Proposal_Scoring_Chart.pdf
PDF 102 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Elections Ballot Sorting System
- Solicitation number
- 2026-RFP-191
- Issued by
- Pierce County, Washington
About this file
This is a Proposal Scoring Chart document for Pierce County, Washington, which outlines the evaluation criteria and methodology for assessing vendor responses to a Request for Proposal (RFP) for an election ballot mail sorting system to be used by the County Auditor's Office. The document does not specify response dates, due dates, site visits, bidder conferences, award dates, or contract terms, as it functions solely as an evaluation framework rather than a comprehensive solicitation notice.
The evaluation process employs a weighted scoring methodology across three primary categories: Cost Proposal (30% weight), which evaluates overall cost effectiveness using a price ratio comparison against the lowest bid; Vendor Qualifications and Experience (10% weight); and Technical Proposal (60% weight), which assesses the overall value of the proposed solution and consistency with system requirements. Vendor responses are scored on a scale from 0 to 10, with scores of 9-10 indicating requirements are exceeded with additional benefits, 8 indicating full compliance, 6-7 indicating partial compliance with needed modifications, 1-5 indicating partial compliance with questions about vendor capability, and 0 indicating non-compliance or no response. The County explicitly states that while cost is an important factor, it is not the primary consideration, and the contract will be awarded to the proposal that best meets the County's needs. If oral presentations or demonstrations are conducted with top proposers, these will be separately scored based on vendor performance and responses.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Elections_Ballot_Sorting_System.pdf | ||
| Attachment_A_-_Pricing.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Pierce_County_Service_Agreement_Sample_.pdf | ||
| Attachment_B_-_Questionnaire.docx | DOCX document | |
| Intake_Form_Submission_Confirmation.pdf | ||
| 2026_Elections_Ballot_Sorting_System_RFP.docx | DOCX document |
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
ATTACHMENT C - Scoring Chart
Vendor’s responses to questions will be scored based upon the chart below.
Vendor’s response appears to indicate:
9-10 Exceeds requirement or offers additional benefit to the County. Vendor’s response demonstrates a strong approach, knowledge and understanding of the requirement.
8 Fully meets requirement.
6-7 Partially meets requirement. Vendor may need to develop or modify solution to meet requirement.
1-5 Partially meets requirement. Response raises questions regarding vendor’s ability or approach to meeting the requirement. Vendor’s response appears to lack knowledge and understanding of requirement.
0 Vendor does not meet requirement or failed to respond.
Cost Proposal
Both equipment purchase and lease option pricing will be evaluated.
In determining final points for the cost proposal, a cost ratio may be used for reference in awarding points. This ratio will compare the lowest price to the other proposer’s price. An example to award 100 points is provided below.
Price Ratio Points Awarded
Proposal # 1 $100.00 100
Proposal #2 $150.00 100/150=.666 x 100 pts 66.66
Proposal # 3 $200.00 100/200=.5 x 100 pts 50
Oral Presentation
If an oral presentation/demonstration/interview is conducted with top proposers, the oral presentation will be separately scored based on vendors presentation and responses.
Proposal Evaluation
Each proposal received in response to the RFP will be objectively evaluated and rated. The County realizes that factors other than price are important and will award the contract based on the proposal that best meets the needs of the County. While cost may not be the primary factor in the evaluation process, it is an important factor.
The following weighting criteria will be used to evaluate each proposal
1. Cost Proposal - Overall cost effectiveness 30% Cost will be used to differentiate between equally qualified vendor proposals.
2. Vendor qualifications and experience. 10%
3. Technical Proposal - Overall value of proposed solution 60% to Pierce County and proposals consistency with system requirements.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .