Download
1 / 21
210 likes | 220 Views
Evaluation - Committee & Stages -. Evaluation Commit t ee Members. are a p pointed and nominated on a personal basis by the Contracting Authority and approved by the EC Delegation (Ex-Ante)
E N D
Evaluation Committee Members • are appointed and nominated on a personal basis by theContracting Authority and approved by the EC Delegation (Ex-Ante) NEW! The composition of the Evaluation Committee is deemed approved by the ECD if no objections is formulated within 5 working days (PRAG 2.8) • The EvC should be formulated early enough (before the tender submission deadline) • may be appointed on a permanent or ad-hoc basis, depending upon the number of envisaged evaluation • highly recommended appointment of spare evaluators • Assessors can be involved • must attend all meetings and any absence has to be recorded and explained in the evaluation report • have equal voting rights (Chairman and Secretary do not vote) • must sign a Declaration of Impartiality and Confidentiality Note: As a general rule, the EC Delegation nominates an observer to follow all, or part of the Evaluation Committee proceedings
Evaluation Committee Members • Voting members should have: • Good command of language • Relevant qualification or experience in the field • Time Assessment of evaluators is based on their CVs • Within the Evaluation Committee there should not exist any subordination links that might jeopardize fair assessment, conflict of interest (towards tenderers, experts).
Responsibilities of Evaluation Committee Members 2.8.3 Chairman • co-ordination, ensuring impartiality and transparency of the evaluation • generally a high ranked official that also takes formal responsibility for endorsing the evaluation conclusions NEW! Article 2.2: Contracting Authority is responsible for chairing tender Evaluation Committees. Secretary– administrative tasks such as minutes, registers, compiling reports Voting Members • collectively responsible for decisions taken by the Committee • not indicated to appoint high ranked officials, they will not have the time to sit in the evaluation room for too many days Observers– non-voting All above members, must have a good knowledge of tender language and PRAG provisions, as well as of technical issues
Impartiality and Confidentiality 2.8.2 • Declaration of Impartiality and Confidentiality(Annex A4) • conflict of interestleads to withdrawal • replacinga member withdrawing (spare evaluators) • disregardassessment made by a withdrawing voting member
Evaluation Committee’s responsibilities • The members of the Evaluation Committee have to be aware of their rights, obligations and responsibilities • It is best practice to provide the voting members with the relevant documents (Instructions to tenderers, ToR, administrative and evaluation grid) beforehand
Stages of the Evaluation Process4.3.9 • Receiptand registration of tender bids – 4.3.9.1 • Preparatory meeting – 4.3.9.2 • Tender opening session – 4.3.9.3 • Technical evaluation – 4.9.3.4: • administrative compliance • technical compliance • Financial evaluation – 4.3.9.5 – mainly related to arithmetical corrections • Choice of successful Tenderer – 4.3.9.6 • Conclusion of Evaluation Committee – 4.3.9.7 • Preparation of the Evaluation Report • Contract preparation – 4.3.11
Tender evaluation principles • A Tender Committee should only have the mandate to issue a recommendation as to the award of a contract • The authorised officer of the Contracting Authority should make the formal decision and be held accountable for it
Preparatory meeting 4.3.9.2 • Tender dossier circulated in advance • First meeting of the Evaluation Committee • Chairman reminders • Discussion of Evaluation Criteria and of possible difficulties that may be encountered, for ensuring a consistent approach
Tender Opening Session 4.3.9.3 To check that tenders are complete and requisite tender guarantee has been provided. • Tenderer’s Representatives may attend – formal public process. Non-public opening of tenders at a formal meeting is acceptable, particularly for low value contracts • Tender opening checklist (annex C5) • Tasks of Chairman and Secretary • Declaration of Impartiality and Confidentiality to be signe by every EvC member
Tender Opening Session 4.3.9.3 • Formal compliance recorded in summary of tenders received in Tender Opening Report (annex C6) • The minutes of the tender opening should be sent to the participants, upon written request • At a public tender-opening session: the names of the Tenderers, the unevaluated tender prices, provision of requisite tender security and fulfilment of any other stipulated formality or condition • Minutes of Tender Opening Session may be distributed to participants, upon written request
A technical evaluation of tenders is to determine the offers compliance with Tender Documents requirements – 4.3.9.4 • Technical evaluation is only carried out for administratively compliant offers, satisfying the qualifications criteria • The Technical submission must meet at least the minimum requirements of the Tender Documents for the tender to be deemed substantially responsive • An offer can only be judged against criteria set in Tender Documents (and clarifications) • To this end, it is recommended to spend sufficient time when preparing the evaluation grids and to make sure all important aspects were taken into consideration • Evaluation period and Report approval should not exceed the tenders validity period
A financial evaluation of tenders is to determine the lowest price – 4.3.9.5 • If the offer is technically compliant with the Tender Documents requirements • If the award criteria is the lowest price the process is simplified • If the award is to be the most economically advantageous tender, the technical evaluation is measured against the award criteria in the Tender Dossier • Need to consider costs of operation, maintenance and consumables, trainings, after-sales services – all these must be reflected in criteria set in the Tender Dossier • Technical evaluations are combined with financial evaluation to determine the most economical advantageous tender
Financial Evaluation – 4.3.9.5 • Once technical evaluation completed, the Committee takes forward the technically compliant offers, for Financial Evaluation. • Offers are checked for arithmetical errors and conform corrections with Tenderer, without penalties. • In case of multiple Lots, Financial offers must be compared for each Lot, taking into account eventual discounts granted by Tenderers. • Special care in case of variable discounts granted in case of more Lots awarded!!! • Always request discounts in the form of percentages!
