160 likes | 171 Vues
Roads 2011 Where are we on Procurement. Monday 21 November 2011, CBI Conference Centre Steven.dennis@tfl.gov.uk. Signed off Strategy. Framework agreement – 4 Lots / Alliances Supplier must be able to provide the full range of services either in house or supply chain
E N D
Roads 2011 Where are we on Procurement Monday 21 November 2011, CBI Conference Centre Steven.dennis@tfl.gov.uk
Signed off Strategy • Framework agreement – 4 Lots / Alliances • Supplier must be able to provide the full range of services either in house or supply chain • Direct call-off by clients within the Lot Area. • Clients only have to take the service they want • NEC3 Contract • We want suppliers to work with us and each other • Value for money!
Four Alliance Areas NE – LoHAC £26m pa NW – LoHAC £35m pa Total estimated value between £747m and £2.64b C – LoHAC £56m pa S – LoHAC £55m pa
Technical Specification • Review of 30 odd existing specifications • First Draft send to Boroughs & TfL • Two workshops held - 23 Authorities attended • 2nd Consultation period ended 4th Nov • Formal responses 14 received • 2 No Comments • 7 very detailed • 5 focused on specific areas
Standard Detail Drawing • 60 Standard Detail Drawing Produced • Five Boroughs volunteered to review them • Comments received back and are being taken on board
Procurement • OJEU: 5/10/2011 • Industry day 24/10/11 – 22 suppliers attended • PQQ submission: 16/11/2011 • PQQ Evaluation process 17/11/2011 – 2/12/2011 • PQQ consensus meeting - 9/12/2011 • Prelim report to TLHM Board Dec • Final recommendation to TLHM Board Mid Jan
Procurement 2 • Announce ITT shortlists end Jan • Issue ITT early Feb • Tender submission: 12 weeks • Award of contracts: November 2012 • Contract commence: April 2013
Framework Approach • TfL is letting the Frameworks on TLHM behalf • TLHM Board have reserved the right to award more than one Lot to a single contractor. • Common governance and performance management. • NEC Price List provision for Target Cost and Cost Reimbursable • Common schedule of rates – Area wide • Base price - uplifts for road type / ToD / restrictions • Individual Authorities Lump Sum prices • Individual Authorities unique item / requirement prices
Common Contract • Reviewed existing contracts • Input from htma, existing suppliers & authorities • Eversheds now appointed to support the project • Draft of Framework produced under review within TfL and by external Lawyers. • Draft Call off Contract circulated to three volunteer Boroughs for review • Allow use of client buying power via E Auctions
Performance Regime • Working very closely with the LoHAC Culture Change Working Party • Contractual and Non Contractual KPIs • Contractual measure contract compliance • Non Contractual measure client and supplier joint working and contribution towards client goals • Contractual KPIs linked to Framework term length • Eight year Framework Term • Supplier doesn't achieve them - term reduced • Supplier does perform - lost time is awarded back
Stakeholder Liaison • All Boroughs asked to give: • Any expression of interest • If interest for what services and from when • Under what basis they wish to procure Lump Sum - SoR • Regular meeting with Boroughs most likely to use the new contracts from 2013/14 – Tier 1. • Regular forum established with Tier 1 Boroughs. - Open to others • Potential users provided with list of asset and contract information required for inclusion in ITT.
National Comparison • Highways Maintenance Efficiencies Programme Survey - Over 80 authorities (approximately 55%). • The most common form of maintenance contract was the NEC, with over two thirds of authorities using it in some form. • A standard form of contract based on the NEC would be welcomed by Local Highway Authorities. • 95% of respondents supported the development of a standard specification. • 31% of respondents were already in some form of alliance, and 26% were looking into joining or forming such an arrangement.
Benefits Realisation • Standard Contract Documents - Staff time savings associated with maintaining bespoke documentation, average £80K* per authority • up to £3m based on those likely to go to the market nationally in the near future. • overall savings of £12m to be realised if all Local Highway Authorities move to one standard form. • Collaborative Alliances for medium sized authorities a figure £1.1m** pa per authority was identified. http://www.dft.gov.uk/topics/local-authorities/hmep/docs/111027-wsg1-survey-update.pdf *TLHM Business case 72k ** TLHM Business case 10-15% savings
Summary • On Track • Still a lot to do • Not to late to join • Borough input is vital and appreciated • Market response has been very positive • Large scale collaborate works • Highway Alliances Work