** FINAL ** NIGP PAPPA CHAPTER PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC PURCHASING ASSOCIATION GENERAL MEETING May 18, 2015 Members i Attedace: Price Morris, Lacaster City Housig Authority; Kelly Laubach, Berks Couty; Mauree McIlvaie, Maria Isabel Biachi-Fiorito, Ed Kolb, Claudia Schloffel, Bucks Couty; Deise Serio, West Whitelad Twp.; Joh Griffies, Etta Smith Edwards, Diae Atkis, Delaware Valley Regioal Plaig Commissio; George Nader, Patrick Leavey, Lehigh Couty; Cydee Baffa, Towship Lower Merio; Soia Lee, Freshawe Johso, Jaice Mato, Tim Viso, Lea Ghee, Trevor Day, Shawee Boo, Sachez Justice, Kevi Haaga, Azah Campfield, City of Philadelphia; Amy Shafer, Doa Zackeru, South Whitehall Towship; Stephe Nasobko. Meetig Locatio: Delaware Valley Regioal Plaig Commissio (DVRPC), Philadelphia, PA Meetig Host: Joh Griffies, Cotracts Maager, DVRPC Call Board Meetig to Order: Presidet Price Morris called the meetig to order at 10:21 am. Approval of the Miutes The March 23, 2015 Geeral Meetig miutes were reviewed ad approved. Motio by Kelly Laubach, Secod by Mauree McIlvaie. The motio passed by all members preset. Treasurer s Reports George Nader reviewed Treasurer s reports from March ad April, 2015. The motio to approve was itroduced by Deise Serio ad secoded by Patrick Leavey. The motio passed by all members preset. Stadig Committee Reports Awards/Scholarship Committee Chair Kelly Laubach: No report. Fiacial Committee Chair Mauree McIlvaie: Mauree haded out ad explaied the 2015 Workig Budget & Expeses worksheet Legislative Committee Chair Joe Coco: No Report Marketig Committee Committee Chair Vacat: No report. Membership Committee Presidet Price Morris stated there are sevety-five PAPPA members to date. Operatios Guide Committee Chair Pete Navarro (abset): No report. Professioal Developmet Committee Chair Bob Dopira reported: There were twelve attedees for the NIGP Cotract Admiistratio Hal Good has bee advertisig NIGP courses usig social media. Developig ad Maagig Requests for Proposals i the Public Sector is scheduled for Jue 22, 2015 i Lehigh Couty.
Strategic Procuremet Plaig is scheduled for September 14, 2015 i Berks Couty ad also Itroductio to Public Procuremet i Bucks Couty i late Fall. Website Committee Chair Patrick Leavey: Patrick shared the followig updates: Educatioal Poits will be posted o the website from the Geeral Meetig attedace. Hal Good set up the PAPPA Twitter accout ad it is liked to the PAPPA website. Special Committee Reports Chapter Liaiso Mauree McIlvaie: Reported Area 2 updates: Delaware (DPPA) held their first Reverse Trade Show evet. Mauree also stated that DPPA had speakers from NIGP ad speakers from Marylad & Pesylvaia discussig their purchasig program from their state. NIGP Liaiso George Nader: Reported that he atteded the sprig NIGP Board Meetig i Kasas City. The followig was discussed: Treds i Procuremet Preview to ext year s White Paper Presetatio Coloial Life & CAT Fiacial Miority participatio i cotractig Chapter Ambassador Program oce every other year the Chapters will be visited by the Chapter Ambassador. NIGP Budget was approved with slight icreases. NIGP is reviewig accreditatio programs for co-ops. Old Busiess Reverse Trade Show Deise Serio reported i Kim Roth s absece that a few committee members visited Bear Creek to address cocers from previous evets. Also, to date fourtee vedors ad five agecies have registered for the RTS. Kim is seekig voluteers to help o the day of the evet. Hal Good has bee promotig the RTS via social media. New Busiess: Job Postig for Buyer, City of Alletow Workshop: Discussio o Global Best Practices Topic The Evaluatio Process Vice Presidet, Kelly Laubach ad Soia Lee, City of Philadelphia, shared their experieces i bid processes as well as egaged group participatio. May shared their practices ad experiece for professioal & oprofessioal bids. Time 11:00 AM 12:00 PM (1 Educatioal Hour) Luch: 12:00 PM 1:00 PM
