1 / 39

Evaluation and Qualification Requirements

Evaluation and Qualification Requirements . Evaluation & Qualification Requirements.

lindsey
Télécharger la présentation

Evaluation and Qualification Requirements

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluation and QualificationRequirements

  2. Evaluation & Qualification Requirements The success of procurement is measured by obtaining the goods, works, and physical services in a timely manner, at the required quality, and at the best (lowest) possible price the market can offer. To meet this objective,   the procurement process conducted by the procuring entity should ensure that the contract is awarded to a bidder who:(i) is capable to perform the contract on time ; (ii) will provide the goods, works and services at the required quality (determination of the responsiveness of the bid) ; and (iii) at the best price conditions.  

  3. QUALIFICATION PROCEDURES • PRE-QUALIFICATION • FIRST STEP IN PROCUREMENT PROCESS • APPLICABLE TO LARGE AND COMPLEX CONTRACTS IN: • CIVIL WORKS (e.g. dams, hydropower stations, power transmission lines, pipelines, roads, railways, ports, airports, water treatment plants, etc.) • INFORMATION SYSTEMS (hardware + software) • PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION (e.g. management contracts, BOT-BOO-BOOT, concession) • ALL PRE-QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS ARE INVITED TO BID

  4. QUALIFICATION PROCEDURES (cont’d) • CLASSIFICATION • PRECONDITION FOR PARTICIPATION IN BIDDING • APPLICABLE TO NATIONAL CONTRACTORS CLASSIFIED BY CATEGORIES OF WORKS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONTRACT TYPE AND SIZE AND CONTRACTOR QUALIFICATION • ONLY CONTRACTORS BELONGING TO CATEGORY/IES SPECIFIED IN INVITATION TO BID ARE ELIGIBLE TO PARTICIPATE

  5. QUALIFICATION PROCEDURES (cont’d) • POST-QUALIFICATION • LAST STEP IN BID EVALUATION PROCESS • APPLICABLE TO ALL GOODS AND WORKS CONTRACTS • AWARD OF CONTRACT TO QUALIFIED BIDDER WITH LOWEST EVALUATED RESPONSIVE BID

  6. QUALIFICATION PASS-FAIL CRITERIA (cont.d) • 1. GENERAL EXPERIENCE • AVERAGE ANNUAL TURNOVER: “MINIMUM 2 (1,5) OF AVERAGE ESTIMATED COST/YEAR IN LAST - (two to five) - YEARS”

  7. QUALIFICATION PASS-FAIL CRITERIA • 2. SPECIALISED EXPERIENCE • SCOPE OF WORKS: SIMILAR TYPE & SIZE OF CONTRACTS SIMILAR CONDITIONS (e.g. climate) “MINIMUM NUMBER - (one to three) - OF CONTRACTS DURING LAST - (five to ten) -YEARS

  8. QUALIFICATION PASS-FAIL CRITERIA (cont.d) • 3. PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS • MANAGERIAL AND TECHNICAL KEY POSITIONS: • MINIMUM NUMBER OF SIMILAR PROJECTS SUCCESSFULLY MANAGED BY THE INCUMBENT • MINIMUM NUMBER OF YEARS OF EXPERIENCE (TOTAL AND IN POSITION)

  9. QUALIFICATION PASS-FAIL CRITERIA (cont.d) • 4. FINANCIAL CAPABILITIES • PAST PERFORMANCES • LIABILITIES/ASSETS • CASH FLOW REQUIREMENT “MINIMUM AMOUNT AVAILABLE FOR THE PERIOD IN MONTHS BEFORE PAYMENT IS RECEIVED BY CONTRACTOR e.g: CW/PS: $240 M. /48 MTHS = $5m*4 MTHS: $20M. IS: $12M./24 MTHS = $0.5m* 4 MTHS: $2M.

  10. QUALIFICATION PASS-FAIL CRITERIA (cont.d) • 5. EQUIPMENT CAPABILITIES • MINIMUM KEY EQUIPMENT LISTED

  11. QUALIFICATION PASS-FAIL CRITERIA (cont.d) 6. CONTRACT COMMITMENTS • CURRENT CONTRACTS COMMITMENTS & WORKS IN PROGRESS 7. LEGAL STATUS 8. LITIGATION 9. REFERENCES

  12. PRE-QUALIFICATIONFOR ICB • PRACTICE • LARGE OR COMPLEX CIVIL WORKS • CUSTOM DESIGNED EQUIPMENT • INFORMATION SYSTEMS • INDUSTRIAL PLANT • PRIVATE SECTOR OPERATIONS • SPECIALIZED SERVICES

  13. PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR ICB (cont’d) • OBJECTIVE • SAVES EXPENSE OF BIDDING FOR UNQUALIFIED BIDDERS • IMPROVES INTEREST OF LEADING CONTRACTORS • INDICATES INTEREST OF POTENTIAL CONTRACTORS • ESTABLISHES ELIGIBILITY FOR DOMESTIC PREFERENCE (IF ANY) • REDUCES POTENTIAL FOR CONTROVERSY

  14. PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR ICB (cont’d) • INFORMATION PROVIDED • DESCRIPTION OF WORKS, SIZE OR COST • SCOPE OF CONTRACT • SOURCE OF FINANCE, TERMS OF PAYMENT • IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE • ELIGIBILITY, LANGUAGE, PROCEDURES • PRE-QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

  15. PRE-QUALIFICATIONFOR ICB (cont’d) • INFORMATION REQUESTED • MINIMUM NECESSARY • AVOID CERTIFICATES • USE STANDARD QUESTIONNAIRE • NUMBER PRE-QUALIFIED • ALL FIRMS WHO MEET CRITERIA (NO MAXIMUM)

  16. Bid Evaluation • OBJECTIVE • SECURE GOODS/SERVICES ATMOST ECONOMICAL COST • PRICE ONLY ONE FACTOR • OTHER FACTORS • TIME OF DELIVERY/COMPLETION • TERMS OF PAYMENT • OPERATING COST • EFFICIENCY AND COMPATIBILITY OF THE EQUIPMENT • AVAILABILITY OF SERVICES AND SPARE PARTS • RELATED TRAININIG • ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS • OTHER FACTORS OTHER THAN PRICE TO BE USED FOR DETERMINING THE LEB SHALL BE TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE EXPRESSED IN MONETARY TERMS, I.E RESALE VALUE.

  17. Evaluation Methodology Commercial Features (cont’d) • TIME OF DELIVERY • EVALUATE LOSS OR GAIN BY LATE OR EARLY DELIVERY • PAYMENT TERMS • EVALUATE VARIATIONS AT SPECIFIED INTEREST/DISCOUNT RATE

  18. Evaluation MethodologyTechnical Features • OPERATING COST • FUEL • TRAINING • MAINTENANCE COST • STANDARDISATION • RESALE VALUE /DEPRECIATED COST • LIFE CYCLE COST • OWNERSHIP COST • CAPACITY • PRODUCTIVITY

  19. Evaluation MethodologyMinimum Technical Specifications • PASS/FAIL CRITERIA • MINIMUM REQUIREMENT • BELOW MINIMUM: REJECTED • NO CREDIT FOR BETTER SPEC • RESPONSIVE = LEB • MAXIMUM REQUIREMENT • RANGE PARAMETERS (MAX <>min)

  20. Life CycleCost Methods • COST TO OWN AND OPERATE ITEMDURING ITS USEFUL LIFE • INITIAL PURCHASE PRICE • ADJUSTED FOR EXTRAS, DELIVERY, VARIATIONS IN PAYMENT TERM, ETC. • VALUE FOR ADJUSTMENTS ADDED TO BID PRICE • OPERATING COST DURING LIFE OF ITEM • FUEL, SPARE PARTS, MAINTENANCE (X YEARS) • ANNUAL COST DISCOUNTED TO NPV • OWNERSHIP COST DURING LIFE OF ITEM • ECONOMICAL USEFUL LIFE (X YEARS) • RESALE OR SCRAP VALUE DISCOUNTED TO NPV

  21. Life CycleCost Methods (cont’d) • EFFICIENCY COST METHOD • CAPITALIZE DIFFERENCES INEFFICIENCY IN OPERATION OF ITEMSi.e. BOILER, TURBINE, TRANSFORMER, ETC. DURING LIFE • PRODUCTIVITY COST METHOD • DETERMINE LIFE CYCLE COST PER UNIT OF OUTPUT FOR COMPARISON PURPOSES • LIFE CYCLE COST OF PLANT (x YEARS)NPV DIVIDED BY TOTAL UNITOUTPUT OF PLANT

  22. On“Life Cycle Cost” Basis ALL FIGURES IN USD A B TOTAL EVALUATED INITIAL COST 46,400 44,350 (without preference) FUEL COST FOR 8 YEARS 1 45,000 46,000 MAINTENANCE COST FOR 8 YEARS 34,000 28,000 MINUS DEPRECIATED COST/ RESALE VALUE -2,000 -5,000 LIFE CYCLE COST 130,400 113,350 RANKING2 1 1 DISCOUNTED TO PRESENT VALUE

  23. Bid Evaluation UsingLife Cycle Costing for Procurementof 100 Urban Buses • RELEVANT PART OF THE BID EVALUATION CLAUSES IN THE BIDDING DOCUMENTS • THE EVALUATION AND COMPARISON OF BIDS SHALL BE BASED ON THE LIFE CYCLE COST FOR THE VEHICLES DURING THE FIRST 6 YEARS, WORKED OUT IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER • INITIAL PRICE • CIF PRICE QUOTED FOR BUSESOFFERED FROM ABROAD • EX-FACTORY/EX-SHOWROOM PRICE FORVEHICLES OFFERED FROM WITHIN THE COUNTRY

  24. Bid Evaluation UsingLife Cycle Costing for Procurementof 100 Urban Buses (cont’d) • OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS • FUEL COSTS SHALL BE COMPUTED ONTHE BASIS OF 100,000 KM OFOPERATION PER YEAR ATA FUEL PRICE OF0.80 USD PER LITER,DISCOUNTED TO NET PRESENT VALUE AT A DISCOUNT RATE OF 10%

  25. Bid Evaluation UsingLife Cycle Costing for Procurementof 100 Urban Buses (cont’d) • OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS • SPARE PARTS COST SHALL BE BASED ON 100,000 KM PER YEAR OF OPERATION,BASED ON THE GUARANTEED FIGURES PROVIDED BY THE BIDDER FOR EACH YEAR, DISCOUNTED TO NET PRESENT VALUESAT A DISCOUNT RATE OF 10 PERCENT • IF GUARANTEED FIGURES ARE NOT PROVIDED, PURCHASER MAY USEESTIMATED FIGURES BASED ONPAST EXPERIENCE, IF AVAILABLE

  26. Bid Evaluation UsingLife Cycle Costing for Procurementof 100 Urban Buses (cont’d) • DEPRECIATED COST • PURCHASER SHALL ESTIMATETHE DEPRECIATED COST OF THE VEHICLEOFFERED BASED ON THEGUARANTEED LIFE PRIOR TO THE FIRST MAJOR OVERHAUL, ORBASED ON PAST EXPERIENCE, BUTIN NO CASE MORE THAN 8 YEARS. • BIDDERS SHALL FURNISH ALL THE DATA REQUIRED FOR THE ABOVE COMPUTATIONS AS FURTHER OUTLINED UNDER CLAUSE OF THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

