(a) Technical expert and ROW provider evaluation criteria. The department will evaluate a technical expert's or ROW provider's responsive proposal based on the following criteria, if applicable:      
        (1) professional qualifications;       
        (2) experience of the firm and the team or individuals;       
        (3) merits of the proposal, including unique or innovative methods for performing the work;       
        (4) ability to commit personnel, time, and other resources to the project (technical experts cannot be removed from association with the contract without prior consent by the department);       
        (5) demonstrated understanding of the scope of services to be provided, including identifying which type of work will be performed by a subprovider, if any;       
        (6) demonstrated understanding of applicable rules, regulations, policies, and other requirements associated with the environmental or cultural studies, analyses, or document preparation to be performed;       
        (7) ability to meet department scheduling requirements;       
        (8) past performance of the provider, specific provider staff, or subproviders on similar contracts; and       
        (9) reasonableness of fee.       
      (b) Landscape architect evaluation. The department will evaluate a landscape architect's responsive proposal based on the following criteria:      
        (1) experience of the project manager and project team;       
        (2) demonstrated understanding of the scope of services to be provided, including identifying which type of work will be performed by a subprovider, if any;       
        (3) references including the ability to meet deadlines over the past three years;       
        (4) ability to meet department scheduling requirements; and       
        (5) reasonableness of fee.       
      (c) Appraiser evaluation. An appraiser must be a department-certified appraiser. The department will evaluate a department-certified appraiser's responsive proposal based on the following criteria:      
        (1) experience of the individual;       
        (2) demonstrated understanding of the scope of services to be provided;       
        (3) references including the ability to meet deadlines over the past three years;       
        (4) ability to meet department scheduling requirements; and       
        (5) reasonableness of fee.       
      (d) Evaluation scale. The department will assign a numerical weighting value to each evaluation criterion and then score each criterion based upon a numerical scale.     
      (e) Evaluation matrix. The department will evaluate each responsive proposal using an individual proposal evaluation matrix.     
      (f) Tie scores. In the event of a tie, the managing officer will break the tie using the following method unless different criteria have been listed in the RFP.      
        (1) The first tie breaker, if needed, will be references/past performances.       
        (2) The second tie breaker, if needed, will be ability to meet department scheduling requirements.       
        (3) If there is still a tie, the provider will be chosen by random selection.       
     Source Note:        The provisions of this §9.85 adopted to be effective March 21, 1999, 24 TexReg 1829; amended to be effective February 20, 2000, 25 TexReg 1146; amended to be effective January 4, 2001, 25 TexReg 13009; amended to be effective February 18, 2016, 41 TexReg 1127