ENPROTEX 10th December 2015 Smart@Fire Christophe Veys Project Director Smart@Fire & Procurement legal advisor Innovation Agency of Flanders (IWT)

1 innovation management company Partners 1 Confederation 1 Notified body 2 Innovation Agencies 5 Procurers 1 University 1 innovation management company

Objectives Develop innovative Personal Protective Systems to reduce risks inherent to firefighting. Create a commonly agreed approach for pre-commercial procurement (PCP) that can be deployed and duplicated in the EU. Project duration: 01/2013 till 12/2016

PPI-PCP- Innovation friendly Public procurement Innovation Innovation- friendly PPI Pre-commercial procurement

Definitions Innovation-friendly procurement encourage procurers to leave room for innovation in their purchasing proces (mindset and procedural aspects) Public Procurement of Innovation (PPI): purchase of innovative solutions available (or partly available) on the market (new for the procurer) Pre-commercial procurement is a phased approach of purchasing R&D services by procurers for the development of innovative products, services or processes (not yet available on the market) by enterprises/ research centres with as goal: To solve socio-economic challenges To improve the performance, functionality of public services

Risks vs distance to market PCP Risks R&D PPI Innovation- friendly Distance of the solutions (to be developed) to the market

PCP Smart@fire Phase 1: Needs assesment of firefighters & state-of-the-art Febrary 2013 till June 2013 Phase 2: Market consultations Phase 3: Pre-commercial procurement Phase 4: Commercial purchasing Development of prototypes Purchase of a final product September –December 2013 July 2014 – December 2015 Januray 2016 7

Phase 1: Needs assesment of firefighters & state-of-the-art Needs assessment Phase 1: Needs assesment of firefighters & state-of-the-art How can I increase my safety and reduce risks undertaking fire fighting and other civil protection work?

Phase 2: Market consultations > 450 participants (enterprises/universities/procurers) attended the different market consultation sessions Feasability check & Risks assessment Summary of the findings both innovation expectations vs technological feasability. Prioritization! Preparation of the tender documents and submitted in February 2014 for approval to the EC Phase 2: Market consultations September – November 2013 9

Prototype priorities Prototype Scope: value vs. risk DO DERISK H Priorities on prototype roadmap Innovative for end-user = + Significant technological risk Added Value Innovation potential from end-user perspective L Off-the-shelf Avoid if possible L H Risk Innovation potential from technological perspective

Market consultations Belgium (Brussels, 10 & 11/9/2013) Localisation systems Integration of ICT solutions in PPE France (Marseille, 17 & 18/9/2013 Data transfer & visualisation systems Germany (Dortmund, 1 & 2/10/2013) Sensors Wrap-up session (10/10/2013)

Overall participants per country Total number of participants: 470/170 different/18 countries

Phase 2: Market consultations PCP in 4 phases Phase 2: Market consultations September – October 2013 13

Pre-commercial procurement phase Stage 1 Solution Exploration Stage 2 Prototyping & Demo Stage 3 Testing first batch of complete products Phase 3: Pre-commercial procurement

Scope of the Pre-commercial tender:

6

State of play Solution Exploration Tender launched in OJEU 11 June 2014 (2014/S 110-194508) + Information day 1st of July (65) : Challenge brief Invitation to Tender Framework agreement Bids submitted in October, Award on the 26 of November 4 consortia were selected Stage 1 Solution Exploration

Submit deliverables Solution Design & End of Phase 1: Stage 1 Solution Exploration Submit deliverables Solution Design & End of Phase 1: On April 30 2015, after 4 months of preparing their solution design, all 4 consortia submitted the following 4 deliverables: End of Phase Report Detailed solution Design Request for clarification List Background IPR In order to evaluate the quality of all submitted deliverables, a jury was appointed 2 representatives of the end-users (SDIS13 – IBZ) 1 IWT advisor 2 independant external experts 1. End of Phase report: Within this document, an overview has been given about the undertaken activities during the 4 months of Phase 1. Detailed, but to the point, answers on the questions mentioned in the end of phase report template were given. 2. Detailed solution Design: The solution design consisted out of a detailed description of the chosen PPS architecture from which prototyping would start. Therefore it was recommended that the Phase I deliveries include technical detail of selected hardware and software, to a detail which allows evaluation on main targets (e.g. precision of location determination, signal integrity in view of penetration depth in buildings, expected battery autonomy, operational costs, functional temperature range, time based external temperature load in view of temperature shielded components). Important, within the solution design, a clear description had to be given of different test procedures which will be used to demonstrate that the prototype at the end of phase 2 will meet the minimal functional requirements mentioned in the challenge document and the other promised PPS capabilities mentioned in your solution design. 3. Request for clarification: A written document has been provided giving clear and detailed answers to the different questions mentioned in the request for clarification. 4. List Background IPR: a complete and accurate list of all Background Intellectual Property the Contractor (or any of its subcontractors) holds and that pertains or may pertain to the Project or any part thereof as well as a complete and accurate list of all software required for the project, thereby specifying which software is closed source software.

The Jury Criteria evaluated the satisfactory completion Solution Exploration The Jury Criteria evaluated the satisfactory completion The jury evaluated the deliverables in order to see if the execution of phase 1 was in line with the work submitted in the bids. Results: All four participating consortia completed their first phase in a satisfactory way. As a result, all four participating consortia received their requested payments for phase 1 1/ Applycon 2/ Texport: 3/ E-Bo enterprises: 4/ Prevent & Deloza Detailed assessment of the solution design and the request for clarification were evaluated by scoring these deliverables on 4 evaluation criteria. For Successful completion of phase 1 and to obtain the access to phase 2, the following minimum scoring requirements had to be attained. The end of phase report should be evaluated as satisfactory The average score over all 4 criteria, taking the different weightings into account, should be min. 50%. The contractors should score min.  60% on criteria I and criteria IV.

Invitation To Tender phase 2 (ITT2): Prototyping & Demonstration Based on the original Invitation to Tender (ITT 1), a new Invitation to Tender (ITT2), with specific requirements for Phase 2, was produced by IWT in cooperation with Addestino and appointed partners. A lot of efforts went to the development of a more accurate description of the Evaluation Process at the end of phase 2 and a list of expectations regarding the results to be achieved at the End of Phase 2. On May 18, 2015 all 4 consortia were invited to submit a bid for phase 2. All eligible bids had to be submitted before June 11, 2015. After evaluation 3 Tenderers with the highest ranking were selected

www.smartatfire.eu Christophe Veys Project Director Smart@Fire & Procurement legal advisor