Presentation_Evaluation_Rubric.pdf

School Board of Volusia County, Florida Invitation to Negotiate No.: ITN-2024-3019 200 North Clara Ave. Date: August 20, 2024 DeLand, FL 32720 Title: District-wide Multifunction Devices

Exhibit 2 Presentation Evaluation Rubric

Criteria Weighted Value

Excellent (5 points) Above Average (4 points) Satisfactory (3 points) Marginal (2 points) No Response (1 point)

Project Understanding, Team, and User Engagement

15 - Professional and persuasive presentation that clearly addresses district requirements, needs, and concerns.

- Presentation includes all evaluation criteria in a concise manner with graphics, evidence, and data as appropriate.

- Professional presentation that addresses most district requirements, needs, and concerns.

- Presentation includes most evaluation criteria with graphics, evidence, and data as appropriate.

- Presentation addresses some district requirements, needs, and concerns.

- Presentation includes some evaluation criteria with graphics, evidence, and data as appropriate.

- Presentation does not address district requirements, needs, and concerns.

- Presentation does not include graphics, evidence, and data as appropriate.

- Did not cooperate with presentation scheduling or did not present.

Approach and Methodology

15 Provides a highly detailed and innovative approach; clearly outlines steps and strategies.

Describes a robust and effective methodology; uses proven techniques and best practices.

Provides a well-defined approach; outlines most steps and strategies clearly.

Describes a good methodology; uses most proven techniques and practices.

Provides a basic approach;

outlines some steps and strategies. Basic methodology described;

uses some relevant techniques and practices.

Approach is somewhat unclear or incomplete;

lacks detail in steps and strategies. Limited methodology described;

uses few techniques or practices.

Approach is unclear or missing; does not outline steps or strategies effectively.

Poor or no methodology described; lacks relevant techniques and practices.

Technical and Functional Requirements Clarifications

25 Responses are exceptionally clear and detailed; all clarifications are easy to understand.

Responses are mostly clear;

most clarifications are understandable.

Responses are somewhat clear; some parts may be vague or require further explanation.

Responses are unclear or confusing in some areas; several clarifications are needed.

Responses are unclear or incomplete; many clarifications are needed.

Demonstration of Solution

10 Provides a clear, comprehensive, and engaging overview; effectively highlights key features and benefits.

Provides a good overview;

highlights most key features and benefits clearly.

Provides an adequate overview; covers some key features and benefits.

Overview is somewhat unclear or incomplete;

misses some key features.

Overview is unclear or lacks critical information; fails to highlight key features.

Best & Final Offer Price Schedule and Financing Options for Phase 2

35 Highly competitive and transparent; provides clear breakdown and justifications.

Competitive and mostly transparent; good breakdown and justifications.

Adequate cost structure;

some breakdown and justifications.

Cost structure is unclear, limited breakdown and justifications.

High cost or lacks transparency; poor breakdown and justifications.