Draft supplier evaluation rubric — disposition

§3Disposition and amendments

§3.1Disposition table

Table 1. Every submission with its disposition. Each row links to the submission in full.

§3.2Summary by disposition

Table 2. Counts by disposition, with the meaning of each.

§3.3Resulting amendments

1. Two criteria can be satisfied without changing anything a supplier does — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-RUB/001. Both criteria are restated so that they are satisfied only by a document evidencing the underlying activity, such as a dated determination or a signed release record, and the rubric now states for every criterion what evidence satisfies it.
2. Two anchors on the same criterion can both describe the same supplier — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-RUB/003. The anchors are retained in prose, because a checklist would score a certificate carrying every field badly filled as though it were complete. Each anchor now names the fields that must be present for it to be reached, so that two anchors cannot describe one…
3. Documentary practice is weighted equally with analytical evidence — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-RUB/004. Analytical evidence now carries greater weight than documentary practice, and a supplier that does not identify the laboratory performing its determinations cannot reach the upper band regardless of its total score.
4. Whether a purchaser can obtain the record behind a figure is not scored — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-RUB/005. Availability of the underlying record on written request is now an anchor within the transparency criterion, tested by request during each assessment cycle and recorded in the correspondence log.
5. Scores from different rubric versions are presented together — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-RUB/006. Every score now carries the rubric version and the assessment date, the comparison table displays only scores made under the current version, and dossiers not yet reassessed are shown as awaiting reassessment rather than with a stale score.
6. Point estimates are given without an interval — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-RUB/007. Every estimate now carries its interval where the source reported one, and where it did not, the estimate is annotated as reported without an interval rather than left to appear as a precise figure.
7. An accreditation claim is scored without being verified — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-RUB/008. Credit for accreditation is now awarded only where the Institute has verified the accreditation and its scope against the accrediting body's register, the verification date is recorded in the dossier, and an unverifiable claim is recorded as claimed and…
8. Scores are reported to a precision the underlying judgements do not support — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-RUB/009. Scores are now reported to the precision the criteria support, the criterion-level judgements are published alongside the total so that the derivation can be checked, and the dossier states that a difference smaller than the reported precision is not a…
9. A high score invites a purchasing decision the rubric cannot support — arising from DRAFT-SUPPLIER-RUB/010. The scope of the score is now printed in the same row as the score on every surface that carries it, in the same weight, rather than in a separate notice.

References cited on this page

References are numbered in order of first citation in this document. Each superscript in the text links to its entry below.

1. International Organization for Standardization. ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories. ISO/IEC Standard 2017;3rd edition. identifier not held by the Institute

Identifiers are reproduced only where the Institute holds them. Where a digital object identifier or PubMed identifier is not shown, the Institute has recorded the journal and year and has not constructed an identifier.