4. Two points (Unsatisfactory): The proposal addresses the requirements or criteria described in the request for proposals in an unsatisfactory manner; 5. One point (Poor): The proposal inadequately addresses the requirements or criteria described in the RFP or cannot be assessed due to incomplete information; or 6. Zero points (Fail): The proposal fails to address the requirements or criteria described in the request for proposals or it cannot be assessed due to missing information. Utah Admin. Rules R33-7-704 (July 26, 2018) Independent judgment by evaluation committee members Evaluators are required to exercise independent judgment in a manner that is not dependent on anyone else's opinions or wishes. Evaluators must not allow their scoring to be inappropriately influenced by another person's wishes that additional or fewer points be awarded to a particular offeror. Evaluators may seek to increase their knowledge before scoring by asking questions and seeking appropriate information from the District. Otherwise, evaluators should not discuss proposals or the scoring of proposals with other persons not on the evaluation committee. The exercise of independent judgment applies not only to possible inappropriate influences from outside the evaluation committee, but also to inappropriate influences from within the committee. It is acceptable for there to be discussion and debate within the committee regarding how well a proposal meets the evaluation criteria. However, open discussion and debate may not lead to coercion or intimidation on the part of one committee member to influence the scoring of another committee member. Evaluators may not act on their own or in concert with another evaluation committee member to inappropriately steer an award to a favored vendor or to disfavor a particular vendor. Evaluators are required to report any attempts by others to improperly influence their scoring to favor or disfavor a particular offeror. If an evaluator feels that the evaluator's independence has been compromised, the evaluator must recuse himself or herself from the evaluation process. Utah Admin. Rules R33-7-705 (July 26, 2018) Best and final offers The best and final offers process is an optional step in the evaluation phase of the request for proposals process in which offerors are requested to modify their proposals. (It is not available for use with any other type of procurement process.) If the necessary conditions are present, the evaluation committee, with the approval of the Board of Education or its designee or the District’s chief procurement officer, may request and evaluate best and final offers from responsible offerors who have submitted responsive proposals that meet the minimum qualifications, evaluation criteria, or applicable score thresholds identified in the request for proposals for the stage of the process at which the final and best offers are being requested. The evaluation committee may only request best and final offers if one of the following circumstances exists: 1. no single proposal addresses all the specifications stated in the request for proposals; 2. all proposals received are unclear or deficient in one or more respects; 3. all cost proposals exceed the identified budget or the District’s available funding; or 4. two or more proposals receive an identical evaluation score that is the highest score.
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker