Exhibit L, Evaluation Tool.pdf
PDF 54 KB Posted
- Attached to
- WIC Multi-media Program
- Solicitation number
- HHS0016182
- Issued by
- Texas
About this file
Exhibit L is an evaluation tool document for the Texas Health and Human Services Commission's WIC Multi-media Program procurement. The RFP seeks one or more contractors to provide comprehensive multimedia production services including digital video production, internet content creation, web lessons, educational videos, and virtual live classes. Qualified respondents must demonstrate at least 10 years of business experience in multimedia services with proven videography capabilities. The solicitation questions deadline is December 9, 2025, with responses posted by December 16, 2025. Proposals are due January 7, 2026 at 10:30 AM Central Time. The evaluation process will occur from January through February 2026, with an anticipated contract award in April 2026 and contract start in May 2026. The initial contract term is one year with HHSC retaining the option to extend for up to four additional years plus a potential one-year transition period.
The evaluation criteria are weighted as follows: 35% for qualifications and experience, 35% for project work plan, and 30% for cost. The total compensation for work orders under the resulting contract shall not exceed $8,750,000, though HHSC reserves the right to increase this amount if additional state or federal funding becomes available. A mandatory HUB (Historically Underutilized Business) Subcontracting Plan is required for this solicitation valued over $100,000. Respondents must submit audited financial statements for 2022-2024, three professional references, Dun and Bradstreet reports, and specified insurance coverage via USB drives or through an online bid room. Pricing must remain firm and constant throughout the contract's lifecycle, and respondents must demonstrate financial solvency. HHSC emphasizes that there are no guarantees of volume or usage and maintains the right to cancel, make partial awards, or decline awarding a contract. The contract is subject to appropriations and continuing availability of funds.
View the file
Other files
Show all 21
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 demonstrated experience in providing multimedia production services in accordance with the requirements of the SOW.
20%
1.2 Evaluate the Respondent's qualifications that demonstrate its ability to meet the requirements of the SOW. 15%
35%
2.1 Evaluate the Respondent's proposed processes and methodologies for providing multimedia production services in accordance with the requirements of the SOW.
20%
2.2 Evaluate the Respondent's proposed process for providing training materials in accordance with the requirements of the SOW. 15%
35%
3.1 Evaluate the reasonableness of the Respondent's proposed cost. 15%
3.2 Evaluate the Respondent's proposed "Total Cost for Initial Term". 15%
30% 100%
RFP No. HHS0016182 Criteria, Subcriteria Sheet
Exhibit L, Evaluation Tool
Cost
Qualifications and Experience
Project Work Plan
TOTAL (%)
Subtotal
Subtotal
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 L, Evaluation Tool RFP No. HHS0016182
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 Qualifications and Experience 35% 2 Project Work Plan 35% 3 Cost 30%
GRAND TOTAL 100%
Exhibit L, Evaluation Tool RFP No. HHS0016182
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 .