[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
EVALUATION PLAN
(Complex procurement)
for
[…INSERT PROCUREMENT NAME AND NUMBER…]
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
1
OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
2
Organisational Chart (Optional) ............................................................................................... 2
Approvals and Delegations (Core) ........................................................................................... 2
Evaluation Team (ET) (Core) ................................................................................................... 2
Evaluation Board (EB) (Core) .................................................................................................. 2
Tender Evaluation Working Group (TEWG) (Optional) ........................................................... 3
Access and Review of Deliverables (Core).............................................................................. 3
Steering Committee (Optional) ................................................................................................ 4
ETHICS, PROBITY AND FAIR DEALING........................................................................................5
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
5
Evaluation Criteria (Core)......................................................................................................... 2
APPROVALS, DELEGATIONS AND EVALUATION TEAM ...........................................................2
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
4
Introduction (Core) .................................................................................................................. 1
Aim (Core) ................................................................................................................................ 1
Background (Core) ................................................................................................................... 1
Indicative Schedule of Activities (Core) ................................................................................... 1
EVALUATION CRITERIA .................................................................................................................2
2.1
3
Evaluation Plan
Evaluation Requirements (Core) .............................................................................................. 5
Accountability, Probity, Ethics and Fair Dealing (Core) ........................................................... 5
Conflicts of Interest (Core) ....................................................................................................... 5
Confidentiality and Security of Documentation (Core) ............................................................. 5
Communication with Third Parties (Core) ................................................................................ 5
Clarification of Tenderer’s Responses (Core) .......................................................................... 6
Site Visits (Optional) ................................................................................................................. 6
TENDER EVALUATION PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY ..........................................................7
5.1
Registration of Tenders (Core) ................................................................................................ 7
5.2
Late Tenders (Core) ................................................................................................................. 7
5.3
Initial Distribution (Core)........................................................................................................... 7
5.4
Initial Screening (Core) ............................................................................................................ 7
5.5
Shortlisting (Optional)............................................................................................................... 7
5.6
Discretion of EB to Set Aside a Tender (Core) ........................................................................ 8
5.7
Detailed Evaluation, Methodology, and Production of the ER (Core) ...................................... 8
5.8
Offer Definition Activity (ODA) (Only to be used if Offer Definition was included in the
Request Documentation) ................................................................................................................... 10
5.9
Notification and Debriefing of Tenderers (Core) .................................................................... 10
ANNEXES
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
Indicative Schedule of Activities (Core)
TEWG Responsibility for Evaluation Criteria (Optional)
Deliverables (Core)
Evaluation Guide and Definitions (Core)
Screening and Shortlisting Template (Optional)
Probity register(Core)
Conflict of Interest Declaration (Core)
Deed of Confidentiality (Core)
Communications Register (Core)
i
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
References:
A.
[…INSERT EITHER “Acquisition Strategy” OR “Procurement Plan”];
B.
[…INSERT ADDITIONAL REFERENCES AS APPLICABLE…]
1
OVERVIEW
1.1
Introduction (Core)
1.1.1
This Evaluation Plan (EP) details the arrangements and framework for evaluating tenders for
the supply of […INSERT DESCRIPTION…] to the requirements of […INSERT REQUEST
DOCUMENTATION TITLE AND NUMBER…] to be issued on […INSERT PROPOSED
RELEASE DATE…].
1.2
Aim (Core)
1.2.1
[…INSERT OVERALL OBJECTIVE OF THE EVALUATION PROCESS…]
1.3
Background (Core)
1.3.1
[…INSERT BACKGROUND OF REQUIREMENT…]
1.4
Indicative Schedule of Activities (Core)
1.4.1
The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the Indicative Schedule of Activities
provided at Annex A.
1
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
2
EVALUATION CRITERIA
2.1
Evaluation Criteria (Core)
2.1.1
The evaluation criteria will form the basis for the evaluation of tenders and assessments
against which value for money ranking and recommendations will be made. Evaluation
criteria to be applied for the purposes of evaluation will include the following, not in any order
of importance:
a.
