[Seite 1]
Annex2 – Evaluation criteria
Semi-automatic prober for characterization of 200 mm wafers
Tender number: IHP-2026-045
- Award Criteria
The evaluation of the tenders will be carried out on the basis of the following award criteria:
Award criterion Weighting Maximum Points Price 35% 35 Technical quality and performance 40% 40 Integration with the existing Keithley 4200A-SCS system 15% 15 Delivery, commissioning and service 10% 10 Total 100% 100
- Mandatory Technical Requirements
The mandatory technical requirements specified in the target designation are minimum requirements and must be fully met.
Compliance with these requirements will be assessed separately on a pass/fail basis. Only tenders that meet all mandatory requirements will be considered for further evaluation and award.
Failure to meet a mandatory requirement may result in the tender being excluded from further evaluation.
The qualitative evaluation described below is intended to assess the differences in quality and performance between technically compliant tenders.
- Price – Maximum 35 Points
The evaluation is carried out using the following formula:
Points = (lowest evaluated price / bidder's evaluated price) × 35
The evaluated price shall be the total price relevant for the procurement in accordance with the Price Schedule (Annex 1), including all costs required for the complete and proper operation of the system in accordance with the Service Description, unless otherwise specified in the tender documents.
The tender with the lowest evaluated price receives 35 points.
- Qualitative criteria
4.1 Technical quality and performance – maximum 40 points
The evaluation will consider, in particular: • technical performance and precision of the wafer positioning system • chuck and wafer handling concept • temperature control and temperature stability over the specified range
page 1 of 4
[Seite 2]
• electrical probe system and suitability for low-noise FORCE/SENSE measurements • suitability for DC, pulsed I-V and low-frequency impedance measurements up to 10 MHz • optical system, microscope and camera functionality • degree of automation and ease of operation • overall technical design and suitability for the intended application
The assessment will be based on the technical documentation submitted with the tender.
Raw points Rating Insufficient information for assessment or no meaningful basis for a positive qualitative 0 assessment. A technical solution with significant disadvantages and clearly below-average qualitative 1 performance. 2 Requirements are met, but the solution has noticeable disadvantages. 3 A technically sound and appropriate solution meeting the requirements. 4 An above-average technical solution with clear advantages for the intended application. A particularly strong technical solution offering significant advantages for the intended 5 application.
4.2 Quality of integration with the existing Keithley 4200A-SCS system – maximum 15 points
Only technically compliant offers fulfilling all mandatory integration requirements specified in Section 2.7 will be evaluated under this criterion.
The assessment will consider the quality and robustness of the proposed integration concept, in particular: • technical robustness and suitability of the integration concept • suitability of the signal routing and switching concept for the intended FORCE/SENSE DC I-V, pulsed I-V and impedance measurements • measures for low-noise operation, including the avoidance or reduction of leakage currents, interference and ground-loop effects • suitability of the proposed chuck-terminal implementation for accurate capacitance measurements • quality and usability of the software/control integration • quality of the commissioning and functional-verification concept; • completeness and technical clarity of the proposed integration concept.
The assessment will be based on the technical documentation and integration concept submitted with the tender.
Additional points will be awarded only for identifiable technical advantages beyond the mandatory requirements. The fact that the mandatory integration requirements are fulfilled does not, by itself, constitute an additional benefit.
Raw points Rating The submitted integration concept does not provide sufficient information to 0 demonstrate the proposed solution beyond the mandatory requirements, or no identifiable additional technical benefit is demonstrated. The integration concept provides only limited additional technical information or 1 benefits and leaves relevant aspects insufficiently addressed. The integration concept provides some identifiable additional benefits, but relevant 2 aspects remain less developed or involve technical limitations.
page 2 of 4
[Seite 3]
The integration concept is complete, technically well structured and demonstrates clear 3 additional benefits for operation and/or measurement performance beyond the mandatory requirements. The integration concept demonstrates several clearly identifiable and technically 4 substantiated additional benefits, particularly with regard to low-noise performance, signal integrity, routing/switching, capacitance measurements and/or ease of operation. The integration concept is exceptionally comprehensive and technically substantiated 5 and demonstrates significant, specific and application-relevant advantages in several of the aspects listed above.
The raw score from 0 to 5 will be converted proportionally to a maximum of 15 points.
4.3 Delivery, commissioning and service – maximum 10 points
The evaluation will consider, in particular: • earliest possible delivery date • installation and commissioning concept • expected duration of installation and commissioning • availability and scope of on-site integration support • operator training • warranty and service concept • availability of technical support and spare parts
The assessment will be based on the delivery schedule, installation and commissioning concept, service information and other relevant documentation submitted with the tender.
Raw points Rating No adequate or usable description of the delivery, commissioning and service concept, or 0 the concept provides no sufficient basis for a positive qualitative assessment. Significant shortcomings regarding delivery time, commissioning or service; the concept 1 is only partially convincing or essential information is missing. Requirements are generally met, but there are longer delivery times and/or noticeable 2 weaknesses in the installation, training or service concept. Delivery time and commissioning meet the requirements; installation and integration are 3 planned in a clear and logical manner; the necessary support and training are provided; warranty and service meet the requirements. Good delivery time; coherent and well-described installation and commissioning plan; 4 adequate on-site support; good training and documentation; good warranty and service plan. Very short and clearly specified lead time; very well-structured installation and commissioning plan; short commissioning time; comprehensive on-site support, 5 including Keithley integration; very good training, documentation and service plan; excellent availability of spare parts and support.
- Conversion of raw points
The raw points awarded for the qualitative criterion will be converted into weighted points as follows:
Weighted points = (raw points / 5) × maximum points for the criterion
The resulting maximum scores are therefore:
page 3 of 4
[Seite 4]
Maximum weighted Qualitative criterion Raw points points Technical quality and performance 0-5 0-40 Integration with the existing Keithley 4200A-SCS system 0-5 0-15 Delivery, commissioning and service 0-5 0-10 Examples: • 3 raw points for Technical Quality = 3 / 5 × 40 = 24 points • 4 raw points for Keithley Integration = 4 / 5 × 15 = 12 points • 5 raw points for Delivery, Commissioning and Service = 5 / 5 × 10 = 10 points
- Documentation of the Evaluation
The evaluation team shall document the reasons for the raw points awarded for each qualitative criterion.
In particular, a brief justification shall be provided where a score of below 3 or above 3 raw points is awarded.
The final score of each tender is the sum of the price points and the weighted points awarded for the qualitative criteria.
Maximum total score: 100 points.
page 4 of 4