Scoring Methodology. The State will receive a “met” or “not met” score for each measure. If the State meets the determined benchmark or improvement goal, it will receive a “met” for that measure. If the State does not meet the benchmark or improvement goal, it will receive a “not met” for that measure. For the measures based solely on reporting (as indicated in the tables above), a “met” is based on full and accurate reporting. For each measure, receiving a “met” is contingent on the State attesting to complete and accurate reporting for that measure and subject to CMS validation of the data being reported. Measures that are ‘not met’ result in a reduction in the number of measures included in the numerator of the calculation of the measures met each year, but remain in the denominator.
Scoring Methodology. 44 1. For a comprehensive evaluation, the Teacher shall receive a summative score of 1 45 (Unsatisfactory), 2 (Basic), 3 (Proficient), or 4 (Distinguished) for each of the eight 46 state criteria.
Scoring Methodology. The State will receive a “pass” or “fail” score for each measure. If the State meets the determined benchmark, it will receive a “pass” for that measure. If the State does not meet the benchmark, it will receive a “fail” for that measure. For the measures based solely on reporting (as indicated in the table above), a “pass” is based on full and accurate reporting. For each measure, receiving a “pass” is contingent on the State attesting to complete and accurate reporting for that measure and subject to CMS validation of the data being reported.
Scoring Methodology. 2.2.1 Each Service Element shown above shall have associated with it;
Scoring Methodology. Responses will be assessed using one, some or all of the following methods:
Scoring Methodology. All technical proposals will be evaluated using the evaluation criteria as indicated below. Bidders are advised to devote chapters of their submissions to demonstrating each of the criteria and be consistent with the tasks detailed in the ToR. Bidders are advised to avoid submitting brochures and pamphlets that have no direct bearing on the requirements under this RFP. Technical Criteria Technical Sub-Criteria Maximum Points Overall presentation and quality of the proposal Clarity and completeness of response; 5 Understanding of the requirements and the desired outcomes; 5 Total 10
Scoring Methodology. The State will receive a “met” or “not met” score for each measure. If the State meets the determined benchmark or improvement goal, it will receive a “met” for that measure. If the State does not meet the benchmark or improvement goal, it will receive a “not met” for that measure. For the measures based solely on reporting (as indicated in the tables above), a “met” is based on full and accurate reporting. For each measure, receiving a “met” is contingent on the State attesting to complete and accurate reporting for that measure and subject to CMS validation of the data being reported.
Scoring Methodology. Criteria Percentage Weighting 1 Income Income will be evaluated in accordance with your response to the Specification set out in Schedule 1. 80% Criteria Percentage/ Weighting
Scoring Methodology. 3.2.1 The following scoring methodology shall be used for the Method Statement question(s):
Scoring Methodology. The Evaluation Team may apply the following scoring methodology, although other models may be used: Score Key Score Interpretation Assessment Good 4 Satisfies the requirement with additional benefits. Above average demonstration by the Tenderer of the understanding and evidence to deliver a solution for the required supplies/services. Response identifies some tailoring and factors that will offer potential added value. Acceptable 3 Satisfies the requirement. Demonstration by the Tenderer of the understanding and evidence in their ability/proposed methodology to deliver a solution for the required supplies/services. Minor Reservations 2 Satisfies most requirements with minor reservations. Some minor reservations of the Tenderer's understanding and methodology, and/or staffing and experience, with limited supporting evidence or information. Serious Reservations 1 Major reservations of the Tenderer's understanding and proposed methodology, with lack of information and little or no evidence to support the response, with minimal tailoring. Unacceptable/No n compliant 0 Does not meet the requirement. Does not comply and/or insufficient information provided to demonstrate that the Tenderer has the understanding or suitable methodology, with little or no evidence to support the response. The Authority reserves the right to disqualify the Tenderer. The above scoring methodology will be applied to each of the Sub Criteria detailed in the ITT. The Total Score for each Sub Criteria will comprise of the score awarded (0 to 4) converted against the weighted % of each Sub Criteria. If a supplier does not score above 60% of the technical score they may be disqualified from the tender process (The award Criteria for all Lots will have a split variation between Commercial Criteria and Technical.