[…INSERT
THE
EVALUATION
DOCUMENTATION…]
b.
etc
c.
etc
CRITERIA
FROM
THE
REQUEST
2.1.2
The evaluation criteria above are sourced directly from the Request Documentation and
have not been weighted or otherwise put in an order of priority.
3
APPROVAL AND EVALUATION TEAM
3.1
Organisational Chart (Optional)
3.2
Approval (Core)
3.2.1
Officials nominated in the […INSERT EITHER “Procurement Plan” OR “Acquisition Strategy”
AS APPLICABLE…] to approve actions, and persons/ bodies who will provide review and
advise of actions, are as follows:
Action
Approve Request
Documentation for release
Delegate
FINMAN 2 Schedule 1
Approve EP
FINMAN 2 Schedule 1
Sign off and Approve
Evaluation Report
FINMAN 2 Schedule 1
Review and Advice
Legal Adviser
Commercial Adviser
Probity Adviser
Procurement Adviser
Legal Adviser
Commercial Adviser
Probity Adviser
Procurement Adviser
Legal Adviser
Commercial Adviser
Probity Adviser
Procurement Adviser
TEWGs and EB/Steering
Committee.
3.3
Evaluation Team (ET) (Core)
3.3.1
The Evaluation Team (ET) consists of the members of the Evaluation Board (EB) and the
members of any Tender Evaluation Working Group (TEWG) formed.
3.3.2
All members of the ET must understand their obligations and comply with this EP.
3.4
Evaluation Board (EB) (Core)
3.4.1
The EB is formed specifically to conduct evaluation of each of the tenders in accordance with
this EP and to provide an Evaluation Report (ER), including a recommendation, to the
delegate.
3.4.2
The EB shall:
a.
comply with all relevant legislative and regulatory requirements and all relevant
2
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
procurement policies;
3.4.3
b.
conduct the evaluation in a manner which is ethical and fair; and
c.
minimise the costs of evaluation for Defence; and
d.
use methodologies that are consistent with this EP and appropriate to its various
components evaluated.
The EB comprises:
Position
Name
Title/Role
Chair
Member
Member
Member
Member
3.4.4
The EB Chair responsibilities include:
a.
ensuring that the ET members are aware of and comply with the requirements of the
EP;
b.
managing the assessment of each tender against the requirements of the Request
Documentation in accordance with the EP;
c.
ensuring consistency of approach and evaluation methodology by the ET;
Option: Where screening or shortlisting report is used
d.
developing a Screening and Shortlisting […DELETE AS APPLICABLE…] Report;
Option: Where TEWGs are formed
e.
reviewing TEWG Reports for consistency and inclusion as annexes to the ER;
f.
developing an ER with the assistance of the ET; and
g.
making a recommendation to the delegate.
Option: Where further advice and guidance is required
3.4.5
The EB may seek advice and guidance from the following advisers:
Area of Expertise
Probity Advice
Legal Advice
Engineering Advice
Contracting Advice
Financial Advice
Name
Work area
3.5
Tender Evaluation Working Group (TEWG) (Optional)
3.5.1
Annex B contains a list of TEWGs formed, TEWG Leaders, TEWG members, and identifies
the evaluation criteria assigned to each TEWG.
3.6
Access and Review of Deliverables (Core)
3
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
3.6.1
The Deliverables provided as part of each tenderers response may be applicable to more
than one evaluation criteria.
3.6.2
Annex C contains a table which maps evaluation criteria against Deliverables that may be
delivered as part of each tender.
3.6.3
For probity reasons, ET members who are not conducting the financial and commercial
evaluation should not have access to financial and pricing volumes of each tender prior to
providing the EB Chair with their report on detailed evaluation.
3.6.4
If a ET member requests access to particular Tender Deliverable in order to conduct its
evaluation and that Tender Deliverable is not attributed to evaluation criteria the ET member
is evaluating at Annex C, the EB Chair will determine whether or not access to the Tender
Deliverable is granted.
3.7
Steering Committee (Optional)
3.7.1
The EB will present its recommendation and ER to the […INSERT TITLE OF STEERING
COMMITTEE…].
