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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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]
Web site:
¹Provide enough information to allow potential consultants decide whether or not to prepare an expression of interest.

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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 of the Consulting Services Manual for participants’ further reading

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

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

16. 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

17. 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 from Consulting Services Manual for participants’ further reading

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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

28. 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

29. 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

30. 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

31. 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

32. 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

33. 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

34. 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

35. 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

36. 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

37. 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

38. 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

39. 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

40. 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

41. 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

42. Thank you