  27. Bid Evaluation UsingLife Cycle Costing for Procurementof 100 Urban Buses (cont’d) ALL FIGURES IN 000’ USD AC 1. INITIAL COST BID PRICE EX-FACTORY/CIF 65,000 70,000 EVALUATION ADJUSTMENT FOR DELIVERY SCHEDULE 6,000 --- EVALUATION ADJUSTMENT FOR VARIATION IN PAYMENT TERMS --- 1,000 TOTAL 71,000 71,000 2. OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS FUEL - GUARANTEED COST (AVERAGE) FOR EACH YEAR (8,000) (6,000) NPV FOR 6 YEARS 34,840 26,130 SPARES - GUARANTEED COST (AVERAGE) FOR EACH YEAR (5,000) (4,000) NPV FOR 6 YEARS 21,775 17,420 TOTAL 56,615 43,550 3. DEPRECIATED VALUE (DEDUCT) LIFE (6 YRS) (8 YRS) DEPRECIATED VALUE 0 12,500 4. TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST 127,615 102,050 RANKING 2 1

  28. Bid Evaluation Using Life Cycle Costing forOil Palm Plant • RELEVANT PART OF THE BID EVALUATION CLAUSES IN THE BIDDING DOCUMENTS • THE EVALUATION AND COMPARISON OF RESPONSIVE BIDS SHALL BE BASED ON THE TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST FOR SIX YEARS, PER UNIT OF OUTPUT • THE LIFE CYCLE COST SHALL BE THE SUM OF THE INITIAL PURCHASE PRICE OF THE PLANT AND THE COST OF OPERATION IN ELECTRIC ENERGY FOR SIX YEARS OF OPERATION AT A UNIT COST OF US$ 0.10 PER KWH,DISCOUNTED TO PRESENT VALUE AT 12%

  29. Bid Evaluation Using Life Cycle Costing forOil Palm Plant (cont’d) BID EVALUATION AND COMPARISON ALL FIGURES IN 000’ USD A C 1. INITIAL COST 9,500 10,300 2. OPERATING COST PER YEAR (1,200) (1,000) OPERATING COST FOR 6 YEARS NPV AT 12% 4,933 4,111 3. TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST 14,433 14,411 4. OUTPUT PER YEAR (TONS) 3,600 4,000 5. EVALUATED COST PER TON OF OUTPUT 4.01 3.60 6. RANKING 2 1 * A:12 MILLION KWH @.10 PER KWH * B:10 MILLION KWH @.10 PER KWH

  30. Evaluation MethodologyMerit Point System (NOT recommended by the World Bank ) • ALLOCATE WEIGHTS TODIFFERENT TECHNICAL FEATURES • ESTABLISH RELATIONSHIPBETWEEN QUALITY AND PRICE • SELECT BID WITH • HIGHEST NO. OF POINTS or • LOWEST PRICE PER POINT • ADVANTAGE: SIMPLE • DISADVANTAGE: SUBJECTIVE ASSIGNMENT OF POINTS

  31. Evaluation MethodologyMerit Point System (cont’d) (NOT recommended by the World Bank ) • POINT WEIGHTAGES TYPICAL • EQUIPMENT PRICE 65-70 • SPARE PARTS 8 - 10 • TECHNICAL FEATURES 8 - 10 • AFTER SALES SERVICE 4 - 5 • STANDARDIZATION 4 - 5 TOTAL 100 • BIDDING DOCUMENTS • SPECIFIES POINT WEIGHTAGE

  32. Evaluation MethodologyMultiple Lots • LOTS INCLUDE ALL ITEMS • INCOMPLETE LOTS • > 10% REJECTED • < 10% PRICE TO BE ADJUSTED • EVALUATION OF EACH LOT (1, 2, …) FROM EACH BIDDER (A, B, C, …) • COST OF ALL COMBINATIONS OF LOTS • A(1) + B(2) + C(3) • A(1+2) + B(3) • A(1+2+3) • LOWEST EVALUATED COST COMBINATION

More Related