Common use of EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS Clause in Contracts

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS. Evaluation will consist of the review and assessment of the Respondents’ submittals. While award will mainly be based upon the best price, the Department reserves the right to invite top scoring respondents to negotiate their offerings and proposed pricing. All areas of evaluation listed in the table below are to be addressed by the Respondent in its submittal. Proposals that are substantially incomplete or lack key information may be rejected as non-responsive by the Department, at its discretion. Responses should be concise, summarizing the Respondent’s pertinent experience and capabilities. Emphasis should be placed on completeness and clarity. Responses that do not provide sufficient content or satisfactory information, as requested in this ITN document, may receive lower scores. Points will be assigned to all categories (see table, below, for point-allocation per category) and then totaled in order to determine each Respondent’s ranking: Vendor Responsiveness Pass/Fail Vendor Responsibility Pass/Fail Section 1 – Respondent is a LAR Pass/Fail Section 2 – PUR 1001 Agree/Disagree Section 3 – Financials 24 Section 3 – Vendor Certifications 100 Section 4 – PUR 1000 Agree/Disagree Section 5 – Special Contract Conditions 75 Section 5 - Track record of Vendor in meeting commitments (verified through references and vendor performance tracking within MFMP) 50 Section 6 – Technical Specifications 60 Section 7 – Pricing Models, Strategies and Commitments proposed 140 Section 7 – Vendor Responsibility Questionnaire Pass/Fail Total Points Possible: 449 pts. All evaluation categories will be scored with each response having the opportunity to achieve the maximum total point allocation indicated.

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS. Evaluation will consist of the review and assessment of the Respondents’ submittals. While award Top- scoring Respondents will mainly be based upon the best price, the Department reserves the right to invite top scoring respondents invited to negotiate their offerings and proposed pricing. (See Section 3.13 of this ITN.) All areas of evaluation listed in the table below are to be addressed by the Respondent in its submittal. Proposals that are substantially incomplete or lack key information may be rejected as non-responsive by the Department, at its discretion. Responses should be concise, summarizing the Respondent’s pertinent experience and capabilities. Emphasis should be placed on completeness and clarity. Responses that do not provide sufficient content or satisfactory information, as requested in this ITN document, may receive lower scores. Points will be assigned to all categories (see table, below, for point-allocation per category) and then totaled in order to determine each Respondent’s ranking: Vendor Responsiveness Pass/Fail Vendor Responsibility Pass/Fail Fail Section 1 – Respondent is a LAR Sales Volume (min $50 Million in national sales) Pass/Fail Section 2 – PUR 1001 Agree/Disagree Section 3 – Financials 24 Section 3 – Vendor Certifications 100 Section 4 – PUR 1000 Agree/Disagree Section 5 – Special Contract Conditions 75 115 Section 5 – References - Track record of Vendor in meeting commitments (verified through references and vendor performance tracking within MFMP) 50 Section 5 – Purchase Orders Review 25 Section 6 – Technical Specifications 60 65 Section 7 – Pricing Models, Strategies and Commitments proposed 140 120 Section 7 – Vendor Responsibility Questionnaire Pass/Fail Total Points Possible: 449 399 pts. All Except for Cost Information, all evaluation categories will be scored with each response having the opportunity to achieve the maximum total point allocation indicated.

EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS. Evaluation will consist of the review and assessment of the Respondents’ submittals. While award Top-scoring Respondents will mainly be based upon the best price, the Department reserves the right to invite top scoring respondents invited to negotiate their offerings and proposed pricing. (See Section 3.13 of this ITN.) All areas of evaluation listed in the table below are to be addressed by the Respondent in its submittal. Proposals that are substantially incomplete or lack key information may be rejected as non-responsive by the Department, at its discretion. Responses should be concise, summarizing the Respondent’s pertinent experience and capabilities. Emphasis should be placed on completeness and clarity. Responses that do not provide sufficient content or satisfactory information, as requested in this ITN document, may receive lower scores. Points will be assigned to all categories (see table, below, for point-allocation per category) and then totaled in order to determine each Respondent’s ranking: Vendor Responsiveness Pass/Fail Vendor Responsibility Pass/Fail Fail Section 1 – Respondent is a LAR Sales Volume (min $50 Million in national sales) Pass/Fail Section 2 – PUR 1001 Agree/Disagree Section 3 – Financials 24 Section 3 – Vendor Certifications 100 Section 4 – PUR 1000 Agree/Disagree Section 5 – Special Contract Conditions 75 115 Section 5 – References - Track record of Vendor in meeting commitments (verified through references and vendor performance tracking within MFMP) 50 Section 5 – Purchase Orders Review 25 Section 6 – Technical Specifications 60 65 Section 7 – Pricing Models, Strategies and Commitments proposed 140 120 Section 7 – Vendor Responsibility Questionnaire Pass/Fail Total Points Possible: 449 399 pts. All Except for Cost Information, all evaluation categories will be scored with each response having the opportunity to achieve the maximum total point allocation indicated.