3.7.2
The role of the Steering Committee is to provide high level input from stakeholders such as
the end user, those involved providing resources to maintain or support the capability (for
example, Defence Services Group), and management input from outside of the EB.
3.7.3
The Steering Committee may review and report on the EB’s recommendation and ER and
provide any comments to the delegate. Information required by the delegate may include
comments on the following issues:
a.
whether sufficient resources are committed to the procurement;
b.
whether appropriate specialist skills are involved in the procurement; and
c.
whether the Supplies or Services to be delivered are planned and checked against
user requirements.
4
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
4
ETHICS, PROBITY AND FAIR DEALING
4.1
Evaluation Requirements (Core)
4.1.1
Prior to the receipt of tenders the EB Chair will brief the ET on requirements of the EP. This
briefing will include such things as:
a.
accountability, probity, ethics and fair dealing;
b.
conflicts of interest;
c.
security requirements and arrangements;
d.
the tender clarification process;
e.
administrative arrangements (for example distribution of tender volumes, the venue
for evaluation, the use of evaluation tools and database); and
f.
areas of responsibility for evaluation, evaluation Stages and required outputs, and
the evaluation schedule.
4.2
Accountability, Probity, Ethics and Fair Dealing (Core)
4.2.1
Staff involved with the evaluation must recognise their public duty and ensure that the
principles and ethics of probity are upheld. APS staff and ADF members are not required to
sign personal non-disclosure agreements as they are held accountable under the Public
Service Act 1999 or the Defence Force Discipline Act 1982 (as applicable).
4.2.2
The following principles must be demonstrated and adhered to at all times:
a.
accountability – see the CPR’s; and
b.
probity, ethics and fair dealing – see DPPM Chapter 3.13.
4.2.3
The probity register at Attachment […INSERT REFERENCE AS APPLICABLE…] will be
used to record all probity issues and risks.
4.3
Conflicts of Interest (Core)
4.3.1
The EB Chair will brief the ET on the risks associated with real or perceived conflicts of
interest prior to evaluation. Any non-Defence personnel participating in the evaluation
process will be required to submit a conflict of interest declaration at Attachment G to the
effect that they have no conflict of interest with tenderers or their potential subcontractors.
4.3.2
Participants in the evaluation process will be advised that should a real or perceived conflict
of interest situation arise at any time over the course of the evaluation they will be required to
declare this and may be required to exclude themselves from further participation in the
process.
4.4
Confidentiality and Security of Documentation (Core)
4.4.1
Throughout the evaluation process, all tendered material must be handled appropriately.
Information provided by tenderers will be treated as Commercial-in-Confidence (CIC), kept
secure and not be used for personal gain or to prejudice fair, open and effective competition.
Any non-Defence personnel participating in the evaluation process will be required to submit
a Deed of Confidentiality form as Attachment H. For further information on security and
confidentiality principles see DPPM Chapters 3.9 and 3.11.
4.5
Communication with Third Parties (Core)
4.5.1
EB members are not permitted to contact any respondents during the evaluation without
prior approval from the EB Chair. All contact must be documented in writing throughout the
procurement process.
4.5.2
The communications register at Attachment […INSERT REFERENCE AS APPLICABLE…]
will be used to retain a record of communications (including complaints, requests for
5
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
information, clarifications, extension to the tender open period, etc) and will provide evidence
of communication between Defence and third parties.
4.6
Clarification of Tenderer’s Responses (Core)
4.6.1
Communication between the Commonwealth and tenderers must not be designed to solicit
new information from tenderers. Any communication between the Commonwealth and
tenderers will be restricted to clarification of issues that would assist the evaluation process,
thereby improving the level of confidence attached to the evaluation. Clarification questions
must be approved for release by the EB Chair. When a tenderer’s response to a clarifying
question foreshadows a change in scope, schedule or cost, the EB Chair will determine
whether the information is admissible for evaluation purposes.
4.6.2
Any unsolicited information received from tenderers after the tender closing date will be
passed to the EB Chair. If the EB Chair determines that such information is inconsistent with
the principles for the handling of late tenders as outlined in the Request Documentation, this
information will be withheld from the evaluation.