Speaker : The NIGP Busiess Coucil presets: Everybody Wis: Craftig a Solicitatio that Fosters Trasparecy, Best Value, ad Collaborative Partership Pael icluded: PAPPA Immediate Past Presidet, Patrick Leavey; Soia Lee, City of Philadelphia; NIGP Busiess Coucil Reps Greg Berry, Muicibid & Rob Rhoads, Graybar. Time 12:00 PM 1:00 PM (1 Educatioal Hour) Educatio Voucher The wier of the educatio voucher drawig was Mya Too, Lycomig Couty ad Jeifer Rhoades, Berks Couty. Motio to Adjour The Geeral meetig was adjoured, motio by Steve Nasobko ad secoded by George Nader at 2:25 PM. Next Meetig: July 20, 2015 Hosted by Kim Roth, Chair, 2015 Reverse Trade Show Bear Creek Moutai Resort & Coferece Ceter, Macugie, Pa Respectfully submitted, Secretary Deise Serio
Est. 1984 www.pappaic.org Chapter of NIGP: THE INSTITUTE for PUBLIC PROCUREMENT MAY 18, 2015 10:00 AM 2:00 PM Call to Order DELAWARE VALLEY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION PHILADELPHIA, PA BOARD OF DIRECTORS: OFFICERS: Presidet: Price M. Morris, CPPB Lacaster City Housig Authority (717) 283-0432 First Vice Presidet: Harry M. Kliger Couty of Lacaster (717) 299-8259 Secod Vice Presidet: Kelly A. Laubach, CPPB Couty of Berks (610) 478-6168 x 6267 Treasurer: George M. Nader, Jr., CPPO Couty of Lehigh (610) 782-3030 Secretary: Deise Serio West Whitelad Towship (610) 363-9525 x 2131 IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT: Patrick J. Leavey, CPPB Couty of Lehigh (610) 782-3030 PRESIDENT S APPOINTEE: Mauree W. McIlvaie, CPPO,CPPB Couty of Bucks (215) 348-6374 Itroductio of Guests & Aoucemets Miutes from March 23, 2015 Geeral Meetig Miutes from March 16, 2015 Board Meetig Approved at Board Meetig Telecoferece Call o April 20, 2015 Treasurer s Report: March 2015 & April 2015 Stadig Committee Reports Awards/Scholarship Committee: Chair Kelly Laubach Fiace Committee: Chair Mauree McIlvaie Legislative Committee: Chair Joseph Coco Marketig Committee: Curretly Vacat Membership Committee: Chair Haah Seiple Operatios Guide Committee: Chair Peter Navarro Professioal Developmet Committee: Chair Robert Dopira Website Committee: Chair Patrick Leavey Special Committee Reports Chapter Relatios Liaiso: Mauree McIlvaie NIGP Area 2 Update: George Nader Old Busiess Review of upcomig 2015 Reverse Trade Show New Busiess 2015 CHAPTER MEETINGS: Jauary 26 Locatio: Couty of Berks, Readig, PA March 23 Locatio: Pesylvaia State Police, Hershey, PA May 18 Locatio: Delaware Valley Regioal Plaig Commissio, Philadelphia, PA July 20 Locatio: Bear Creek Resort ad Coferece Ceter, Macugie, PA September 21 Locatio: Couty of Chester, West Chester, PA November 17 Locatio: Couty of Bucks Doylestow, PA Workshop: Discussio o Global Best Practices from the NIGP Priciples Ad Practices Of Public Procuremet. Topic: The Evaluatio Process (see attached) Time: 11:00 am 12:00 pm [1 Educatioal Cotact Hour] Luch: 12:00 PM 1:00 PM Speaker: The NIGP Busiess Coucil presets: Everybody Wis: Craftig a Solicitatio that Fosters Trasparecy, Best Value, ad Collaborative Partership Time: 1:00 PM 2:00 PM [1 Educatioal Cotact Hour] Adjour Next Meetig: July 20, 2015 Hosted by Kim Roth, Chair, 2015 Reverse Trade Show Bear Creek Moutai Resort & Coferece Ctr., Macugie, PA
Public Procuremet Practice THE EVALUATION PROCESS STANDARD The receipt, opeig, ad evaluatio of requested documetatio from potetial suppliers must be carried out by a competet evaluatio pael ad i accordace with all applicable laws, as well as the priciples of impartiality ad trasparecy. Those ivolved i the process must maitai itegrity ad professioalism i all aspects of evaluatio. All submissios received must be kept secure durig the evaluatio process 1. The cofidetiality of the submitted documets must also be maitaied subject oly to applicable freedom of iformatio or public records legislatio. Defiitio Evaluatio Process is the process by which a qualified pael or resposible idividual receives, opes ad evaluates the requested documetatio from potetial suppliers. The evaluatio process is a complete review of the received proposals based o pre-defied evaluatio criteria. The criteria should be comprehesive eough to determie the best value solutio for the public body so that a recommedatio for award ca be made. (See Practice: Developig Evaluatio Criteria). Elemet 1.1: The Evaluatio Pael 2 The evaluatio pael must