Proposal Evaluation and Scoring.pdf
PDF 138 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Partition Services
- Solicitation number
- 43ADG-S3847
- Issued by
- Clark County, Nevada
About this file
This document is a Proposal Evaluation and Scoring guide for Nevada state procurement (Solicitation 43ADG-S3625) related to partition services and modular wall components. The evaluation process is conducted in accordance with Nevada Revised Statutes 333.335 and Nevada Administrative Code 333.160-333.165. All vendor responses are kept confidential until contract award, and the State reserves the right to limit participation in cost scoring and presentations to vendors above a natural break in relative scores. An independent evaluation committee assesses qualitative factors, and the State may require vendor presentations or select based solely on written responses at its discretion.
Vendor responses are scored across five weighted evaluation criteria: Demonstrated Technical Competence and Specialization (25 points), Past Performance on Similar or Previous State or Government Contracts (25 points), Availability of Key Personnel and Familiarity with Facilities (15 points), Compliance and Safety (15 points), and Cost Factor (20 points). Financial stability is evaluated on a pass or fail basis. The cost factor score is calculated using a mathematical formula comparing each vendor's proposed cost against the highest and lowest proposals received. The State reserves the right to request best and final offers and to add evaluation criteria at its discretion. Vendors are encouraged to submit their best offer with the initial response to avoid delays in the award process.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Quote Instructions.pdf | ||
| Invitation to Bid - Partitions.pdf | ||
| Partition Services Scope of Work NV.pdf |
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
Page 1 of 1 43ADG-S3625
PROPOSAL EVALUATION
1.1. Evaluation and scoring are conducted in accordance with NRS 333.335 and NAC 333.160-333.165.
1.1.1. Responses shall be kept confidential until a contract is awarded.
1.1.2. In the event the solicitation is withdrawn prior to award, responses remain confidential.
1.1.3. The evaluation committee is an independent committee established to evaluate and score qualitative evaluation factors for the solicitation.
1.1.4. The State, at its option, may limit participation in cost scoring, presentations, or both to vendors above a natural break in relative scores.
1.1.5. Financial stability shall be scored on a pass or fail basis.
1.1.6. Responses shall be consistently evaluated and scored based upon the following factors and relative weights.
1.1.6.1. Demonstrated Technical Competence and Specialization in this RPF
1.1.6.2. Past Performance on Similar or Previous State or Government Contracts
1.1.6.3. Availability of Key Personnel and Familiarity with the Facilities Contained in this RFP
1.1.6.4. Compliance and Safety
1.1.6.5. Cost factor
1.1.7. Cost factor. The cost factor score is based on the following equation, unless the subject solicited requires alternative scoring. The highest proposed cost from any vendor and the lowest proposed cost from any vendor will be added together to generate a combined total. For each vendor, that proposed cost will be subtracted from the previously combined total. This number is then divided by the highest proposed cost.
The resulting number is multiplied by the cost factor weight to generate a weighted cost score.
1.1.8. Presentations. The State may require vendors to make a presentation. The State reserves the right to add additional criteria for presentations. The State reserves the right to forego presentations and select vendor(s) based on written responses submitted.
1.1.9. Best and final offers. Pursuant to NAC 333.165, the State reserves the right to permit revised responses or add criteria to obtain the best offers. Vendors are encouraged to submit their best offer at time of initial response.
https://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/nrs-333.html#NRS333Sec335 https://www.leg.state.nv.us/nac/nac-333.html#NAC333Sec160
| 1.1. Evaluation and scoring are conducted in accordance with NRS 333.335 and NAC 333.160-333.165. |
| 1.1.1. Responses shall be kept confidential until a contract is awarded. |
| 1.1.2. In the event the solicitation is withdrawn prior to award, responses remain confidential. |
| 1.1.3. The evaluation committee is an independent committee established to evaluate and score qualitative evaluation factors for the solicitation. |
| 1.1.4. The State, at its option, may limit participation in cost scoring, presentations, or both to vendors above a natural break in relative scores. |
| 1.1.5. Financial stability shall be scored on a pass or fail basis. |
| 1.1.6. Responses shall be consistently evaluated and scored based upon the following factors and relative weights. |
| 1.1.6.1. Demonstrated Technical Competence and Specialization in this RPF 25 |
| 1.1.6.2. Past Performance on Similar or Previous State or Government Contracts 25 |
| 1.1.6.3. Availability of Key Personnel and Familiarity with the Facilities Contained in this RFP 15 |
| 1.1.6.4. Compliance and Safety 15 |
| 1.1.6.5. Cost factor 20 |
| 1.1.7. Cost factor. The cost factor score is based on the following equation, unless the subject solicited requires alternative scoring. The highest proposed cost from any vendor and the lowest proposed cost from any vendor will be added together to g... |
| 1.1.8. Presentations. The State may require vendors to make a presentation. The State reserves the right to add additional criteria for presentations. The State reserves the right to forego presentations and select vendor(s) based on written responses... |
| 1.1.9. Best and final offers. Pursuant to NAC 333.165, the State reserves the right to permit revised responses or add criteria to obtain the best offers. Vendors are encouraged to submit their best offer at time of initial response. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .