This programme is financed by the European Union, the Russian Federation and the Republic of Finland

Transcription

1 INVITATION TO TENDER for public procurement of Services of independent assessors in charge of supporting the evaluation of proposals submitted under the Karelia CBC Programme This programme is financed by the European Union, the Russian Federation and the Republic of Finland

2 Invitation The Council of Oulu Region as the Managing Authority of the Karelia CBC Programme hereby invites tenders from the candidates interested acting as an assessor for the calls for proposals of the programme. Interested candidates are invited to apply in accordance with provisions of this notice. A candidate can leave a tender for one or several priorities indicated in this notice. 1. Description of the assignment The MA will select assessors who will assist the Selection Committee in the evaluation of the proposals submitted under the calls for proposals in line with the evaluation grid approved by the Joint Monitoring Committee. One primary assessor and one or more secondary assessors are chosen per priority. The assessor evaluates both micro applications, concept notes and full applications on priorities 1 and 3 and concept notes and full applications on priority 2. A call for proposal is either a regular call or a micro call. Assessors are used in both types. Regular calls for proposals include two phases: in the first phase the applicants submits a concept note describing shortly the project idea. In the second phase the best concept notes are invited to submit a full application. In the first phase of the call for proposals all submitted concept notes will be evaluated according to the evaluation grid. The assessor completes each section of the grid with clear comments for each sub-section, duly substantiating the score given at each stage. The final evaluation for each concept note should contain sufficient information to justify the total score assigned. The evaluation grid for concept notes is included to the guidelines of the call for proposals and is annexed to this tender notice as annex 1. In the second phase of the call, shortlisted concept notes are completed and will be evaluated as full applications according to the evaluation grid. The assessor completes each section of the grid with clear comments for each sub-section, duly substantiating the score given at each stage. The final evaluation for each full application should contain sufficient information to justify the total score assigned. The evaluation grid for full applications is included to the guidelines of the call for proposals and is annexed to this tender notice as annex 2. In a micro call for proposals the applicants submit a concept note and detailed budget. The evaluations are based on these documents and completed according to the evaluation grid of the micro projects. The assessor completes each section of the grid with clear comments for each sub-section, duly substantiating the score given at each stage. The final evaluation for each micro project should contain sufficient information to justify the total score assigned. Micro project evaluation grid is included to the separate guidelines for micro projects and is also attached to this notice as an annex 3. It is anticipated that the number of concept notes could be and the number of grant applications per priority. Estimated amount of micro project applications is per priority. The time allocated for the evaluation is a minimum of 4 weeks (the time between receiving the applications and the deadline for submitting the evaluations) per phase.

3 Priority 1 is open as follows: Micro call from January 16 th to March 23 rd 2017 assessing in April First phase of the regular call from March 2 nd to May 11 th 2017 assessing in May and June Assessing of the second phase is foreseen to take plane in October and November Priority 2 is open as follows: First phase of the regular call from January 16 th to March 31 st 2017 assessing in April Assessing of the second phase is foreseen to take place in September Priority 3 is open as follows: Micro call from January 16 th to March 23 rd 2017 assessing in April First phase of the regular call from March 2 nd to May 11 th 2017 assessing in May and June Assessing of the second phase is foreseen to take plane in October and November The evaluation can be carried out from the assessor s place of work. 2. Requirements To be eligible the applicants must fulfill the following compulsory requirements: be fluent in English. have a good knowledge on project cycle management have a basic understanding of EU funded programmes, especially of cross-border cooperation. have a good understanding of the field of the priority they apply for. 3. Tenders Interested tenderers shall submit the following documents as an offer: 1. One page cover letter in English (briefly describing appropriate experience, fields of expertise, qualifications, skills and motivation). In the cover letter it must be clearly defined for which priority(ies) the application is aimed at. 2. Detailed CV in English (EU format). 3. Fees: a. fixed fee covering familiarizing oneself with the material. b. fee per concept note

4 c. fee per grant application d. fee per micro application (concept note + budget), not applicable if the application is aimed only to priority 2. Tenders are sent to the Managing Authority of the Karelia CBC programme by to the address: info@kareliaenpi.eu on at the latest Assessor should be written as the subject of the mail. 4. Evaluation of the tenders One primary assessor and one or more secondary assessors are chosen per priority based on the evaluation of the tenders. The tenders are evaluated by the Managing Authority of the Karelia CBC. Only those found eligible (see chapter 2, requirements) will be evaluated further. The tenders are evaluated separately for every priority. An assessor can be chosen as primary assessor only for one priority. The following points will be assessed: 1) Quality of the tender (maximum total 20 points) Familiarity with the theme of the call 0- points Project cycle management skills 0-8 points Familiarity with EU programmes 0- points Familiarity with the programme region 0-2 points 2) Fee (maximum total 20 points) The scoring is given with the following formula: the lowest price/ price of the given proposal * maximum score. Regular projects: o fee covering familiarizing oneself with the material max 4 points o fee per concept note maximum 8 points o fee per grant application maximum 8 points

5 Micro projects: o fee covering familiarizing oneself with the material max 4 points o fee per micro application (concept note + budget) max 16 points The importance of the quality of the tender shall be 70 % and the fee 30 % when counting the total score of the offer.. Conflict of interest To ensure the independence of proposal evaluation, the selected assessor will have to sign a declaration certifying that there is no conflict of interest at the time of appointment and that they undertake to inform the MA of any situation of conflict, even potential, while carrying out their duties. In general, the role as independent assessor is incompatible with being: a member, observer or their deputy in the Joint Monitoring Committee or in the Joint Selection Committee, an employee of an applicant or partner organization in the call for proposals, a consultant for designing projects in the frame of the Karelia CBC calls for proposals, Also, the role as an independent assessor is incompatible with an expert who: was involved in writing a project proposal which is going to be evaluated within the call for proposals is holding shares of a consulting company writing a proposal to be evaluated, is holding shares of the applicant and/or the partners participating to the call for proposals, is member of a management board or a steering committee of a company writing a proposal to be evaluated, or of the management board or steering committee of an applicant and/or the partners, is husband/wife, relative or in-law relative of people who are members of the management board or steering committee or hold shares of the applicant and/or the partners, is husband/wife, relative or in-law relative of people who occupies management positions within the authorities playing the role of an applicant or partners, or of people who are members of the team which implements the project. In case the selected assessor has a conflict of interest no contract will be signed and the contract will be offered for the second best offer.

6 6. Confidentiality and impartiality The assessor will have to observe complete confidentiality of the information and documents brought to their attention during the whole evaluation process. If selected, before starting the evaluation, the assessor will be requested to submit the Declaration of Impartiality and Confidentiality. Failing to declare a conflict of interest or failing to respect the confidentiality and impartiality during the evaluation process may lead to cancelling the service contract. Also, the assessor will bear any other consequences and sanctions provided by the legislation or by the above mentioned contract. In case where, after the conclusion of the service contract, the selected assessor is found to be in conflict of interest, the service contract is cancelled. 7. The contract Contracts will be made with the chosen primary assessors. Contracts with the chosen secondary assessors will be made when necessary. The Managing Authority reserves the right to refuse all the offers. The general conditions for contract for public procurement (Julkisten hankintojen yleiset sopimusehdot, JYSE 2014, Finland) will be followed. 8. Additional information Requests for additional information should be delivered to the address: info@kareliaenpi.eu by at the latest. All relevant questions and answers if any shall be published on the programme website at by 17 th of November. More information on the programme can be found from the programme website at You may also contact Mr Jarkko Kärkimaa ( , jarkko.karkimaa@pohjois-pohjanmaa.fi

7 Information about Karelia CBC Programme The Karelia CBC Programme provides a framework for continuing cross-border cooperation in , which was formerly pursued through the Karelia ENPI CBC programme. Karelia CBC Programme contributes to regional development with activities that have clear cross-border dimension and cooperation nature. Activities benefit regions and stakeholders on both sides of the border. Programme complements other regional development programmes operating on the regions. Programme is divided to four priorities: Priority 1: Priority 2: Priority 3: Priority 4: Growing cross-border business cooperation Attractive cultural environment Clean and comfortable region to live Well-functioning border crossings The promotion of local cross-border people-to-people actions is included in all the priorities, the special focus being on young people. Innovations, research and education are considered as cross-cutting themes that shall be promoted within all priorities. The main objective of the Karelia CBC programme is to make the Programme area attractive for the people to live and work and businesses to locate and operate. Programme area consists of Oulu region, North Karelia and Kainuu in Finland and the Republic of Karelia in Russia. The calls for proposals are based on Programme priorities. Separate guidelines describing the objectives and available resources are published for each call for proposals. The regular calls for proposals include two phases meaning that in the first phase the applicants submit a concept note describing shortly the project idea. The concept notes are evaluated by assessors and by the Selection Committee and the best concept notes are invited to submit a full application. Full applications are then evaluated by the same assessors and by the Joint Selection Committee. The Joint Monitoring Committee makes the final decisions on the projects. A separate micro project facility is also launched under the Programme priorities 1 and 3. Micro projects have a preparatory nature with an objective to create a larger project to Karelia CBC context or to some other financial instrument. The applicants for micro projects submit a concept note with a detailed budget. Separate guidelines are published for the micro projects.

8 The calls for proposals The call for proposals, for which the assessors are searched for, concentrate on Programme priorities 1-3. Priority 1. Growing cross-border business cooperation This priority enhances long-term business cooperation across the border. Special attention is paid to improving conditions for the cooperation between Russian and Finnish SMEs as well as to attracting investments on both sides of the border. All the projects selected under this priority work towards the overall objective to Increase the cross-border economic interaction and trade Each project contributes to one of the following elements of the priority (to which of these the project s specific objective is connected to): 1. Identification of bottlenecks, barriers and obstacles of cross-border economic interaction and trade 2. Solving / removing of the barriers hindering the cross-border economic cooperation 3. Activities increasing the capacity of the enterprises to start cross-border economic cooperation 4. Activities increasing the area s attractiveness as a target for investments Priority 2. Attractive cultural environment This priority facilitates the development of sustainable, diverse and versatile cultural services. To reach this objective the improvement of skills and capacities of cultural stakeholders is seen important. Improved skills help to build the cultural services to operate on sustainable basis. Crossing the border may also open up new possibilities for cultural services. All the projects selected under this call for proposals work towards the overall objective: Programme area s cultural services are easily reached and their quality is good Each project contributes to one of the following elements (to which of these the project s specific objective is connected to): 1. Improvement of skills and capacities of cultural stakeholder 2. Increase of the diversity of cultural services with new forms of cross-border cultural activities 3. Creation of new cross-sectoral initiatives 4. Helping of young people in danger to drop out of the active society with inclusive cultural activities

9 Priority 3. Clean and comfortable region to live Clean environment is a key attraction factor of the Programme area and notable natural resources a clear strength. Activities promoted under this priority have multiple nature: on the one hand they improve the peoples living conditions by creating environmental friendly living areas and by improving their basic infrastructure. On the other hand the priority includes activities which have a direct environmental dimension such as environmental awareness, which also act as inducements for people to stay in the region. All the projects selected under this call for proposals work towards the overall objective to Improved peoples living and working environment Each project contributes to one of the following elements (to which of these the project s specific objective is connected to): 1. Increased environmental awareness 2. Improvement of peoples physical living environment 3. Border areas biodiversity 4. Use of nature in the promotion of health and wellbeing

10 Evaluation Grid: Concept Note: 1. Justification / Relevance of the project Are the initial problem(s) clearly identified and described? 1.2. Is the project relevant to the target groups? 1.3. How relevant is the project to the objectives / priority of the call for proposals? 1.4. Does the project have a cross-border nature? Award criteria: quality of the proposal 2. Quality of the proposal Are the activities proposed appropriate, practical, and consistent with the objectives and expected results? 2.2. Is the role and motivation of proposed partners appropriate and clear? Award criteria: expected results (quality) 3. Expected results of the project Are the main outputs necessary and sufficient in order to achieve the objectives of the project? 2 x *

11 Award criteria: Budget and cost-efficiency (quality) 4. Budget and cost-effectiveness 4.1. How good is the price-quality ratio of the proposed action? Selection criteria: Capacity. Capacity.2. Do the applicant and partners have sufficient technical expertise to implement the proposed activities? (notably knowledge of the issues to be addressed.) *the scores are multiplied by 2 because of their importance Maximum score is 0.

12 Evaluation Grid: Grant Application: Award criteria: justification and relevance 1. Justification / Relevance of the project Are the initial problem(s) clearly identified and described? 2 X * 1.2. Is the project relevant to the target groups? 1.3. How relevant is the project to the objectives / priority of the call for proposals? 1.4. Does the project have a cross-border nature? Award criteria: quality of the proposal 2. Quality of the proposal Are the activities proposed appropriate, practical, and consistent with the objectives and expected results? 2 X * 2.2. Is the role and motivation of proposed partners appropriate and clear? 2.3. Is the timetable of the project realistic? 2.4. Does the strategy for dissemination and communication correspond to the objectives and to the target groups of the project? Is the strategy sufficient? Award criteria: expected results and sustainability (quality)

13 3. Expected results and sustainability of the project Are the main outputs necessary and sufficient in order to achieve the objectives of the project? 2 x * 3.2. Are the expected results of the proposed project sustainable? Can they be effectively utilized? 3.3. Does the project have any environmental impacts? Does the project address any cross-cutting issues of the programme? Award criteria: Budget and cost-efficiency (quality) 4. Budget and cost-effectiveness Are the planned resources sufficient and reasonable to ensure the project implementation? 4.2 Does the expenditures correspond to the proposed actions of the project? 4.3. How good is the price-quality ratio of the proposed action? Selection criteria: financial and operational capacity. Financial and operational capacity 1.1. Do the applicant and partners have experience of project management?

14 .2. Do the applicant and partners have sufficient technical expertise to implement the proposed activities? (notably knowledge of the issues to be addressed.).3. Does the applicant and partners have sufficient financial capacity in relation to overall total costs of the project? *the scores are multiplied by 2 because of their importance Maximum score is 100.