Government of Western Australia
Department of Your Dept Name here
Evaluation Report
[Products and services procurement templates - Evaluation
Report]
TITLE:
[Insert Title Here]
REQUEST NUMBER:
[Insert the Request Number]
AGENCY:
[Insert the Request Number]
Approved by:
[for >$5m to be signed after STRC endorsement]
__________________________________________
[Insert name of Public Authority’s Accountable Officer or
Delegate]
[Insert Title]
201
State Tender Review Committee Endorsed Date:
[remove for <$5m)]
__ / __ /201 __
EVALUATION REPORT
Table of Contents
1. EVALUATION SUMMARY .............................................................................. 3
2. SCOPE OF CONTRACT ................................................................................ 5
3. PROCUREMENT DEVELOPMENT ................................................................. 6
3.1
SUMMARY ........................................................................................... 6
4. THE EVALUATION ........................................................................................ 8
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
EVALUATION PANEL MEMBERS ........................................................ 8
RESPONSES RECEIVED ..................................................................... 8
DESK TOP ASSESSMENT ................................................................... 8
[INITIAL] QUALITATIVE SCORE AND PRICE SUMMARY
TABLE ................................................................................................. 9
4.4.1 RESPONDENTS NOT SHORTLISTED ..................................... 9
SHORTLISTED RESPONDENTS QUALITATIVE SCORE AND
PRICE SUMMARY TABLE ...................................................................10
4.5.1 FURTHER EVALUATION PROCESS .......................................10
4.5.2 REVISED QUALITATIVE SCORES FOR SHORTLISTED RESPONDENTS ........................................................10
5. RECOMMENDATION ....................................................................................11
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
BASIS .................................................................................................11
DUE DILIGENCE ................................................................................11
ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED ................................................................12
COMPETITIVE NEUTRALITY ..............................................................12
6. ENDORSEMENT BY EVALUATION PANEL ..................................................13
APPENDIX A – SELECTION REQUIREMENTS ..................................................14
APPENDIX B – EVALUATION RATING SCALE ..................................................15
APPENDIX C1 – [INITIAL] QUALITATIVE SCORE & PRICE SUMMARY ............17
APPENDIX C2 – REVISED QUALITATIVE SCORE FOR SHORTLISTED
RESPONDENTS ...........................................................................................19
APPENDIX D – COMPARATIVE STATEMENT ...................................................21
APPENDIX E – BUY LOCAL POLICY.................................................................24
APPENDIX F – RISK REGISTER .......................................................................27
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 2 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
1. EVALUATION SUMMARY
ITEM
RESPONSE
Contract Title:
[Title]
Public Authority/Customer:
[Name of Public Authority/Customer]
Scope:
[provide a brief overview of what is to be
purchased/provided]
See ‘Scope of Contract’ at Section 2 for further
information
Contract Term:
Initial: [Term]
Extension options: [Options]
Recommended or Preferred Respondent(s):
[name of Recommended OR Preferred Respondent(s)]
See ‘Recommendation’ at Section 5
Total Contract Value:
Pre-Tender Estimate:
$[insert $ amount] (inc GST)
$[insert $ amount] (inc GST)
[If the Price Variance is significant, please provide
an explanation as to why this is the case?]
[Include paragraph below if price is not fixed and
expenditure may go above the original estimate.]
Expenditure under this contract is not capped or fixed.
The estimated contract award value is based on
estimated expenditure at this time but may vary
depending on budget availability.
Price Basis:
Fixed for [Term]
OR
Fixed for the initial [number] months/years.
On each anniversary of the Commencement Date,
variations in the Contract Price will be permitted for
annual changes in the Perth Consumer Price Index,
Australia (Cat No 6401.0): 1 All Groups, Index Numbers
– Perth
OR
Fixed for the initial [number] months/years.
[Insert variation index and frequency] Use for other
variation mechanisms
Local Business?
YES / NO
[If “NO” insert] Refer ‘Buy Local Policy’ at Appendix E
Anticipated Contract Commencement Date:
[Date]
Issues to be Resolved?
YES / NO
[If “YES” insert] Refer ‘Issues to be Resolved’ at
Section 5.3
Contract Management Plan?
YES / N/A
Accountable Authority or Delegate
[If “YES” insert name of Officer or delegate]
Contract Manager or Position
[Insert name of Officer or position]
Buying Rules: [Panel Contracts and CUA
only]
[Insert explanation of buying rules]
Small Business? (<20 people)
YES / NO
Registered Australian Disability Enterprise
(ADE)?
YES / NO
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 3 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
(the ADE is listed as an approved ADE on the
Australian Disability Enterprises website at
www.australiandisabilityenterprises.com.au/).
Registered Aboriginal Business?
(the business is registered on the Aboriginal
Business Directory WA at
http://www.abdwa.com.au/).
YES / NO
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 4 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
2. SCOPE OF CONTRACT
[provide summary / overview of the project]
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 5 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
3. PROCUREMENT DEVELOPMENT
3.1
SUMMARY
ITEM
RESPONSE
Procurement Plan Prepared?
YES / N/A
[If “YES” insert]
Date endorsed by STRC: [date]
[If the process used in the Request process differed in any material
respect from that in the Procurement Plan, insert the following]
The following were departures from the Procurement Plan:

Risk Assessment:
[insert changes and justify the changes. If there is not
sufficient space, then include as an appendix]
[If no significant or high risks identified, insert] All identified risks
were rated as low [or] moderate.
[If any identified risks were rated as significant or high, insert the
following, selecting the applicable rating(s)] Some identified risks
were rated as significant and/or high. Refer ‘Risk Register’ at
Appendix G.
Selection Requirements:
Refer to copy of Selection Requirements at Appendix A
Public Authority Approval to
Proceed to Request:
Name: [name]
Exemptions or Approvals under
the Open and Effective
Competition policy:
As permitted by the Open and Effective Competition policy, [Name
and title of Accountable Authority] granted approval on [date]: [delete
as appropriate]
[delete if not applicable]
Title: [title]

of an exemption from the minimum requirement being [state
the circumstance ie bona fide sole source of supply,
registered ADE etc];

to name a proprietary product;

to specify a contract term in excess of five years;

from the minimum open tender advertising period; and/or

to not publish the contract award details on Tenders WA.
[If a covered procurement under the FTAs, include the following
sentence] The [title of Accountable Authority] has determined that
the procurement complies with the requirements of the Free Trade
Agreements.
Early Tender Advice:
YES [OR] NO
[If “YES” insert]Posted on Tenders WA on [insert date]
Advertising:
Tenders WA: YES / NO
Date: [insert date]
Newspaper: [name of newspaper & date advertised]
[or if a direct source or invited tender]
Date released: [insert date]
Tender Briefing Details:
A [mandatory/non mandatory] tender briefing was held on [insert
date] at [insert location].
Addenda Details:
[insert number] addend[a/um] [were/was] released. In summary
the addend[a/um]:

[insert details and supporting reasons. If there is not
sufficient space, then include as an appendix]
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 6 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
Request Closing Date:
[Request Closing Date]
Offer Validity Expiry Date:
[date] [When does the offer validity date expire?]
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 7 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
4. THE EVALUATION
4.1
EVALUATION PANEL MEMBERS
Name
Agency
Job Title
Voting/Non Voting
Member/Advisor
The evaluation panel chairperson was [Name, Title and Contact details] . The
evaluation panel facilitator was [Name, Title and Contact details].
[If the evaluation panel contained a technical expert, identify that person and their
role. If a probity advisor or auditor was engaged for this process, include details
here.]
All panel members completed a Declaration of Confidentiality and Interest form.
No interests were declared. Or The following interests were declared:

[insert details].
These interests were addressed by:

