Evaluation of Expression of Interest and Proposals Consulting Services Evaluation of Expression of Interest and Proposals

Development of Shortlist Bidders participating in a tender for consulting services are selected in one of the following ways: Through publication of a notice requesting expressions of interest and developing a shortlist in case of Open Selection Through development of a shortlist in case of Limited Selection

Development of Shortlist Where a notice requesting expressions of interest is invited, it shall include: Details of the scope of the assignment A statement of the criteria for short-listing Details of information to be included in the expression of interest Details of any margin of preference or reservation to be applied The date, time and address for submission See sample format of EOI

REQUEST FOR EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST SAMPLE FORMAT REQUEST FOR EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST (CONSULTING SERVICES) [COUNTRY] [NAME OF PROJECT] [insert sector] CONSULTING SERVICES Project ID No. The [insert name of the Employer] provided for funds in its [year] budget toward the cost of the [insert name of project], and intends to apply part of the proceeds for consultant services. The services include [insert brief description, implementation period, etc.]¹ The [insert name of implementing agency/Employer] now invites eligible consultants to indicate their interest in providing the services. Interested consultants must provide information indicating that they are qualified to perform the services (brochures, description of similar assignments, experience in similar conditions, availability of appropriate skills among staff, etc.). Consultants may associate to enhance their qualifications. A consultant will be selected in accordance with the procedures set out in the [Public Procurement Act No. 12 of 2008 and the Public Procurement Regulations]. Interested consultants may obtain further information at the address below during office hours [insert office hours if applicable, i.e. 08:00 to 17:00 hours]. Expressions of interest must be delivered to the address below by [insert date]. [tender box] [insert postal address and/or street address] Tel: [include the country and town code] Fax: [include the country and town code] E-mail: Web site: ¹Provide enough information to allow potential consultants decide whether or not to prepare an expression of interest.

Development of Shortlist Expressions of interest (EOI) shall be evaluated by an evaluation committee Criteria stated in the EOI notice shall be used in order to develop a shortlist of suitable bidders Suitability is determined by bidders’ eligibility, qualifications, capacity, resources and experience A shortlist shall include sufficient bidders to ensure effective competition (between 4 and 6) Where the number of suitable bidders is greater than that needed on a shortlist, include those that best meet your requirements

Development of Shortlist Bidders included on the shortlist shall not have the same ownership Where the suitable bidders all have same ownership, the procurement shall be treated as direct bidding The evaluation committee shall prepare an evaluation report for the EOI Approvals authority authorises results of the evaluation and proposed shortlist before issuing solicitation document

Development of Shortlist Where a shortlist is developed without seeking expressions of interest, the shortlist shall include: All potential bidders, where limited selection is used on grounds of a limited number of sources At least 3 bidders, where limited selection is used on grounds of an emergency In developing a shortlist, one may use: Supplier databases from associations or list maintained by the procuring entity Own knowledge of the market

Development of Shortlist Where limited selection is used on grounds of limited sources, a notice shall be published stating: the nature of the procurement requirement that limited selection is being used on grounds of a limited number of sources the proposed shortlist of bidders that any bidder wishing to participate may request to be included on the shortlist The proposed shortlist shall be authorised by the approvals authority

The solicitation document shall include the following information: Statement of requirements for the services Instructions on the preparation of technical and financial proposals Instructions in the sealing, labeling and submission of proposals Information on the selection method and evaluation criteria Type of contract to be awarded Terms and conditions of the proposed contract

Quality and cost-based selection (QCBS) Quality-based selection (QBS) Fixed-budget selection (FBS) Least-cost selection (LCS) Selection based on consultant’s qualifications (SBCQ) Selection of individual consultants Single source selection (SSS) Photocopy page 44-50 of the Consulting Services Manual for participants’ further reading

An evaluation committee shall be responsible for the evaluation of both technical and financial proposals Technical proposals shall be evaluated first and any financial proposals kept unopened in a secure location until time for opening of financial proposals

Bidders are eligible Preliminary Examination To determine whether the proposals are complete and responsive to the basic instructions of the solicitation document The examination shall determine whether – the proposal has been submitted in correct format there are any material reservations or deviations the proposal has been correctly signed A separately sealed financial proposal has been submitted, if required The proposal is valid for the required period CVs have been correctly signed, if required Bidders are eligible

Y – Complied N – Not complied Yes – Responsive No – Not responsive Examination Criteria Solicitation document reference Bidders A B C D Eligibility ITC clause… Y N Power of Attorney Bid Form correctly signed Joint venture agreement submitted Separate sealed financial proposal submitted Validity of the proposal Curriculum vitae correctly signed Responsiveness No Yes Key Y – Complied N – Not complied Yes – Responsive No – Not responsive

