Scoring the Technical Evaluation Maximum possible score

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SAUDE Feb 2010 Stirling Conference Centre University of Glasgow Professional Services Consultants Framework.
Advertisements

Test Construction A workshop. Activity 1 Using the information you read Brown (2004) (particularly on pages 51-64), develop criteria for evaluating an.
Computer Science & Engineering 2111 IF and Boolean Functions 1 CSE 2111 Lecture-IF and Boolean Functions.
Procurement in PPPs February 27, When do you start thinking about procurement? Preliminary Scoping & teaming Viability assessment Choice between.
Updated Merit Pay Process for MCC Administrators Committee of the Whole Meeting Tuesday, April 15, 2014.
Selection Scoring Methodology Presented by August 23, 2007.
1 Financial Mathematics Clicker review session, Final.
ADAMS STATE COLLEGE LAYOFF MATRIX. MATRIX BASICS State of Colorado Personnel Rules Chapter 7 requires that a matrix be developed to determine which employees.
Further Optimization of Economic Functions
1 Chapter 17: Introduction to Regression. 2 Introduction to Linear Regression The Pearson correlation measures the degree to which a set of data points.
Each member will evaluate their contribution to the overall group project as well as their peers in the group.
SAT Score Range Critical Reading: Mathematics: Writings: ACT Composite Score : ACT Score Range.
 Statistical Measures allow us to compare individual values to other values in a data set. They are things like:  Per capita  Percent change  Percentile.
EU-TURKEY CHAMBER FORUM PROJECT (ETCF) ETCF is funded by the European Union. 1 EU-TURKEY CHAMBER FORUM EU TURKEY CHAMBERS PARTNERSHİP GRANT SCHEME PROCUREMENT.
Evaluation Overview Set 4: Evaluating Responses. Tenderbox Keys The evaluation process begins with a system generated immediately at tender close.
1 Department for Work and Pensions The Work Programme Prospectus Supplier Briefing 8 th December 2010.
Methodology for measuring the Index of Responsibility, Transparency and Accountability (RTA) at local level Fatmir Musa Project Manager UNDP Project “Fighting.
Risk Identification in Practice Solange Berstein Chair IOPS Technical Committee Superintendent Pension Supervisor Chile.
Formula? Unit?.  Formula ?  Unit?  Formula?  Unit?
 Describe inputs and outputs  Explain the principle of diminishing returns  Describe the 3 stages of the production function  Describe the amount.
Gwerth Cymru Value Wales Supplier Selection Nick Sullivan Gwerth Cymru/Value Wales 2 Gorffenaf/July.
Exponents and Order of Operations. Exponents The exponent (little number) indicates how many times the base (big number) appears as a factor.
Final FRCA SOE Course Evaluation Course 1 : June 1 st – 2 nd 2015.
Safety Self-Assessments Assessing opportunities to improve Workers’ Compensation best practices within an organization.
Mr. Wooten Room  Graduate of the University of West Florida  Bachelor's Degree in Middle School Education  Certification in Middle School.
5.3 – Solving Multi-Step Inequalities. *Just like solving equations*
A course is designed to increase mathematical comprehension. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the course, students are given a test before and.
By max guerrero,bryan hernandez,caleb Portales  Spreadsheets are set up like tables with information running across rows and down columns. You could.
Lesson 65 Addition of Radical Expressions Weighted Average.
FACTORING a). FACTORING a) FACTORING a) FACTORING a)
Applied Mathematics 1 Applications of the Multi-Weighted Scoring Model and the Analytical Hierarchy Process for the Appraisal and Evaluation of Suppliers.
WEIGHTED AVERAGE ALG114 Weighted Average: an average where every quantity is assigned a weight. Example: If a teacher thinks it’s more important, a final.
Chapter 3 Percentiles. Standard Scores A standard score is a score derived from raw data and has a known basis for comparison. A standard score is a score.
1 FY 2013 Call for Projects Candidate Evaluation and Selection Criteria March 20, 2012.
Balancing Credit and Debt to Maintain Credit Worthiness.
Sum and Difference Formulas Sum Formulas Sum and Difference Formulas Difference Formulas.
New York State Report Cards Rosemary Matt NYS Director of Accountability
COLLEGE ADMISSION TEST SCORES Student IDReadingWritingMathTotal S S S S S
Example 2.1 Writing an Excel Formula. For the student exam scores given in Example 2.4, suppose that each of the first two exams contributes 30 percent.
EXAMPLE FORMULA DEFINITION 1.
Acceleration.
Notes Over 1.2.
The Handbook of Logistics and Distribution Management
Light Rail Transit Project
Supplement S7 Supplier Selection.
Cedar Falls Board of Education October 2017
Types of contract selection based upon following:
Objective: To Divide Integers
Quicken technical support number SDFGFFGGDF. QUICKEN TECHNICAL SUPPORT NUMBER QUICKEN TECHNICAL SUPPORT NUMBER
Creating & Administering your Variable pay strategy
Evaluating RFP’s Presented by:
PSLE Results Release 25 November 2015
The number 1 ranked item is…
Team Project Showcase Presentation: 15 to 20 minutes Peer evaluation
X-STANDARD MATHEMATICS ONE MARK QUESTIONS
MS Excel Scaffolding START.
Microsoft Excel – Part I
Purchasing cycle Purchase request
Central Southern Tier RAEN
Career & Technical Education Adult Programs Meeting
Developing a Hiring System
Review for Test1.
Evaluation by Best Value for Money Methodology
For First Place Most Times Up at the Table
Water Storage Investment Program
Evaluate the integral. {image}
Substituting into formulae
Financial Mathematics
2011 CEPP Retreat Data Report
Presentation transcript:

Scoring the Technical Evaluation Maximum possible score Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Evaluator A 100 55 88 84 Evaluator B 60 82 Evaluator C 59 90 Total Evaluator Scores 300 174 254 256 Average Evaluator Score (mathematical average) 174 / 3 = 58.00 254 / 3 = 84.67 256 / 3 = 85.33 Final Technical score ELIMINATED* Formula: (84.67 / 85..33 x 100 = 99.22) 99.22 100.00

Maximum possible score Financial Scoring Maximum possible score Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Total fees ELIMINATED FOLLOWING TECHNICAL EVALUATION €951 322 €1 060 452 Financial score 100.00 Formula: (951 322 / 1 060 452 x 100 = 89.71) 89.71

Maximum possible score Combining the Scores Maximum possible score Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Technical score x 0.80 ELIMINATED FOLLOWING THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION 99.22 x 0.80 = 79.38 100.00 x 0.80 = 80.00 Financial score x 0.20 100.00 x 0.20 = 20.00 89.71 x 0.20 = 17.94 Overall score 79.38 + 20.00 = 99.38 80.00 + 17.94 = 97.94 Final ranking 1 2