Choice of Contractor – 4.3.9.6 • The successful Tenderer is the one submitting the least expensive technically compliant offer and equal, or under the available budget. • In case of budget exceeding, tender procedure is cancelled and Contracting Authority may? proceed with Negotiated Procedure (4.4.4.1). • In case of abnormal low offers, Contracting Authority may reject the tender but ONLY after requesting in writing details on price constituent elements, e.g. economics of manufacturing process, chosen technical solution, etc.
Conclusion of Evaluation Committee – 4.3.9.7 After due deliberations, Evaluation Committee may recommend: • Award the contract to the Tenderer that submitted a tender: • compliant with formal requirements and eligibility rules. • technically compliant. • that is the least expensive tender. • whose price is equal, or under the available budget. • Cancel the tender process (4.3.10), when: • no qualitatively or financially worthwhile tender received • the economic or technical data of the project have beenfundamentally changed • exceptional circumstances or force majeure render normal performance of the contract impossible • all technically compliant tenders exceed the financial resources available • there have been irregularities in the procedure
Notification of an Award – 2.9.1.1: • the Contracting Authority must notify Tenderers promptly about their award decision, within the tender validity period • this may include a decision to abandon an award procedure after invitations to tender • notification of successful Tenderer, implies automatic extension of his tender for a period of 60 days • evidences required in TD must be submitted by successful Tenderer within 15 days from notification • if a financing agreement is not in place at the time of the tender procedure (suspension clause - 2.4.13), successful Tenderer shall not be notified until such agreement has been concluded.
Contract preparation – 2.9.1.2 Documents to be considered for Contract preparation: • explanatory note (form A6) • copy of financing agreement • copy of tender announcements, Tender Opening Report, Evaluation Report and any other relevant information • prepare three (four – Ex-Ante) originals All standard annexes must be reproduced without modification in all copies of the contract, except Special Conditions that need to be completed by Contracting Authority (adjusted during tendering phase).
Contract signature – 2.9.1.2 Once contract prepared: • CA signs and date all copies and initial Special Conditions pages • send contract to EC Delegation for endorsement (until EDIS) • send Contract to successful Tenderer, who must countersign within 30 days of receipt and before the tender validity period, and prior to the contracting deadline!!! • Contractor keep an original and returns the other to CA, with eventual guarantees. One original to ECD (until EDIS). • Failure to sign the contract within the deadline, the contract preparation re-start from step 1, awarding the contract to the second ranked tender. Contract only takes effect on the date of the later signature!!!
Conclusions: If you find yourself in a tender committee, then here are a few points: • Conduct preliminary meeting of committee before tender opening to discuss tactics, programme and if appropriate, marking and weighting. • All voting committee members must read and evaluate all tenders. • If a majority vote is recorded for any particular aspect the dissenting voter must briefly record their reasons. • Differentiate between must do / have items ( e.g. bank guarantees) and minor issues (e.g. missing parameter). • Be logical, but keep your approach and method simple, always return to basics. • Make your own clear notes of your views and decisions so that you can recall issues should there be an audit. • Be prepared to answer an economic operator’s appeal against the award (if allowed). Fair Competition!!!