be competet ad able to idetify the most appropriate outcome, by usig the pre-determied evaluatio criteria ad make a recommedatio for award to the cotractig authority. Preparatio ad Plaig Advace plaig is importat for the timely ad proper coduct of the evaluatio process. It is recommeded that the evaluatio pael hold a preparatory/ plaig meetig before the requested documetatio is received. All members of the evaluatio pael should uderstad: The process to be followed icludig sigature of a o coflict of iterest statemet, where applicable How criteria ad scorig will be applied Legislative costraits Their resposibilities while servig o the pael Timescales for the evaluatio process The agreemet to a evaluatio timetable icludig schedulig meetigs of the pael. Operatio of the Pael The way i which the members of the evaluatio pael operate (e.g. whether or ot they joitly or idepedetly access the submitted documetatio) depeds o local law ad practice. Regardless of the operatio method that is chose, pael members must serve oly the public etity's iterests to esure the fairess of the evaluatio process, ad must ever maipulate or ufairly ifluece other members of the pael. The Evaluatio Process
Public Procuremet Practice THE EVALUATION PROCESS (Cot d) Impartiality ad No-Disclosure All pael members should sig a declaratio of impartiality ad o-disclosure or similar kid of declaratio before they start to evaluate the submitted documetatio. By sigig such a documet each pael member: Declares that he/she is ot associated with ay of the potetial suppliers or their proposed sub-cotractors, etc. Commits to ot disclosig ay iformatio acquired durig the evaluatio process to potetial suppliers or to ay other persos ot officially ivolved i the evaluatio process. Elemet 1.2: Receipt/Opeig ad Compliace Depedig o the type of procuremet, the evaluatio process may ivolve several stages. The first stage usually icludes the receipt, opeig ad compliace validatio of the submitted documetatio. Oce this stage has bee completed the evaluatio pael will coduct the full evaluatio i accordace with the established criteria. The completio of this stage will result i a recommedatio for award by the evaluatio pael to the cotractig authority. Where a e-procuremet system or portal is beig used for the receipt of teders, the security built ito the system oly allows for opeig after the fial teder receipt time/date is reached. The cetral procuremet team will ope the teders ad sed them alog with the evaluatio score sheet electroically to the pael to eable evaluatio to begi. The followig receipt ad opeig process details the traditioal paper-based approach for receipt ad opeig: Receipt Upo receivig the requested documetatio, the cotractig authority must record the followig iformatio: Declares that he/she is ot associated with ay of the potetial suppliers or their proposed sub-cotractors, etc. Commits to ot disclosig ay iformatio acquired durig the evaluatio process to potetial suppliers or to ay other persos ot officially ivolved i the evaluatio process. The Evaluatio Process I additio: The requested documetatio must remai uopeed ad secured i a safe locatio util the established time for opeig such iformatio has bee reached. Before opeig, iformatio cocerig the idetity ad umber of submissios received shall be made available oly to govermet employees. Such disclosure shall be oly o a eed to kow basis. 3 Submissios received after the established deadlie may be rejected ad retured uopeed to the offeror/ proposer who submitted them ad a record made of this decisio. The offeror/ proposer is allowed to revoke their submissio prior to the closig date. Should this occur, the submitted documetatio should be retured uopeed to the offeror/ proposer. Opeig The opeig of the submitted documetatio may be public or o-public. 4 Public Opeig If a public opeig method is chose, the submitted documets should be opeed publicly i the presece of authorized idividuals at the time ad place idicated by the cotractig authority. 5 No-public Opeig If a o-public opeig method is chose, the submitted documets should be opeed i the presece of the evaluatio pael members oly.