4.6.3
Any clarification questions will be consolidated into a single request and passed to the EB
Chair (or nominated officer). Requests for clarifying information will be issued by the EB
Chair to the relevant tenderers in writing.
4.6.4
The communications register at Attachment […INSERT REFERENCE AS APPLICABLE…]
will be used to retain a record of communications when clarifying information and will provide
evidence of communication between Defence and third parties.
4.7
Site Visits (Optional)
4.7.1
Site visits to tenderers’ premises, as outlined in the Conditions of Tender may be required
during the detailed evaluation of tenders. The purpose of these visits is to verify or clarify
attributes of the tendered solution. Requests for site visits by ET members must be
organised through the EB Chair.
4.7.2
The EB Chair may request to visit the facilities of tenderers and their proposed
Subcontractors to verify or clarify attributes of the tender responses.
4.7.3
All travel and associated costs (including meals) incurred by members of the ET in the
course of any visit are to be borne by the Commonwealth.
4.7.4
All discussions with tenderers must be fully documented in the communications register and
at least two ET members must be present at all times.
6
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
5
TENDER EVALUATION PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY
5.1
Registration of Tenders (Core)
5.1.1
A representative of Defence will register the receipt of all tenders in the presence of at least
two witnesses in accordance with Defence’s policy and procedures as described in the
DPPM at Chapter 5.5.
5.1.2
All tenders will be stored securely by the representative in a manner that ensures no person,
including members of the ET, has access to them until the evaluation commences.
5.2
Late Tenders (Core)
5.2.1
Tenders lodged after the closing time specified in the Request for Tender may be deemed to
be “Late Tenders”.
5.2.2
Late Tenders must be treated in accordance with the ‘Late Submission’ guidelines found at
paragraphs 10.24-10.27 of the Commonwealth Procurement Rules and Chapter 5.5 of the
DPPM.
5.3
Initial Distribution (Core)
5.3.1
The EB Chair will ensure that copies of the relevant volumes of each tender are made
available to each member of the EB. These copies are to be held in a secure lockable
storage medium. If the members of the EB are geographically dispersed then the distribution
of the tenders will be treated as Commercial in Confidence (CIC) and the appropriate
security measures adhered to in accordance with paragraph 4.4.
5.4
Initial Screening (Core)
5.4.1
The EB will initially check tenders against the:
a.
minimum content and format requirements;
b.
conditions for participation; and
c.
Essential requirements identified in the Request Documentation.
Option: For procurements subject to the additional rules that apply under Division 2 of the
CPRs
5.4.2
Tenders that do not satisfy the minimum content and format requirements, do not meet the
conditions for participation, or do not satisfy Essential requirements specified in the Request
Documentation must not be considered for detailed evaluation and will be set aside.
Option: For procurements not subject to the additional rules that apply under Division 2 of the
CPRs
5.4.3
Tenders that do not satisfy the minimum content and format requirements, do not meet the
conditions for participation, or do not satisfy Essential requirements specified in the Request
Documentation must be brought to the attention of the delegate and may be excluded from
detailed evaluation and set aside.
Option: Where a Screening Report is required and shortlisting is not used
5.4.4
A Screening Report will be produced in accordance with the Screening and Shortlisting
Template provided at Annex E.
5.5
Shortlisting (Optional)
5.5.1
Tenders that have satisfied initial screening may be subject to shortlisting in order to identify
non-competitive tenders that have no reasonable prospect of exhibiting the best value for
money in comparison to other tenders received. Tenders that are identified as non
competitive will not be considered for detailed evaluation and will be set aside.
5.5.2
Shortlisting must be conducted in accordance with the evaluation criteria, the Evaluation
7
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
Guide and Definitions (Annex D) and evaluation principles outlined at paragraph 5.7.
Shortlisting must be of sufficient rigour to ensure that excluded tenderers would stand no
reasonable chance of exhibiting the best value for money under more detailed evaluation.
5.5.3
The EB Chair will determine which members assist in shortlisting tenders and not all ET
members will necessarily be involved. Access to tender volumes for ET members will be in
accordance with paragraph 3.6.3.