4.2
[insert details of the manner in which these interests were managed].
RESPONSES RECEIVED
Responses were received from the following organisations:
[List in alphabetical order. Please ensure the name included below reflects the
correct legal entity. If unsure, check the Australian Securities and Investment
Commission website at http://www.asic.gov.au/ or the Australian Business
Number website at http://abr.business.gov.au/].
a). [Name] (location eg Perth, NSW...)
4.3
b).
[Name] (location eg Perth, NSW...)
c).
[Name] (location eg Perth, NSW...)
d).
[Name] (location eg Perth, NSW...)
DESK TOP ASSESSMENT
All Respondents [met the Pre-Qualification Requirements and] properly
addressed the Compliance and Disclosure Requirements and were passed
through to the Qualitative Assessment.
OR
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 8 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
The following Respondents did not pass through to Qualitative Assessment: [list
names and reason why]
a).
[Name]
[Reason why]
b).
[Name]
[Reason why]
c).
[Name]
[Reason why]
d).
[Name]
[Reason why]
All other Respondents [met the Pre-Qualification Requirements and] properly
addressed the Compliance and Disclosure Requirements and were processed
through to Qualitative Assessment.
4.4
[INITIAL] QUALITATIVE SCORE AND PRICE SUMMARY TABLE
[If a two stage evaluation process was undertaken, insert the word 'initial' as
indicated above, and include information relating to non-shortlisted respondents
below.]
[List the Respondents in price or qualitative ranking order. This order should be
consistent throughout the Report, ie as in Appendix C and in Appendix D.]
Price
Respondent
Price Ranking
(or Evaluated
Price) (inc GST)
Qualitative
Ranking
Score (%)
[Any issues related to how the price schedule was devised should be discussed
here – including use of estimated hours, estimated quantities, categories of work,
products.
Also discuss the application of preferences based on the Buy Local Policy –
ANZGPA/AUSFTA/ACI-FTA applied/not applied; regional business and regional
content preferences (10%) and imported content impost (20%).
4.4.1
RESPONDENTS NOT SHORTLISTED
The following Respondents were not short-listed:
a).
[Name] [reason, price, qualitative score]
b).
[Name] [reason, price, qualitative score]
c).
[Name] [reason, price, qualitative score]
d).
[Name] [reason, price, qualitative score]
Refer to Appendix B for a copy of the Evaluation Rating Scale(s) [include Buy
Local scale if applicable] used in the evaluation process.
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 9 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
Refer to Appendix C for a detailed “Qualitative Score & Price Summary” and
Appendix D for the “Comparative Statements”.
4.5
SHORTLISTED RESPONDENTS
PRICE SUMMARY TABLE
QUALITATIVE
SCORE
AND
4.5.1 FURTHER EVALUATION PROCESS
After the initial evaluation, a number of shortlisted Respondents were selected to
be further evaluated. The additional evaluation was undertaken as follows:
[detail process undertaken]
4.5.2 REVISED QUALITATIVE SCORES FOR SHORT-LISTED RESPONDENTS
Respondent
Price Ranking
Price (or
Evaluated Price)
(inc GST)
Qualitative
Ranking
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 10 of 27
Score (%)
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
5. RECOMMENDATION
5.1
BASIS
[name of Respondent] is the evaluation panel’s recommended or preferred
Respondent.
The basis for this decision is as follows:
a).
Quality
[Discuss]
b).
Price
[Discuss]
A settlement discount of [discount percentage]% will apply for payment
made within [number of days] days of rendering of the account.
[NB: If only one Respondent, explain how price was benchmarked (eg price
compares favourably with price for a similar contract recently awarded either
locally or in another State – provide details).
c). Summary
[Include in this section justification for your value for money decision.
Include, for example, why lower priced or comparatively higher scored offers
were not recommended]
In summary, [Name of Respondent] is best suited to meet the Request
requirements and represents Value for Money.
5.2
DUE DILIGENCE
[Include in this section any due diligence undertaken.
undertaken, give reasons]
If no due diligence
a). Referee Reports
The following table provides a summary of the referees contacted and their
comments in relation to the recommended or preferred Respondent.
Referee Contact
Comment
[Organisation and contact
person]
[Organisation and contact
person]
[Organisation and contact
person]
In summary, the referee reports supported the Evaluation Panel’s
recommendation(s).
[Or]
[Provide further detail]
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 11 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
b). Financial Due Diligence
[Provide further detail]
c). [Insert detail of any other due diligence undertaken]
5.3
ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
No issues to be resolved.
OR
[State issues as applicable and provide detail]
5.4
COMPETITIVE NEUTRALITY
[Delete if not applicable]
The [name of tertiary institution or government organisation]provided a covering
letter from the [title of the head of the institution / organisation] certifying that their
offer had been calculated on a full commercial basis and [if appropriate] verified
by an independent expert.
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 12 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
6. ENDORSEMENT BY EVALUATION PANEL