Public Procuremet Practice THE EVALUATION PROCESS (Cot d) Compliace Oce the documetatio has bee opeed it should be checked for compliace with the requiremets of the teder. Procedural Compliace Check cosists of evaluatig the submitted documetatio for compliace with procedural requiremets established by the cotractig authority (e.g. submissio of the correct umber of copies, submissio of requested documetatio). To avoid mistakes, a checklist of the procedural requiremets should be used whe evaluatig the submitted documetatio to esure legal certaity ad reduce the umber of ocompliat submissios. Techical ad Substative Compliace Check cosists of evaluatig the submitted documetatio for compliace with the specificatios ad cotract coditios ad other fudametal substative requiremets (e.g. isurace requiremets). No- Compliace Fudametal Procedural Requiremets As a geeral rule, o-compliace with ay of the fudametal procedural requiremets, specificatios, ad other techical ad substative requiremets may result i the rejectio of o-compliat submissios. The evaluatio pael should establish (prior to evaluatio) which procedural requiremets will be classified as substative so that o-compliat submissios are easily idetified. It is agaist the priciple of impartiality to accept o-compliat submissios. Reasos for rejectig a submissio for o-compliace with specificatios or other substative requiremets must be clearly explaied, documeted i the evaluatio report ad relayed without delay to the affected offeror/ proposer. The decisio to reject a bid may eed to be ratified by a qualified lawyer. No-Fudametal Requiremets No-compliace with o-fudametal requiremets (e.g. submissio of a umber of copies that is fewer tha the required umber of copies) should ot costitute a reaso for the rejectio of the submitted documetatio, but should lead to a request for clarificatio that will rectify the error or omissio Requests for Clarificatio ca be used for clarificatio of o-fudametal ad fudametal requiremets, but it may ot be used to brig fudametal requiremets ito compliace. Whe a request for clarificatio is ecessary it is importat to remember: Requests for clarificatios do ot imply egotiatios. Ay request for clarificatio ad its correspodig respose must be i writig ad provided to all offerors/ proposers, if the clarificatio is applicable to all offerors/ proposers. The evaluatio pael must agree o ay request for clarificatio before it is set. Ay agreed upo request for clarificatios must be set exclusively through the chairperso of the evaluatio pael. Idividual members of the evaluatio pael are ot allowed to cotact the potetial supplier/s directly i order to seek clarificatios. The clarificatio correspodece exchaged must be summarized i detail i the evaluatio report, with a clear idicatio of whether the aswers received are satisfactory to the evaluatio pael, ad if ot why ot. I supportig the priciples of trasparecy the exchaged correspodece must also be added to the evaluatio report. Ay urequested iformatio provided i the teder (solicitatio) should ot be cosidered by the evaluatio pael. Elemet 1.3: Evaluatio 6 The evaluatio pael or resposible idividual must make sure that the received documetatio is complete ad that it complies with all of the requiremets set by the cotractig authority. The evaluatio pael should the apply the previously aouced evaluatio criteria to evaluate the teders (See Practice: Developig Award Criteria). The Evaluatio Process
Public Procuremet Practice THE EVALUATION PROCESS (Cot d) Choosig the Best Offeror/ Proposer Followig the compliace check, submitted documetatio from offerors/ proposers should be evaluated agaist the previously advertised evaluatio criteria. Evaluatig for lowest price Whe evaluatig for lowest price all offerors/ proposers must have met the procedural requiremets ad formalities, as well as the madatory specificatios ad ay other substative requiremets. Oce this has bee verified, the evaluatio pael should examie the submitted documetatio to esure: Prices iclude all of the price elemets i accordace with the requiremets set forth i the otificatio of cotract or solicitatio documets. Arithmetical errors are corrected ad recorded. Discouts are applied. Prices that appear to be abormally low are appropriately ivestigated. Evaluatig based o pre-aouced Award Criteria (See Practice: Developig Evaluatio Criteria) Whe evaluatig for criteria other tha lowest price, all offerors/ proposers must have met the procedural requiremets ad formalities, as well as the madatory substative requiremets. Oce this has bee verified, the