5.5.4
The EB Chair will produce a Screening and Shortlisting Report for approval by the delegate
in accordance with Annex E.
5.5.5
Tenderers who have been declined will be informed as soon as practicable after the
delegate has approved and signed the Screening and Shortlisting Report.
5.6
Discretion of EB to Set Aside a Tender (Core)
5.6.1
At the discretion of the EB, if it becomes apparent at any stage of the process that a tender
is clearly non-competitive or otherwise has no reasonable prospect of exhibiting the best
value for money compared to other tenders, it may be set aside. The ER will document the
justification for setting aside any tender that occurs after detailed evaluation has
commenced.
5.7
Detailed Evaluation, Methodology, and Production of the ER (Core)
Option A: Where TEWGs are used for detailed evaluation
5.7.1
Detailed evaluation will commence with TEWGs using the standard definitions found in the
Evaluation Guide and Definitions at Annex D to evaluate the Deliverables assigned to the
TEWG at Annex C against the requirements of the Request Documentation.
5.7.2
Where relevant, TEWGs should consider material tendered in response to one evaluation
criterion in the evaluation of other criteria. Communication between TEWG leaders should be
maintained during detailed evaluation in order to allow identification of information relevant to
other TEWGs.
5.7.3
In addition to evaluating the Deliverables, TEWGs may consider any additional information
that relates to evaluation criteria provided that the use of such information is in accordance
with the Conditions of Tender. Information which may be suitable includes reports from credit
rating agencies, the use of company scorecards, and, subject to any IP and confidentiality
obligations, material received from the tenderers in response other tender processes.
5.7.4
The level of detail documented by the TEWGs will be commensurate with the complexity of
the procurement. These working notes may be attached in tabular form as an Annex to the
TEWG Reports.
5.7.5
For each tender, based on the results of detailed evaluation, the TEWGs will produce an
analysis of the tender’s performance against the evaluation criteria in the form of a
qualitative statement that addresses key strengths and weaknesses of each tender and the
compliance and risk assessments conducted. Quantitative methods may be used to support
the qualitative statement where appropriate.
5.7.6
The TEWGs will use the qualitative statements as the basis to produce a comparative
assessment resulting in a ranking all of the tenders against the evaluation criteria, and a
narrative that describes key discriminators which formed the basis upon which tenderers
were ranked in order of preference for each criteria.
5.7.7
Each TEWG will produce a TEWG report for review by EB Chair for consistency and
inclusion as an Annex to the ER which will include the qualitative statements and
comparative assessments described above.
Option B: Where TEWGs are not used and EB members conduct detailed evaluation
8
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
5.7.8
Detailed evaluation will commence with the EB using the standard Compliance Ratings and
Risk Assessments found at Annex D to assess the Deliverables against the requirements of
the Request Documentation.
5.7.9
Where relevant, the EB should consider material tendered in response to one evaluation
criterion in the evaluation of other criteria. In addition to evaluating the Deliverables, the EB
may consider any additional information that relates to evaluation criteria provided that the
use of such information is in accordance with the Conditions of Tender. Information which
may be suitable includes reports from credit rating agencies, the use of company
scorecards, and, subject to any IP and confidentiality obligations, material received from the
tenderers in response other tender processes.
5.7.10
The level of detail documented by the EB will be commensurate with the complexity of the
procurement. These working notes may be attached in tabular form as an Annex to the ER.
5.7.11
For each tender, based on the results of detailed evaluation, the EB will produce an analysis
of each tender’s performance against each evaluation criteria in the form of a qualitative
statement that addresses key strengths and weaknesses of each tender and the compliance
and risk assessments conducted. Quantitative methods may be used to support the
qualitative statement where appropriate. The qualitative statements will be included in the
ER to provide a summary assessment of each tender.
5.7.12
The EB will use the qualitative statements as the basis to produce a comparative
assessment resulting in a ranking all of the tenders against the evaluation criteria, and a
narrative that describes key discriminators which formed the basis upon which tenderers
were ranked in order of preference for each criteria.
