Introductions:

Tricia Herley – Assistant Procurement ManagerEddie Milne – Property Resources ManagerMoray MacLeod – Design Manager

Workshop will last approx 30 mins.

1

2

This is what we will cover during this presentation

3

4

The Moderator makes sure that objectivity is maintained throughout the evaluation process to provide fairness, transparency, a consistent approach. The Moderator does not evaluate.

Weightings tell you what is important to us – you need to interpret them.

By identifying what is important to us (the higher weighted section / questions) you will be able to focus your answers to these areas with more detail.

5

6

All sections total 100

All questions total 100

Which of these areas look important? – you wouldn’t just provide one line answers to these questions, give a full explanation as to what you do and how you do it.

7

When we create a project (Tender) on PCS-T we create 3 Envelopes_

Qualification – Company information, - Financials, Business Probity, Company policies and Insurance Cover

Technical – Quality questions

Commercial - Price

Envelope opening is sequential – we cannot open the envelopes out of order –The Moderator is the only one able to “open” an envelope and give the Evaluators access to it.

8

All of our tenders will be run via PCS-T. There is a messaging facility - you ask Q’s through it …….we answer through it!

Alerts sent to your email address will include the words bravo-solution and may go into your spam box. Additionally, you need to keep you contact details up to date on PCS-Tender.

9

Extract from current Procurement ProceduresAll works up to £50k are tendered to the Maintenance Framework ContractorsWorks over £50k are subject to full tender advertisement on PCS Tender

10

The next 6 slides are designed to illustrate the impact of different Q/P evaluation models on contract award outcomes The questions and notional Contractor scores are exactly the same for ‘High Risk’ and ‘Price Focus’ contract examples, with only the Q/P % split amended High risk projects are generally lower cost, but significant consequences (injury, building closure, prosecution) from contract failure Examples of high risk contracts are fire equipment servicing, fixed electrical wiring testing, Legionella servicing, Asbestos management consultancy The matrix split used in the example is 70% quality/30% price This slide indicates the top quality submission by Tenderer 2 and a very poor submission from Tenderer 3 Tenderer 2 gets max score of 0.7 (70%) and other scores are calculated pro-rata to the base score of 230

11

Tenderer 3 submitted the lowest price and gets the max price score of 0.3 (30%) Other scores are calculated pro-rata to this using the £100k as a base

12

Tenderer 2 is the preferred bidder for contract award as the most economically advantageous, although they submitted the highest price Lesson learned is to focus more on quality submission where greater weighting noted, as lowest price may not be the most economically advantageous

13

Price focus contracts tend to be larger value like a major new build or extension to a school Quality price matrix used in this example is 30% quality/70% price As before Tenderer 2 has the highest score and gets max marks of 0.3 (30%)All other scores are calculated pro-rata to the base score of 230

14

Tenderer 3 has the lowest price and gets max score of 0.7 (70%)All other scores are calculated pro-rata to the lowest price of £100k

15

This outcome shows the preferred bidder as Tenderer 3, who submitted the lowest price The evaluation matrix of 30% Q/70% P produced a completely different outcome than the previous example for a high risk project, although the prices and quality scores were exactly the same for both examples

16

These are the scoring standards we use for tenders run through PCS Tender.

17

18

19

Poor rate of tender return experienced by Property on advertised projects over the past year – why? Scottish Govt review published in 2013 following actions raised by the industry, resulting in various recommendations to achieve better procurement in public sector construction. The report is over 180 pages and can be downloaded from the Scottish Govt websiteWorking group set up in Moray to consider the recommendations, with a view to reviewing procurement processes for Construction Lessons learned workshop pending to consider issues recently experienced in construction procurement and possible improvements in the Q/P evaluation processMaintenance Frameworks for works up to £50k to be retendered during 2014 and tender publication anticipated before September

20

21

Feedback from suppliers is very positive – particularly from the construction sector. It’s a far quicker process that isn’t impacted by EU Regulation timescales - but is governed by Moray Council Financial Regulations and Procurement Procedures.

22

Complete your profile so that we can find you through the Supplier Finder function

We also search via “Details” and or “Category”

Please be reminded to keep your contact details as upto date as possible –especially the email contact!

23

24