Name __________________________________ DATE: ___ / ____ /201_
Name __________________________________ DATE: ___ / ____ /201_
Name __________________________________ DATE: ___ / ____ /201_
Name __________________________________ DATE: ___ / ____ /201_
Name __________________________________ DATE: ___ / ____ /201_
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 13 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
APPENDIX A – SELECTION REQUIREMENTS
1.
PRE-QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
The pre-qualification requirements for this request were:
a).
b).
2.
COMPLIANCE AND DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS
The compliance and disclosure requirements for this request were:
a).
b).
c).
d).
3.
QUALITATIVE REQUIREMENTS
The qualitative requirements for this request were:
a).
b).
c).
d).
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 14 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
APPENDIX B – EVALUATION RATING SCALE
A rating of 0-9 was used for evaluating each tender submission. Panel members were
required to score each Respondent’s response to the qualitative requirements. The rating
scale and a description for the range of scores is shown in the table below.
SCORE
DESCRIPTION
The response does not address the qualitative requirement
OR
0
 The evaluation panel is not confident that the Respondent:
 Understands the Request requirements covered by this qualitative requirement; and / or
Will be able to satisfactorily meet the qualitative requirement(s)
The evaluation panel has some reservations whether the Respondent:
 Understands the Request requirements covered by this qualitative requirement; and / or
3
 Will be able to satisfactorily complete the Request requirements covered by this
qualitative requirement.
If Minor concern: rate higher (4).
If Major concern: rate lower (1 or 2).
The evaluation panel is reasonably confident that the Respondent
5
 Understands the Request requirements covered by this qualitative requirement; and / or
 Will be able to satisfactorily complete the Request requirements covered by this
qualitative requirement to a reasonable standard.
The evaluation panel is confident that the Respondent
6
 Understands the Request requirements covered by this qualitative requirement; and / or
 Will be able to satisfactorily complete the Request requirements covered by this
qualitative requirement to a reasonable standard.
The evaluation panel is confident that the Respondent:
7
 Understands the Request requirements covered by this qualitative requirement; and / or
 Will be able to satisfactorily complete the Request requirements covered by this
qualitative requirement to a good standard.
The evaluation panel is confident that the Respondent:
8
 Understands the Request requirements covered by this qualitative requirement; and / or
 Will be able to satisfactorily complete the Request requirements covered by this
qualitative requirement to a high standard.
The evaluation panel is confident that the Respondent:
9
 Understands the Request requirements covered by this qualitative requirement; and / or
 Will be able to satisfactorily complete the Request requirements covered by this
qualitative requirement to a very high standard.
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 15 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
[If Buy Local was a separate qualitative criterion include the rating scale table as shown
below – if not, delete it.]
The rating scale used to evaluate the Buy Local qualitative requirement is shown below:
SCORE
DESCRIPTION
The response does not address the Buy Local requirement
0
OR
The evaluation panel is not confident that the Respondent will be able to satisfactorily meet
the specified requirement(s)
The response offers minimal benefits in relation to the Buy Local Policy.
3
OR
The evaluation panel has some reservations whether the Respondent will be able to
satisfactorily meet the specified requirements.
The response offers a reasonable or average level of benefits in relation to the Buy Local
Policy.
5
OR
The evaluation panel is reasonably confident that the Respondent will be able to
satisfactorily meet the specified requirements to a reasonable standard.
The response offers a high or above average level of benefits in relation to the Buy Local
Policy.
7
AND
The evaluation panel is confident that the Respondent will be able to satisfactorily meet the
specified requirements to a high standard.
The response offers a very high level of benefits in relation to the Buy Local Policy.
9
AND
The evaluation panel is completely confident that the Respondent will be able to satisfactorily
meet the specified requirements to a very high standard.
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 16 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
APPENDIX C1 – [INITIAL] QUALITATIVE SCORE & PRICE SUMMARY
Qualitative Requirement
Weighting
Respondent A
Raw
/9
1
Understanding of the
required tasks
X%
2
Organisational
capacity
X%
3
Experience
X%
4
X
X%
Weighted
/9
%
Respondent B
Raw
/9
Weighted
/9
%
Respondent C
Raw
/9
Weighted
/9
%
Respondent D
Raw
/9
Weighted
/9
%
Respondent E
Raw
/9
Weighted
/9
%
Total Weighted Score
(%)
Qualitative Ranking
Price (inc GST)
Buy Local Preferences
Total Price (inc GST)
Price Ranking
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]
Page 17 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
When completing the table please note the following:

If a two stage evaluation process was undertaken, insert the word ‘initial’ as indicated above.

You may have to adapt the table where there are various prices – eg consultancy tenders, therefore, adjust where necessary.

The table is on a landscape page and there is a section break between the table and the previous page – do not delete this,
otherwise the pages will lose their formatting.

Shade the three columns of the preferred or short-listed Respondent (as applicable)

List the Respondents in price or qualitative ranking order. This order should be consistent throughout the Report, ie in the
table at paragraph 4.4 and in Appendix D.

Qualitative requirements to be listed in highest to lowest weighting.

If the total Qualitative score has been ‘rounded’ please ensure that the rounded score is referred to throughout the rest
of the Report

Show Buy Local preferences that have been applied.

If a two stage evaluation process was undertaken, the table below needs to be included – this table should contain the revised
score of the shortlisted Respondents only.
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]
Page 18 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
APPENDIX C2 – REVISED QUALITATIVE SCORE FOR SHORTLISTED RESPONDENTS
Qualitative Requirement
Weighting
Respondent A
Raw
/9
1
Understanding of the
required tasks
X%
2
Organisational
capacity
X%
3
Experience
X%
4
X
X%
Weighted
/9
%
Respondent B
Raw
/9
Weighted
/9
%
Respondent C
Raw
/9
Weighted
/9
%
Respondent D
Raw
/9
Weighted
/9
%
Respondent E
Raw
/9
Weighted
/9
%
Total Weighted Score
(%)
Qualitative Ranking
Price (inc GST)
Buy Local Preferences
Total Price (inc GST)
Price Ranking
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]
Page 19 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]
Page 20 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
APPENDIX D – COMPARATIVE STATEMENT
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT – QUALITATIVE REQUIREMENTS AND PRICE
A summary statement for each Respondent is provided below.
The summaries have been prepared for the purposes of providing feedback to
Respondents and as a brief overview of the principal issues used by the evaluation panel
to reach a decision on the preferred Respondent. The summaries are not meant to cover
all criteria and issues discussed by the evaluation panel.
The summaries must address the application of the Buy Local Policy in the Value for
Money assessment of tender submissions (refer to page 5 of the Buy Local Policy). The
respondents must be addressed in the same order (price or qualitative ranking) as in
paragraph 4.4 and Appendix C.
STAGE ONE EVALUATIVE PROCESS (DELETE TITLE IF NO SHORTLISTING
WAS UNDERTAKEN)
1.
RESPONDENT'S NAME

Total qualitative score [insert percentage]% – ranking [insert ranking]/X.

Total price $[insert amount] (inc GST) – ranking [insert ranking]/X.
[Insert Heading of Qualitative Requirement]

Discussion of the response to a requirement.

Include the evaluative statement from the evaluation rating scale that
corresponds to the score given.
[Insert Heading of Qualitative Requirement]

Discussion of the response to a requirement.

Include the evaluative statement from the evaluation rating scale that
corresponds to the score given.
.

Discussion of the response to Buy Local requirement – or if no requirement,
the elements that apply to the other requirements (discuss issues such as
local business, level of local content, discussion of any Buy Local benefits).

Summary of price (competitive, expensive, etc).
OUTCOME: [NOT] RECOMMENDED [OR] [NOT] SHORTLISTED
[include justification]
2.
RESPONDENT'S NAME

Total qualitative score [insert percentage]% – ranking [insert ranking]/X.

Total price $[insert amount] (inc GST) – ranking [insert ranking]/X.
[Insert Heading of Qualitative Requirement]

Discussion of the response to a requirement.

Include the evaluative statement from the evaluation rating scale that
corresponds to the score given.
[Insert Heading of Qualitative Requirement]
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 21 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT

Discussion of the response to a requirement.

Include the evaluative statement from the evaluation rating scale that
corresponds to the score given.

Discussion of the response to Buy Local requirement – or if no requirement,
the elements that apply to the other requirements (discuss issues such as
local business, level of local content, discussion of any Buy Local benefits).

Summary of price (competitive, expensive, etc).
OUTCOME: [NOT] RECOMMENDED [OR] [NOT] SHORTLISTED
[include justification]
3.
RESPONDENT'S NAME

Total qualitative score [insert percentage]% – ranking [insert ranking]/X.

Total price $[insert amount] (inc GST) – ranking [insert ranking]/X.
[Insert Heading of Qualitative Requirement]

Discussion of the response to a requirement.

Include the evaluative statement from the evaluation rating scale that
corresponds to the score given.
[Insert Heading of Qualitative Requirement]

Discussion of the response to a requirement.