5.7.13
If during detailed evaluation tenders are identified as having Critical Deficiencies in
accordance with Annex D, they may be set aside at the discretion of the EB chair.
Option A: Where TEWGs are used
5.7.14
The EB Chair, with the assistance of the EB members will use the TEWG Reports and the
qualitative statements produced to produce a summary assessment of each tender which
addresses performance against all criteria in turn. Where more than one TEWG has
evaluated the same criteria the EB will provide a consolidated summary that takes into
account all assessments.
5.7.15
The EB Chair, with the assistance of the EB members will produce a Value for Money
assessment and provide an overall ranking of tenders. The Value for Money assessment will
evaluate the performance of each tender against the evaluation criteria (capability) against
cost, taking into account risk assessments/confidence ratings in accordance with DPPM
Chapter 5.6.
5.7.16
The outcome of detailed evaluation will be documented in an ER. The ER will address the
following subjects:
5.7.17
a.
Executive Summary;
b.
Background;
c.
Conduct of Evaluation;
d.
Summary Assessment of Tenders Against Evaluation Criteria;
e.
Value for Money Assessment (including the factors to be considered per paragraph
4.5 of the CPRs);
f.
Recommendations; and
g.
Further Actions.
The ER serves to record the detailed evaluation results, provide details from which issues for
contract negotiation will be drawn, and serve as an audit trail for the detailed assessments
made in arriving at the recommendation. The ER will then be submitted to the delegate,
before letters to preferred and non-preferred tenderers are issued.
9
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
5.8
Offer Definition Activity (ODA) (Only to be used if Offer Definition was included in the
Request Documentation)
5.8.1
At the discretion of the EB, one or more tenderers may be selected to participate in an ODA.
The purpose of the ODA is to better define particular aspects of the tenders. The
Commonwealth may use the outcomes of the ODA in finalising selection.
5.9
Notification and Debriefing of Tenderers (Core)
5.9.1
Notification of tenders must not occur until after the Screening and Shortlisting Report, or the
Evaluation Report (as appropriate), have been approved and signed by the source selection
delegate.
5.9.2
As soon as possible after the appropriate approvals for selection and its announcement have
been obtained, the EB is to formally notify tenderers. In notifying unsuccessful tenderers, all
tenderers will be provided with the opportunity of a debriefing. The debriefing will not occur
before successful negotiations with the preferred tenderer are concluded.
5.9.3
The Contact Officer identified in the Request Documentation (Conditions of Tender) will be
the signatory for notifications to tenderers, unless the EB Chair determines otherwise.
10
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
ANNEX A
INDICATIVE SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES (CORE)
[INSERT...]
Example:
INDICATIVE SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES
Request Documentation released to tenderers
dd/mm/yyyy
Closing date for tenders
dd/mm/yyyy
Evaluation of tenders complete
dd/mm/yyyy
ER provided to Delegate
dd/mm/yyyy
Delegation exercised
dd/mm/yyyy
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
A-1
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
ANNEX B
TEWG RESPONSIBILITY FOR EVALUATION CRITERIA (OPTIONAL)
TEWG
Members
Retained by
EB
Assigned Evaluation Criteria
(a) past performance of contractual obligations of the
tenderer, any proposed Approved Subcontractors and any
Related Bodies Corporate
(b) the tenderer’s degree of overall compliance with the
RFT
(e) the extent to which the tenderer’s management
proposal is assessed as meeting the requirements of the
draft SOW
Project
Management
TEWG
Technical
TEWG
TEWG Leader:
Members:
(m) the tenderer’s demonstrated technical capability (which
includes ILS) and managerial capability to meet the
requirements of the draft SOW
(c) the extent to which the tendered solution for the Mission
System is assessed as meeting the function and
performance requirements stated in the draft SOW,
including any specifications
(m) the tenderer’s demonstrated technical capability (which
includes ILS) and managerial capability to meet the
requirements of the draft SOW
Financial
TEWG
TEWG Leader:
Members:
(h) the proposed corporate structure and the financial and
corporate viability of the tenderer and Approved
Subcontractors to fulfil contractual obligations
(i) the tendered prices and pricing structure, including
proposed payment schedule
Commercial/
Contracting
TEWG
TEWG Leader:
(d) the extent to which the tenderer is compliant with the
draft Ethics Letter
Members:
(f) the extent to which the tenderer is compliant with the
draft conditions of contract and the assessed level of risk
relating to the negotiation of a contract acceptable to the
Commonwealth
(g) the nature and extent to which the tender response
proposes IP rights to the Commonwealth and the assessed
level of risk relating to the negotiation of IP provisions
acceptable to the Commonwealth
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
B-1
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
ANNEX C
DELIVERABLES (CORE)
[INSERT ANNEX C HERE – MS WORD FILE IS MAINTAINED SEPARATELY]
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
C-1
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
ANNEX D
EVALUATION GUIDE AND DEFINITIONS (CORE)
Compliance Rating
1.