evaluatio pael should examie the submitted documetatio accordig to the advertised specific criteria ad their relative weightigs. If a more detailed evaluatio methodology was disclosed i the otice for cotract or solicitatio documets, the that methodology must be followed. The members of the evaluatio pael must: Use a cosistet approach whe scorig agaist the pre-aouced criteria. Evaluate the documets o the pre-aouced criteria ad weightigs, subcriteria ad weightigs, ad/or evaluatio methodology. Esure that all costs are icluded, where requested by the evaluatio criteria. Correct ay arithmetical errors, uless they are substative to the bid. Apply ay discouts. Appropriately ivestigate ay prices that seem abormally low. Record scores i grids/ matrices ad for the purpose of trasparecy, attach the grids/ matrices to the evaluatio report. Elemet 1.4: Award The Evaluatio Process Meetig of the Evaluatio Pael Oce all members of the evaluatio pael have completed their idepedet review of the o-fiacial criteria, the fiacial evaluatio will usually be coducted by the whole evaluatio pael to establish the rakig of the offerors/ proposers ad will make a recommedatio for award. At this meetig the evaluatio pael will: Cosider the scores ad commets allocated by each member of the evaluatio pael. Request ay clarificatios from offerors/ proposers or solicit expert advice to recommed how to resolve sigificat differeces. The method chose to resolve such differeces should be agreed to i advace ad i lie with applicable policies ad laws. Cosider other issues (e.g. abormally low prices, equally-raked offerors/ proposers, etc.) Make a recommedatio for award. Recommedatio to Award ad Evaluatio Report I accordace with applicable laws, the evaluatio pael: Will issue the recommedatio to award to the cotractig authority. Will iclude the recommedatio to award withi the evaluatio report.
Public Procuremet Practice THE EVALUATION PROCESS (Cot d) The report should be prepared by the chairperso of the evaluatio pael with support from pael members. The evaluatio report should iclude: Names of the members of the pael Descriptio of the cotract which is the subject of the evaluatio process Cofirmatio of the recommedatio of the pael Names of usuccessful offerors/ proposers Clear summary of the activities, aalysis, ad associated results that were carried out by the evaluatio pael durig the evaluatio process Clear justificatio for the recommedatio that is beig made Attachmet of all documetatio draw up by the evaluatio pael durig the performace of its tasks. Award Approval Depedig o applicable law, the cotractig authority will make the fial approval for awardig the cotract ad: Verify that the process of evaluatio of submitted documetatio was coducted properly Esure that the recommedatio of award is soud ad correct Make the fial award decisio. Award Notice Oce the award approval has bee give, the cotractig authority shall otify the successful offeror/ proposer i writig that their submissio has bee accepted for cotract award. All other offerors/ proposers must also be otified of the fial decisio to award. Madatory Stadstill Followig writte otice of award, a madatory stadstill period 8 (3-15 caledar days depedig o applicable law ad practice) must elapse betwee the award otificatio ad the sigig of the cotract. Oce the stadstill period has passed, the cotractig authority may cotiue with the coclusio of the cotract i accordace with the coditios that were set forth i the cotract otificatio/ solicitatio documets. Backgroud The evaluatio process is a multi-step process that cosists of the examiatio ad evaluatio of the submitted documetatio. Submitted documets are examied for their resposiveess ad compliace with requiremets set forth by the cotractig agecy. Evaluatio for resposiveess i additio to the evaluatio criteria ad method specified by the cotractig agecy will serve as the basis for the subsequet selectio of the offer that provides the best value for moey for the orgaizatio. 9 1 Adapted from OECD. (2011). Brief 9 public procuremet: Teder evaluatio ad cotract award. Retrieved from www.sigmaweb.org 2 Adapted from OECD. (2011). Ibid. 3 Adapted from FAR 14.401-a 4 Public or o-public opeig is subject to the requiremets of the local law. 5 The time, place, ad authorized idividuals should have bee previously set by the cotractig authority i the solicitatio documets. (See Practice: Developig Evaluatio Criteria) 6 Adapted from OECD. (2011). Op cit. 7 The Public Cotract Regulatios 2005) (UK &EU) require public cotractig authorities to apply a compulsory waitig period betwee their decisio to award a cotract to which the Regulatios apply ad the date o which the cotract is siged. This is commoly called the Stadstill Period. 