CHAIRMANS OPENING ADDRESS GRAHAME STEED Managing Editor, Government Opportunities
Find out more by visiting www.govopps.co.uk today The public procurement landscape is changing like never before . Government Opportunities (GO) , the leading media brand for the procurement sector, has changed too. The all-new GO portal brings you the latest intelligence, insight, opinion and debate shaping this multibillion-pound sector. Whether you are buying for or supplying to the UK public sector, the GO portal is the only reference point you need to navigate the brave new world of public procurement, finance and service delivery.
Romulus, founder of Rome – a pioneer in public procurement
Marcus Tullius Cicero Champion of transparency in public procurement
“ The Senate, yielding to the prayers and lamentations of the tax-farmers, annulled these arrangements and ordered fresh terms to be made. The censors gave public notice that those who had treated the former contracts with such contempt should not be allowed to make fresh bids. They signed fresh contracts for everything on slightly easier terms” Livy
“ One Stop Shop” for Suppliers and Contracting Authorities Consistent display of contract opportunities across Scotland
Public Contracts Scotland : Contracting Authorities TARGET 185 Authorities in 2 years 300+ Registered Authorities using PCS 17,000 business opportunities on site over last 2 years
Public Contracts Scotland : Suppliers Over 2 million alerts sent to suppliers each year 51,000 Registered Suppliers 39,000 unique notes of interest in contracts 84% of Suppliers are SME’s 73% of contracts Awarded to SME’s
Subcontracting facility to be expanded for capital
projects; commencing with Forth Replacement Crossing;
Currently contracting for standardised
prequalification module for PCS;
Enhancements to site reporting, transparency of
contracts, enhanced quickquote and framework
Increased number of contracting organisations
using the system.
Why do we require a standardised approach to PQQs ?
(Inconsistency) :The prequalification criteria for contracts, although defined within E.U. Procurement Directives, are currently applied in an inconsistent manner across contracting organisations which can lead to a sense of frustration from suppliers.
(Duplication) : Suppliers repeatedly provide similar PQQ information relating to business probity, financial standing, standard company information and technical/professional ability in different formats to contracting authorities. The current process is, therefore, administratively inefficient for both buyers and suppliers.
Why do we require a standardised approach to PQQs ?
(Disproportionate) : known issues requiring SMEs to provide unreasonable levels of insurance and assessment of financial records for low value / risk procurement exercises, while the technical and professional ability criterion often neglects the capability of SMEs to demonstrate innovative solutions.
(Simplification) : Current processes are overly complex and require to be simplified for the benefit of both buyers and suppliers.
sPQQ - Envisaged Electronic Process Questions should be proportionate and relevant to the procurement exercise. Step1 Buyer completes risk matrix Step2 System suggests standard questions to buyer Step 3 Buyer has option to add or delete standard questions Step 4 Buyer has option to add bespoke (non-standard) questions Step 5 Buyer must score and weight questions PQQ issued to suppliers that have noted interest In the contract Bidders complete responses to standard and non-standard questions Bidders have option of saving responses to standard questions for future use Buyer process Supplier process Completed PQQ returned to contracting authority
Question Document Includes the Following Key Sections Question Guidance Section 1 : Explanation of requirements for contract (Mandatory Section) Section 2 : Company Details (Mandatory Section) Section 3 : Criminal Convictions and Business Probity (Mandatory Section) Section 4 : Information regarding Economic / Financial Standing (Optional Section) Section 5 : Technical or Professional Capability (Optional Section) Section 6 : Quality Management (Optional Section) Section 7 : Equal Opportunities (Optional Section) Section 8 : Environmental Management (Optional Section) Section 9 : Health and Safety (Optional Section) Section 10 : Subcontractors (Mandatory Section) Section 11 : Community Benefits (Optional Section) Section 12 : Construction Specific (Optional Section)
Example Question and Scoring Q – Provide 2 relevant examples that demonstrate your experience and ability to deliver goods, services or works similar to the required outcomes for this contract – see section one. 15% 3 Suppliers must be able to understand what constitutes a good score. Clarification. Additionally, provide the details of previous car park construction works, confirming that the requirements were completed successfully, contract value and completion dates. Relevant experience where supplier can clearly meet all requirements and can add value Good experience, suggesting supplier can meet all key requirements Experience suggests suppliers can meet most key requirements, but with some minor issues Mixed experience suggest supplier can meet some requirements but with some major gaps or issues Poor and less relevant example supplier meets few requirements; serious concerns or issues No relevant experience provided, or irrelevant to the requirement, or very negative Weighting 5 4 3 2 1 0 20%
How Do Buyers Find Suppliers – Low Value/Risk Procurement Activity
Glasgow City Council Maximising the Business Opportunity: A Prosperous Glasgow Commonwealth Games Business Portal: - Register for games-related contracts - Supported by the ‘Buyer Engagement Team’
Glasgow City Council 2014 Games Related Contracts Catering; Transport; Printing Equipment; Technology; Advertising; Human Resources; Design Services; Security; Venue Fit-out; Seating; Clothing; Marketing Materials
Glasgow City Council Maximising the Business Opportunity: A Prosperous Glasgow
“ a Contracting Authority shall not treat the tender of a consortium as ineligible nor decide not to include a consortium amongst those economic operators from which it will make the selection of economic operators to be invited to tender…on the grounds that the consortium has not formed a legal entity for the purposes of tendering”
“ where a contracting authority awards a public contract to a consortium it may, if it is justified for the satisfactory performance of the contract, require the consortium to form a legal entity before entering into, or as a term of, the contract”
“ an economic operator or a group of economic operators as referred to in regulation 28 may rely on the capacities of other entities or members in the group, regardless of the legal nature of the link between the economic operator or group of economic operators and the other entities”
“ the economic operator or the group of economic operators shall prove to the contracting authority that the resources necessary to perform the contract will be available and the contracting authority may, in particular, require the economic operator to provide an undertaking from the other entities to that effect”
Reasons for the decision (including the characteristics and relative advantages of the successful tender)
Scores of recipient and winner
Name of winner
Precise statement of end of standstill/date before which contract will not be entered into
NOTE, if the notice is sent to a candidate , rather than a tenderer, the candidate is to be told why he was unsuccessful, but not the relative advantages of the winning tenderer
Remedy of Ineffectiveness Illegal Direct Award Cancellation (unless Court exercises discretion) Technical Breach * Is there antecedent Breach? Alternative Remedies Yes No * i.e. No standstill or contract entry before expiry of standstill or contract entry before court order