Comments from the table Bidder ‘A’ did not separate its financial proposal from the technical proposal. Both were combined and placed in the same envelope. The bidder was therefore non- responsive. Bidder ‘C’ was not eligible as it was not on the shortlist of bidders invited to submit a proposal. The bidder was therefore non-responsive. Bidders ‘B’ and ‘D’ complied with all the requirements and were responsive

The evaluation committee shall reject a proposal which has material deviations or reservations and shall not subject it to detailed technical evaluation

Detailed Technical Evaluation The purpose of a detailed technical evaluation is to determine… Quality of technical proposal - Whether the proposal demonstrates the bidder’s clear understanding of the tasks in the Statement of Work Quality of key personnel – Whether the proposal shows that the key staff to be assigned to work on each task have the required professional expertise Quality of work plan – Whether the proposal provides clear, logical and specific plans for ensuring quality and timeliness of services to be provided

Detailed Technical Evaluation Evaluation criteria The standard Request for Proposal (RFP) specifies 5 general criteria used to evaluate technical proposals and the points given to each: Specific experience of the consultants related to the assignment (5 – 10 points) Adequacy of the proposed work plan and methodology in responding to the terms of reference (20 – 50 points) Qualifications and competence of key staff proposed for the assignment (30 – 60 points) Suitability of the transfer of knowledge program (training) (0 – 10 points) Local participation (as reflected by nationals among key staff presented by a foreign firm) (0 – 10 points) Total = 100 points Photocopy pages 67-74 from Consulting Services Manual for participants’ further reading

Detailed Technical Evaluation Scoring of technical proposals Before commencing the evaluation, the evaluation committee shall discuss the criterion to ensure all have a common understanding Each member shall independently conduct the evaluation for each proposal and award scores accordingly The committee shall compile the scores from each member and calculate the average score for each proposal Any evaluator with significant deviations from the average score or inconsistencies in scoring shall be required to justify that score

Detailed Technical Evaluation Scoring of technical proposals Where an evaluator has misunderstood a proposal or criteria or has evaluated a proposal in an inconsistent manner, the evaluator may be permitted to adjust the scores But the evaluator shall not be obliged to make adjustments or permitted to adjust scores without any justification The average score for each proposal shall be its total technical score

Technical Evaluation Table Criteria Max. Scores Bidders A B C 1. Specific experience of consultant relevant to assignment (a) Experience of firm – max. 5 (b) Experience in assignments of similar nature – max. 5 10 8 7 Adequacy of proposed work plan and methodology in responding to the TOR (a) Technical approach and methodology – max. 10 (b) proposed work plan – max. 10 (c) Understanding the TOR – max. 10 30 20 25 26 Qualifications and competence of key staff (a) Architect – max. 20 (b) Quantity Surveyor – max. 10 (c) Civil Engineer – max. 10 (d) Electrical Engineer – max. 10 50 45 40 Local participation 2.5 points for each national among the key staff 5 2.5 Total score 100 78 77 65

Technical Evaluation Table Comments on the table An evaluation committee shall explain the scores given to each proposal For each proposal, the evaluation committee shall indicate technical weaknesses and strengths, any deviations to the special conditions of contract proposed by the bidder and comment on their acceptability

Detailed Technical Evaluation cont... For QCBS, FBS, LCS and Selection of Individual Consultants... The total technical score for each proposal shall be compared with the minimum qualifying mark stated in the RFP The proposal with a score less than the minimum mark shall be eliminated from further evaluation The proposals with scores equal to or higher than the qualifying mark shall be recommended for financial evaluation An evaluation committee shall prepare a technical evaluation report and submit to the approvals authority for authorisation before opening and evaluation of financial proposals

Detailed Technical Evaluation For Quality-based Selection... An evaluation committee shall recommend the proposal with the highest total technical score for financial evaluation An evaluation committee shall prepare a technical evaluation report and submit to the approvals authority for authorisation before opening and evaluation of the financial proposal

Notification of Technical Evaluation Results Upon authorisation, the Procurement Unit (PU) shall notify bidders whose proposals are proceeding to financial evaluation of the date for opening of financial proposals For QBS where only technical proposals were submitted, the PU shall request the bidder with the highest technical score to submit a financial proposal

Evaluation of Financial Proposals Financial evaluation for QCBS An evaluation committee shall determine the evaluated price for each proposal by – correcting any arithmetical errors determining whether the financial proposals are complete and have priced all costs associated with the assignment, including: remuneration for staff (foreign and local) reimbursable expenses, e.g. subsistence, services transportation, equipment, office rent, printing and training Converting all proposals to a single currency

Evaluation of Financial Proposals Financial evaluation for QCBS The lowest priced proposal shall be given a financial score of 100 Other proposals shall be given a financial score which is inversely proportional to the lowest price using the formula - Sf = 100 x Fm/F where Sf is the financial score, Fm the lowest price, and F the price of proposal under consideration