2.
3.
This comprises guidance on how the evaluation will assess the extent to which the
Response complies with the requirements of the Request Documentation.
Compliant:
The tendered solution meets the requirement specified in the request
documentation or, where it exceeds the requirement, there is no
significant additional benefit to Defence; and
Non-compliant:
The tendered solution does not meet the requirement specified in the
request documentation or, where it exceeds the requirement, there is
no significant additional benefit to Defence solution does not meet the
requirement specified in the request documentation.
If a tender is assessed as being non-compliant against a requirement of the Request
Documentation it will be classed as deficient. Deficiencies will be further classified as follows:
Deficient - Critical:
A deficiency that cannot be readily remedied which is of such
significance that it may seriously prevent the principal
requirements from being achieved;
Deficient - Significant:
A deficiency that has the potential to prevent an element of
the principal requirements from being achieved; and
Deficient - Minor:
A deficiency that has no substantial implications for the
requirements and may be acceptable without remedial action.
If a deficiency can be readily rectified the deficiency will not be assessed as “critical”. In
applying the criteria, each deficiency is to be judged on its merits as presented, irrespective
of the ease or cost of rectification. Having made this judgment, a further assessment is to be
made of how readily deficiencies might be overcome and whether or not such deficiencies
should be rectified or identified as a shortcoming in the response.
Risk Assessment
4.
Once compliance has been assessed then a Risk Assessment will be applied to each
criterion which addresses the level of confidence of the ET members conducting evaluation.
The evaluation of confidence provides an indication of an assessment of risk associated with
the tender. A high level of confidence would indicate a low level of risk in the claims of the
respondent.
5.
Any risk identified in a response will be assessed by Defence and taken into account, in the
evaluation.
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
D-1
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
6.
Evaluation Plan
The following terminology for risk ratings will be used:
Consequence
Likelihood
Insignificant
Minor
Moderate
Major
Severe
Almost Certain
Medium
Medium
High
High
Extreme
Likely
Medium
Medium
Medium
High
Extreme
Possible
Low
Medium
Medium
High
High
Unlikely
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
High
Rare
Low
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
7.
The EB will consider confidence level ratings in determining an overall risk assessment for
the comparative assessment report.
Evaluation Tools (Optional)
8.
[…INSERT DETAILS OF ANY EVALUATION TOOLS OR QUANTITATIVE METHODS
HERE…]
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
D-2
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
ANNEX E
SCREENING AND SHORTLISTING TEMPLATE (OPTIONAL)
[INSERT ANNEX E HERE – MS WORD FILE IS MAINTAINED SEPARATELY]
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
E-1
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
ANNEX F
PROBITY REGISTER TEMPLATE (OPTIONAL)
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
F-1
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
ANNEX G
CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATION
[INSERT ANNEX G HERE – MS WORD FILE IS MAINTAINED SEPARATELY]
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
G-1
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
ANNEX H
DEED OF CONFIDENTIALITY
[INSERT ANNEX H HERE – MS WORD FILE IS MAINTAINED SEPARATELY]
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
G-2
[insert procurement name and number] Commercial-In-Confidence
Evaluation Plan
ANNEX I
COMMUNICATIONS REGISTER TEMPLATE (OPTIONAL)
COMMERCIAL–IN–CONFIDENCE
G-3