Justification:

SOLICITATION TITLE: Enrollment Broker

RESPONDENT:

DATE:

PCS 546 Version 1.10 Review Date: 07/02/2024

EVALUATION OF CRITERIA II

Technical Proposal

Total Points Available: 30 POINTS Score: _____

Excellent= ~ 24 – 30 points Acceptable= ~ 18 – 24 points Marginal= ~ 12 – 18 points

Unacceptable= ~ 6 – 12 points Nonresponsive= ~ 0 – 6 points

Evaluation Team Topics for Consideration and Discussion

Topics for Consideration Discussion Notes

a. Evaluate the Respondent’s hosting plan as outlined in the Solicitation.

b. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed technology architecture as outlined in the Solicitation.

c. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to providing system availability and capacity and the approach to monitoring system performance as outlined in the Solicitation.

d. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed systems to support the performance of the required Services including software and hardware components for the proposed system.

e. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to system design, development, and Implementation as outlined in the Solicitation.

f. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to system integration with other information systems as outlined in the Solicitation.

g. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to system administration, support, and maintenance as outlined in the Solicitation.

h. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed approach to system security and disaster recovery as outlined in the Solicitation.

i. Evaluate the Respondent’s proposed methodology for performance monitoring and management of reporting systems, as well as the proposed approach to technology

SOLICITATION TITLE: Enrollment Broker

RESPONDENT:

DATE:

PCS 546 Version 1.10 Review Date: 07/02/2024 management as outlined in the Solicitation.

Evaluation Team Scoring Selection Justification:

SOLICITATION TITLE: Enrollment Broker

RESPONDENT:

DATE:

PCS 546 Version 1.10 Review Date: 07/02/2024

EVALUATION OF CRITERIA III

Qualifications and Demonstrated Relevant Experience

Total Points Available: 20 POINTS Score: _____

Excellent= ~ 16 – 20 points Acceptable= ~ 12 – 16 points Marginal= ~ 8 – 12 points

Unacceptable= ~ 4 – 8 points Nonresponsive= ~ 0 – 4 points

Evaluation Team Topics for Consideration and Discussion :

Topics for Consideration Discussion Notes

a. Evaluate the Respondent’s qualifications and demonstrated relevant experience that demonstrates how the Respondent is qualified to provide the Services outlined in the SOW.

Evaluation Team Scoring Selection Justification:

SOLICITATION TITLE: Enrollment Broker

RESPONDENT:

DATE:

PCS 546 Version 1.10 Review Date: 07/02/2024

EVALUATION OF CRITERIA IV

Cost Approach

Total Points Available: 10 POINTS Score: _____

Excellent= ~ 8 – 10 points Acceptable= ~ 6 – 8 points Marginal= ~ 4 – 6 points

Unacceptable= ~ 2 – 4 points Nonresponsive= ~ 0 – 2 points

Evaluation Team Topics for Consideration and Discussion

Topics for Consideration Discussion Notes

Evaluate the reasonableness of the Respondent’s Total Cost for the Initial Term and Optional Extension Terms.

Evaluation Team Scoring Selection Justification:

EVALUATION OF CRITERIA V

Total Cost

Total Points Available: 10 POINTS Score: _____

Scoring of the Total Cost will be based on the following formula. The lowest Total Cost will receive the maximum cost points.

Price Score = [1- ((Respondent Total Cost – Lowest Total Cost) / Highest Total Cost)] x Max. Points Available.

SOLICITATION TITLE: Enrollment Broker

RESPONDENT:

DATE:

PCS 546 Version 1.10 Review Date: 07/02/2024

ORAL PRESENTATIONS

SCORING SUMMARY

Oral Presentations will add up to 10 additional points to the Respondent’s Final Written Response Score, the calculation of which will be the Total Score as defined by the Solicitation.

Each criterion can receive a raw score of 0-10. The points awarded will be calculated based on the raw score and the number of points available for each criterion. For example, if a criterion has 2 points available and the Respondent receives a raw score of 8/10 (80%) the Respondent would get 80% of the points for that criterion, or 1.6 points (0.8 x 2 = 1.6)

Raw Score:

Excellent= 10 Acceptable= 7-9 Marginal= 4-6 Unacceptable= 1-3 Nonresponsive= 0

ID Criterion Raw Score (out of 10)

Number of Available Points

Points Awarded

Justification

1. Enrollment Services 4

2. Call Center Operations 3

3. THSteps Outreach, Informing, and Education Services

Oral Presentation Score:

No. Criteria Scenario Discussion

1. Enrollment Services

2. Call Center Operations

3. THSteps Outreach, Informing, and Education Services

SCORING GUIDE FOR ORAL PRESENTATIONS

SOLICITATION TITLE: Enrollment Broker

RESPONDENT:

DATE:

PCS 546 Version 1.10 Review Date: 07/02/2024

Excellent Respondent’s presentation addresses the criterion in a high level of detail. The presentation relates directly to the needs of this criterion/scenario. The Evaluation Team has a high degree of confidence in Respondent’s ability to fulfill the requirements of this criterion.

Raw Score

Acceptable Respondent’s presentation addresses the criterion in a moderate level of detail. Respondent’s presentation relates generally to the needs of this criterion. The Respondent does not address minor considerations.

The Evaluation Team has a medium degree of confidence in Respondent’s ability to fulfill the requirements of this criterion.

Raw Score 7 – 9

Marginal Respondent’s presentation addresses the criterion in general terms.

The Respondent’s presentation may address some major considerations; however, responses may not address specific needs of this criterion/scenario. The Evaluation Team has a somewhat low degree of confidence in Respondent’s ability to fulfill the requirements of this criterion.

Raw Score 4 – 6

Unacceptable Respondent’s presentation addresses the criterion in general terms.

The Respondent’s presentation does not address major considerations or responses do not address specific needs of this criterion/scenario.

The Evaluation Team has a very low degree of confidence in Respondent’s ability to fulfill the requirements of this criterion.

Raw Score 1 – 3

Nonresponsive Respondent’s presentation does not address the criterion/scenario.

The Evaluation Team has no confidence in Respondent’s ability to fulfill the requirements of this criterion.

Raw Score