43247-18A & 23B-RFP - Rotational Rheometer for Characterization of Polymeric Liquids (18A) & Dynamic

Part 7: evaluation process

1. 1. Stages of Evaluation

 

1. 1. 1. The University will conduct the evaluation of proposals in the following three (3) stages:

 

1. 1. 1. 1. Stage I (one) - Mandatory Requirements

Stage I (one) will consist of a review of the proposals to determine compliance with all of the mandatory requirements. Proposals that fail to satisfy the technical and the mandatory proposal content requirements will not be considered for the next evaluation stage. The following Mandatory documents must be included with the Proponent’s Proposal:

• Technical Specifications Compliance (Appendix A) - Attachment #1

Proponent must complete the Technical Specifications Compliance form (Appendix A) and include it with their proposal. Proponents are required to indicate that the equipment proposed is either compliant (Yes), or non-compliant (No) with each of the technical specifications listed by filling out the table provided, providing a detailed description of how the equipment satisfies the specifications, and indicate the page reference number where information is found in the proposal.

• Technical Rated Criteria (Appendix B) - Attachment #1

Proponent must complete the Rated Criteria form (Appendix B) and include it with its proposal.
 

• Equipment, Utility, and Environmental Requirements (Appendix C) – Attachment #1

Proponent must fill out the Equipment, Utility, and Environmental Requirements form (Appendix C) and include all the requirements described on this form with its proposal.

• Supplemental Information (Appendix D) – Attachment #1

Proponent must fill out the Supplemental Information form (Appendix D) and included it with its proposal.

• Reference Consent Form (Appendix E) – Attachment #1

Proponent is required to provide three (3) references from clients who have obtained comparable goods or services to those requested in the RFP in the last five (5) years. Each Proponent must complete the Reference Form (Appendix E) and include it in its proposal.

• Submission Declaration Form (Appendix F) – Attachment #1

Proponent must include a Submission Declaration Form (Appendix F) completed and signed by an authorized Proponent representative.

• Pricing Structure Form (Appendix G) – Attachment #2

Proponent is required to complete the Pricing Structure form (Appendix G) with signature of an authorized representative of the Proponent.

• Price Schedule Form (Appendix H) – Attachment #2

Proponent is required to fill out the Pricing Schedule form (Appendix H) and include all the requirements described on this form with its proposal. The options are not mandatory requirements for this proposal submission.

1. 1. 1. 2. Stage II (two) - Rated Criteria

Stage II (two) will consist of scoring the proposals based on the rated criteria listed in Appendix B – Rated Criteria; the Proponent must demonstrate a specific level of ability in meeting the criteria listed therein.

1. 1. 1. 3. Stage III (three) - Financial Evaluation

Stage III (three) will consist of scoring the pricing as per section 7.3.2. B).

1. 1. 1. 4. Tie Score            

In the event that two or more Proponents obtain an identical proposal score, the selected Proponent shall be determined by way of a coin toss.
 

1. 2. Evaluation

 

1. 1. 1. The University of Ottawa intends to award a contract to the Proponent who offers the proposal with the best value to the University of Ottawa for both items (18A & 23B). However, the University of Ottawa is under no obligation to award any contract in whole or in part and the University of Ottawa reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to cancel this RFP process at any time before or after the submission date of this RFP without providing reasons for such cancellation. The lowest proposal may not necessarily be retained.

 

1. 1. 2. All proposals will be evaluated upon the following criteria:

Rated Evaluation CriteriaAssigned Value
Minimum Mandatory Requirements Pass/Fail
Technical Specifications / Service70%
Price 30%
Total Cumulative Score of Evaluation100%

1. Technical Specifications / Service (70%):

 

• The higher percentage will consist of a scoring, by the University, of each eligible proposal based on the rated requirements, and their maximum point and weight allocations, as described in the Appendix B – Rated Criteria.
• Proponents are required to provide with their proposal complete and comprehensive documentation.

 

2. Price (30%):

 

• The higher percentage will be allocated to the proposal that provides the lowest price.
• The pricing schedule must be clear, detailed, and complete including the process for warranties and service.
• Proponents should quote a range of possible options/add-ons, if applicable
• Pricing will be scored based on a relative pricing formula using the costs provided by each proponent.

Each Proponent will receive a percentage of the total possible points allocated to price for the particular category it has bid on by dividing that Proponent’s price for that category by the lowest bid price in that category.

For example, “(30 x (lowest bid price / Proponent’s bid price), And so on, for each proposal”.
 

3. References:

 

• Proponents are requested to supply at least three (3) references where similar goods and services have been provided including contact names, titles, telephone numbers and email address. This information should include a description and the date of the goods and services provided to the client. In the event that you have done or have been doing business with the University of Ottawa in the past five (5) years, you must include the University of Ottawa as one of your three (3) references. References must include one (1) from a higher education institution and two (2) from other similar environments to whom the Proponent has supplied the goods and services within the past five (5) years, preferably in Ontario Canada.
• The Proponent authorizes the University to contact the persons or organizations listed for the purpose of obtaining reference information. The University may, at its own discretion visit the references.
• Proponents are also advised that if the University chooses to contact a Proponent’s reference(s), the information and feedback obtained could impact the Proponent’s evaluation scores.
• The Proponent shall co-operate with the University in its attempts to verify any such statement or claim.

 

1. 3. Award of Contract

Any award made by the University of Ottawa shall be published on Merx and shall be subject to the availability of funding at the time of award (if any).