Since you ask if this is considered Agile, I'll provide an answer in that direction.
And the answer is "most likely no".
All the individuals involved (business owners, managers, stakeholders) except the team itself gauge how they felt the team did using a score. If the score is higher, they performed better and produced more, if its lower they didn't. It's a number given at the end of a sprint, in retrospective about the whole teams output.
Any Agile team should receive feedback after each Sprint if not continuously, but the way things are set up here you may have a few problems.
- it doesn't mention how this help the team improve. Improve of their work, of the product or of the way the team interacts with others (business owners, managers, stakeholders);
- you mention no rules of how this score is calculated. Is this a score based on "feeling"? If I liked what the team did I give a high score, if I don't like it I give a low score? Daniel's answer points out very well (+1) that the team might get a low score just because some stakeholders is unhappy because the priorities were other than what they wanted.
- it can create the wrong incentives. The team might focus on getting high scores while the actual work suffers. Daniel's answer mentions this too (sorry, can upvote only once :D). It's the well known saying of "be careful what you measure, you just might get it".
- it creates a separation between the team and others. Agile is all about collaboration. With this scoring it seems that business owners, managers, stakeholders are not part of what's happening. If things turn out bad it's the team's fault and they get a low score. But what if things go bad because business owners, managers, stakeholders, etc didn't do their share of things? Do they get a score? They don't. This is not Agile. Everyone needs to pull on the cart. You don't have people pulling on the cart and people sitting in it and then you gauge their performance from how well they pulled.