Original source · versioned page text
2017-06-12 General Committee Agenda
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 12 JUNE 2017
Page 8 of 32
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 12 JUNE 2017
Final Evaluation
Weighted Attribute Evaluation Spreadsheet
ee ee
emcee |
No. |NAME OF TENDERER (excl of GS’ ff
1 [Ecovist hai ae no . ons ” var Oost Spoon
3 [Storm Intemational PtyLid The ratings:
4 +0 (zero) = Unacceptable — a fail for that criteria and extreme risk
5 [Total BuildingMaintenance = 20 (twenty) = Very Poor - the content of the submission for that criteria is of a low standard and high risk
6 + 40 (forty) = Poor — the content of the submission for that criteria is unimpressive and poses a moderate risk
7 + 60 (sixty) = Good - the content of the submis sion for that criteria is mertable and will need to be monitored if awarded
8 |House WithNoSteps(HWNS) + 80 (eighty) = Very Good - the content of the submission for that criteria is of a high standard and advantageous
9 [McCullough CleanngSerice Yt = 100 (one-hundred) = Exceptional — the content of the submission for that criteria is flawless / outstanding and most advantageous
10 |Achieve Corporate Services PtyLtd
11|SwampyCleanings—i—isis—‘s Once ail the data is entered the resultant scores based on the price and non price elements are automatically calculated for you
12 |CMBM Facility Services PtyLtd
13
NON-CONFORMING TENDERS Number of Tenders Evaluated = [13 ]
Pf notevaluate |
: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
— feo | eae fare es] me | oes, [eee |e, irc, |
meme mm |r] [P| [| [a [ae [er [a [er] [en] Se [er Se [eS [ee
ms © | 4° | eo | so | ss | 20 | oo | «so | mo | a0 | se | 20 | mo | 200 | oo | 200 | 4 | 20 | so | 20 | oo | 200 | se | 20 | oo | 200 |
Setneereceee © | 0 | 7 | uo | se | i160 | os | tooo] eo | sae | se | 160] s6 | 120 | 70 | 1400] o7 | sro | se | 1160 | se | s160| eo | tem | a0 | 1600 |
ey ee | es |e | veo | os [or | os | i275 | ro | toss | so | zo | se | ero | ov | ors | a7 | ros | os | ors | a7 | 705 | o6 | 200 | m4 | 11410 |
ene © | 3 | 0 | 250 | 00 | soo | so | 250 | 7 | ss | o | soo | so | sm | a | 200 | 4 | 20 | eo | so | 40 | 200 | 100 | so | oo | 300 |
mms | 32 | sv | ze | sz | 200 | so | 250 | m | a7 | w | oss | os | sm | os | 205 | oo | 150 | oo | soo | 22 | so | oe | a | mm | 320 |
Nomnalieed Technical Score (Th)
Total Fees (Pc) 30% 600 2,947 640 132 180 242 $8,389 $10,660 10,920 $15,000 16,700
Price Score 170 166 158 157 152 140 104 78 15 28 9
Normalised Price Score (Pn) 100 98 93 92 89 82 61 46 44 17 5
Weighted Price Score (Pw)
elements
OTHER DETAILS
Assesment panel member 1 Facility Officer, Planning and Infrastructure
Assesment panel member 2 Facility Officer, Planning and Infrastructure The Contract Administrator confirms the above weightings
Assesment panel member 3 AlDirector, Planning and Infrastructure Contract Administrator's signature: ————
Assesment panel member 4
Page 8 of 32See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.