8 A stadstill period s purpose ad legth is depedet upo applicable local law. 9 Best value for moey i the cotext of evaluatio of offers, meas that price aloe is ot always the oly criterio factored ito a evaluatio method. Other criteria such as quality, availability, time, compliace, cost for maiteace ad support, life cycle cost, etc. are part of the equatio to determie the best retur o ivestmet of the procuremet of goods, services or works (UN, 2006). UN. (2006). Procuremet practitioer s hadbook. Retrieved from: www.uops.org The Evaluatio Process 2012 CIPS ad NIGP
Public Procuremet Practice DEVELOPING EVALUATION CRITERIA STANDARD Before issuig the solicitatio, procuremet professioals ad applicable stake-holders must establish the criteria by which the resultig bids or proposals will be evaluated. Oce the appropriate procuremet method is selected, criteria should be established to evaluate bids or proposals for the most ecoomically advatageous offer for the cotractig authority, or for the lowest price. 1 Defiitio Selectio Criteria: Criteria that may be used to qualify a proposer/ offeror. The criteria should determie whether or ot the proposer/ offeror is resposible ad has the capability/ capacity to meet the requiremets of the solicitatio ad the subsequet cotract. The proposer/ offeror must possess the full capability ad capacity to perform i good faith. The criteria may iclude criterio to assess the proposer s/ offeror s fiacial coditio, ethics, quality of services/ goods supplied, capability of facilities/ equipmet used to provide the good/ service, reliability, maagemet, experiece, ad techical ability. Award Criteria: The criteria idetified at the award stage must relate directly to the goods, services or works to be provided. Award criteria should evaluate the proposer s/ offeror s coformace to all material with respect to the requiremets, icludig all form ad substace. Public bodies ca award cotracts o the basis of the most ecoomically advatageous teder or the lowest price. Elemet 1.1: Developig Evaluatio Criteria Developmet of the evaluatio criteria will vary depedig o the type of procuremet method that is beig used, ad may iclude the use of selectio criteria, award criteria or both. 2 Geerally, evaluatio criteria may be established for either a sigle-step, or multi-step procuremet method. Developig Evaluatio Criteria
Public Procuremet Practice DEVELOPING EVALUATION CRITERIA (Cot d) Selectio Criteria (Qualificatio Criteria) Whe a multi-step procuremet method is selected, bidders/ offerors may be qualified accordig to the selectio criteria. The selectio criteria may iclude questios to determie whether or ot the bidder/ offeror is resposible ad has the capability ad capacity to perform/ deliver. The selectio criteria may iclude evaluatio for: Ecoomic ad fiacial stadig (icludig bodig capacity ad applicable isuraces) Techical ad professioal ability Crimial history/ backgroud/ referece checks (e.g. esurig that the bidder/ offeror has ot bee covicted of bribery, corruptio, collusio, fraud, etc.). Quality of goods/ services provided Reliability (e.g. will the offeror be reliable, ethical, ad faithfully complete the terms of the cotract?) Ethics (e.g. determied through referece checks, past performace evaluatios, compay policy o ethics, etc.) Maagemet practices ad ability to perform Experiece Note: Cost is ot a cosideratio durig this phase. Award Criteria Award criteria may be used aloe i a sigle-step procuremet, or followig the qualificatio phase (See: Selectio Criteria), of a multi-step procuremet, to determie which bidder/ offeror provides the most ecoomically advatageous offer, to further determie the bidder s/ offeror s ability to perform/ deliver as it relates to the cotract. Where resultig bids or proposals will be evaluated for the most ecoomically advatageous 3 offer, award criteria must be liked to the subject matter of the cotract ad ca iclude criteria for: Developig Evaluatio Criteria Price Quality Techical merit 4 Aesthetic ad fuctioal characteristics Evirometal characteristics Operatioal costs Cost effectiveess Service costs Techical assistace Delivery date ad delivery period Period of completio Social cosideratios 5 Sustaiability Iovatio Note: This is a o-exhaustive list based o the UK Procuremet Regulatios. 6 Criteria may vary based o the requiremets of each cotract ad/ or local regulatios, ad the eeds of the ed user.