Combined evaluation for QCBS The technical and financial scores of each proposal shall be weighted, using the weights stated in the solicitation document Example: 0.8 for technical and 0.2 for financial proposal The weighted technical and financial scores shall be added together, to give a total score for each proposal The proposal with the highest total score shall be the best evaluated bid and shall be recommended for award of contract, subject to any negotiations required

Evaluation of Financial Proposals Financial evaluation for QBS An evaluation committee shall determine the evaluated price for the proposal with the highest total technical score by – correcting any arithmetical errors determining whether the financial proposal is complete and has priced all costs associated with the assignment, including: remuneration for staff (foreign and local) reimbursable expenses, e.g. subsistence, services transportation, equipment, office rent, printing and training

Evaluation of Financial Proposals Financial evaluation for QBS An evaluation committee shall analyse the financial proposal to determine whether it offers value for money An evaluation committee shall prepare and submit the financial evaluation report to the approvals authority for prior authorisation before proceeding with any negotiations, where required, or award of the contract

Evaluation of Financial Proposals Financial evaluation for FBS An evaluation committee shall determine the evaluated price for each proposal by – correcting any arithmetical errors determining whether the financial proposals are complete and have priced all costs associated with the assignment, including: remuneration for staff (foreign and local) reimbursable expenses, e.g. subsistence, services transportation, equipment, office rent, printing and training Converting all proposals to a single currency

Evaluation of Financial Proposals Financial evaluation for FBS An evaluation committee shall reject any proposal whose evaluated price exceeds the budget stated in the solicitation document Proposals which are within the budget shall be ranked according to their technical score and the one with the highest rank shall be the best evaluated bid An evaluation committee shall prepare and submit the evaluation report to the approvals authority for prior authorisation before proceeding with any negotiations, where required, or award of contract

Evaluation of Financial Proposals Financial evaluation for LCS An evaluation committee shall determine the evaluated price for each proposal by – correcting any arithmetical errors determining whether the financial proposals are complete and have priced all costs associated with the assignment, including: remuneration for staff (foreign and local) reimbursable expenses, e.g. subsistence, services transportation, equipment, office rent, printing and training Converting all proposals to a single currency

Evaluation of Financial Proposals Financial evaluation for LCS An evaluation committee shall rank the proposals according to their evaluated price The proposal with the lowest price shall be the best evaluated bid An evaluation committee shall prepare and submit the evaluation report to the approvals authority for prior authorisation before proceeding with any negotiations, where required, or award of contract

Scope of Negotiations Negotiations shall consider the comments and suggestions made by the evaluation committee and recommendations of the approvals authority Negotiations may relate to – Minor alterations to the terms of reference, methodology and staffing Minor amendments to the special conditions of contract Mobilisation arrangements, work plan and completion schedule Inputs required from the procuring entity

Scope of Negotiations Negotiations shall not be conducted to – Substantially change the details of the proposal, including the responsibilities of the bidder Materially alter the terms and conditions of the contract Reduce the fee rates or reimbursable costs, except where the changes are required to reflect agreed changes to the technical proposal However, where an evaluation was conducted using QBS, SBCQ, SSS, negotiations may relate to the proposal price to obtain value for money

Procedure for Negotiations Negotiations shall be conducted only after approval by the relevant approvals authority Negotiations shall only be held with the bidder recommended for contract award If negotiations fail, prior authorisation of the approvals authority shall be obtained to open negotiations with the next ranked bidder A plan for the negotiations shall be prepared which shall specify issues to be negotiated, objectives to be achieved and set maximum and minimum parameters

Procedure for Negotiations Negotiations shall be conducted by not less than 2 persons from the procuring entity The persons conducting the negotiations shall prepare minutes which shall be signed by both the procuring entity and the bidder

Publication of Best Evaluated Bidder Within 7 days of obtaining authority to award a contract, the procurement unit shall prepare a notice indicating the best evaluated bidder The notice shall be sent to all bidders who submitted bids No award shall be made for a period of 10 working days after the publication of the best evaluated bidder

Summary flowchart: Preparation, Submission and Evaluation of Proposals (QCBS Method) Opening of proposals. Provisions are taken for safe-keeping of the financial proposals Technical and financial proposals received Evaluation committee meets to agree on rating system to adopt for evaluating technical proposals Evaluation committee is appointed Pre-bid conference Letters of invitation are issued

Public opening of financial proposal Approvals authority reviews technical evaluation report and approves the opening of financial proposals Technical evaluation report prepared by evaluation committee and submitted to approvals authority Evaluation committee discusses and consolidates the evaluation Each member of the evaluation committee independently evaluates the technical proposals

Negotiations concluded, publication of best evaluated bidder and contract signed Approvals authority reviews final evaluation report and decides on recommendation for award/negotiations Evaluation committee prepares final evaluation report (combined technical and financial) and submits to the approvals authority Evaluation committee evaluates financial proposals, determines combined scores and recommendation for award

Thank you