Public Procuremet Practice DEVELOPING EVALUATION CRITERIA (Cot d) Elemet 1.2: Weightig Criteria Each criterio should be weighted to reflect its relative importace to the cotractig authority. The idetificatio of criteria ad weights must be carried out with care to esure that the cotractig authority idetifies the most advatageous proposal/ offer. 7 To accomplish this task: Weightigs may be assiged a rage that specifies a miimum ad maximum weightig. The applicatio of such weightigs is up to the cotractig authority ad appropriate use may be determied based o the subject matter of the cotract. 8 Whe a decisio to split the weightigs betwee price ad quality is made, it is best to decide o a overall split betwee price ad quality first, ad the to allocate weightig to the quality sub-criteria. Whe it is ot possible to provide weights that are based o objective grouds, the criteria should be listed i descedig order of importace. Elemet 1.3: Notificatio of Criteria Proper publicatio ad otificatio of iteded evaluatio criteria, to potetial proposers/ offerors will help the proposers/ offerors to meet the eeds of the cotractig authority. Furthermore, proper publicatio ad otificatio protect the authority from challeges o the grouds that the criteria were chose post otificatio to favor a particular proposer/ offeror. Evaluatio criteria ad their associated weightigs must: Be agreed to before the solicitatio process begis. Be published i the otice for the cotract, or withi the solicitatio documetatio, or both. 9 Not be chaged oce they have bee advertised ad otificatio has bee set to the bidders. If chages become ecessary, all bidders must be otified of the chages. Backgroud Establishig evaluatio criteria is a importat part of may procuremet processes. Whe developed appropriately criteria should determie whether or ot the potetial proposer/ offeror is suitable, be directly related to the subject matter of the cotract, ad be clear eough to esure that the potetial proposer/ offeror has a accurate uderstadig of what is most importat to the cotractig authority. Criteria ad their assiged weights will vary by the type of good or service that is beig procured. Extesive market ad supplier research, alog with a full uderstadig of the subject matter of the solicitatio, will aid i the selectio of the most appropriate evaluatio criteria for the particular procuremet. 1 Note: For cotracts subject to the Europea Procuremet Directives, the rules regardig teder evaluatio criteria are set forth i Regulatio 30 of the Public Cotracts (Scotlad) Regulatios 2006. (http://www.scotlad.gov.uk/publicatios/2006/11/16102303/tederigprocess#a4) 2 Criteria may also vary depedig o the type of service or good beig purchased, characteristics of the marketplace, ad/ or depedig o the eeds ad preferece of the user. 3 Value for Moey is defied as the optimum combiatio of whole life costs ad quality (or fitess for purpose) to meet the customer's requiremets, ad ca be take to be largely aalogous with "most ecoomically advatageous. What costitutes the optimum combiatio of whole life costs ad quality will clearly differ from commodity to commodity ad will deped o the outputs required from the procuremet exercises cocered. (Ibid.) 4 Icludig ay special certificatios or liceses required, warraties offered, ad respose times/ staffig levels. 5 Social cosideratios iclude positive actio towards disabled persos, promotio of equality betwee me ad wome ad promotio of ethic/racial diversity. They do ot iclude Buy Local (Marieau, 2010). See also: Europea Commissio (2010). Buyig social. Retrieved fromhttp://ec.europa.eu/social/blobservlet?docid=6457&lagid=e 6 For a detailed list of UK Procuremet Regulatios see www.myteders.com 7 The criteria to determie the most advatageous offer will vary depedig o the type of procuremet that is beig cosidered. For example, i some procuremets quality may be more importat tha price, therefore criteria should be weighted to reflect the relative importace as it relates to the specific procuremet. 8 Uder EU Procuremet Regulatios, whe awardig a cotract o most ecoomically advatageous teder, the criteria must be listed i the origial cotract otice or i the ivitatio to teder ad the criteria must be weighted either as a exact umber (eg price: 25%) or withi a meaigful rage (eg price: 20%-30%) (Martieau, 2010). 9 Uder EU Procuremet Regulatios all criteria (icludig ay sub-criteria) ad all weightigs must be set out i the OJEU otice ad/or the cotract documets. The circumstaces i which chages ca be made at a later date are very limited, ad geerally ot possible (Martieau, 2010). Developig Evaluatio Criteria