Include the evaluative statement from the evaluation rating scale that
corresponds to the score given.
.

Discussion of the response to Buy Local requirement – or if no requirement,
the elements that apply to the other requirements (discuss issues such as
local business, level of local content, discussion of any Buy Local benefits).

Summary of price (competitive, expensive, etc).
OUTCOME: [NOT] RECOMMENDED
[include justification]
STAGE
TWO
EVALUATIVE
PROCESS
(DELETE
SECTION
IF
NO
SHORTLISTING WAS UNDERTAKEN)
1.
RESPONDENT'S NAME

Total revised qualitative score [insert percentage]% – ranking [insert
ranking]/X.

Total price $[insert amount] (inc GST) – ranking [insert ranking]/X.
[Insert Heading of Qualitative Requirement]

Discussion of the response to a requirement.

Include the evaluative statement from the evaluation rating scale that
corresponds to the score given.
[Insert Heading of Qualitative Requirement]
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 22 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT

Discussion of the response to a requirement.

Include the evaluative statement from the evaluation rating scale that
corresponds to the score given.
.

Discussion of the response to Buy Local requirement – or if no requirement,
the elements that apply to the other requirements (discuss issues such as
local business, level of local content, discussion of any Buy Local benefits).

Summary of price (competitive, expensive, etc).
OUTCOME: [NOT] RECOMMENDED
[include justification]
2.
RESPONDENT'S NAME

Total revised qualitative score [insert percentage]% – ranking [insert
ranking]/X.

Total price $[insert amount] (inc GST) – ranking [insert ranking]/X.
[Insert Heading of Qualitative Requirement]

Discussion of the response to a requirement.

Include the evaluative statement from the evaluation rating scale that
corresponds to the score given.
[Insert Heading of Qualitative Requirement]

Discussion of the response to a requirement.

Include the evaluative statement from the evaluation rating scale that
corresponds to the score given.

Discussion of the response to Buy Local requirement – or if no requirement,
the elements that apply to the other requirements (discuss issues such as
local business, level of local content, discussion of any Buy Local benefits).

Summary of price (competitive, expensive, etc).
OUTCOME: [NOT] RECOMMENDED
[include justification]
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 23 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
APPENDIX E – BUY LOCAL POLICY
1.
2.
APPLICATION OF THE POLICY
The Buy Local Policy has been applied to this procurement as follows:
a).
Local Content was a qualitative requirement with a weighting of [insert
percentage]% or Local Content questions were included in the following
qualitative requirement: [insert details];
b).
Regional preferences were applied [only include if a regional contract
delivery point]; and
c).
Imported content impost was applied [only include if there were imported
content calculations made].
LOCAL BUSINESS
State whether the recommended Respondent is a local business] [To determine
whether the Respondent is a local business, refer to page 46 of the Buy Local
Policy - ‘Local Purchase’. If the recommended Respondent is not a local business
include relevant text from 2.1 and 2.2 (REMOVE THE HEADINGS).]
2.1 IF LOCAL BUSINESS NOT CHOSEN
The following local business(es) were unsuccessful in the recommendation
for the awarding of the contract:
A summary of the reasons justifying this decision is shown in Section 5 of
this report. As part of the procurement process, a comprehensive debriefing
shall be made available to the unsuccessful local Respondents upon
request.
2.2 LOCAL BUSINESS NOT CHOSEN – DIRECTOR GENERAL APPROVAL
[If the contract was publicly tendered and the contract has not been
awarded to a local business, the Accountable Authority or their delegate
must approve the Report (by signing the front page) prior to contract award.]
In accordance with the Buy Local Policy, as the contract was not awarded to
a local business, the [insert the accountable authority or their delegate] has
approved the Report. (Refer to signature on front page of this document).
3.
LOCAL CONTENT
Local content is defined as the proportion of the contract that is undertaken locally
in Western Australia. The total estimated contract price is $[insert the price] (inc
GST) and including extension options. The value of the products and services,
by source (location), is estimated as follows:
Proportion of the Contract Undertaken In
$
Regional Western Australia (within the prescribed distance from the contract
delivery point) [only for contracts with a regional contract delivery point]
Western Australia
Australia (not including WA)
Overseas (not Australia)
4.
IMPORTED CONTENT
[Provide a summary of the recommended Respondents imported products or
services as they will apply to the contract. For example:]
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 24 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
[If no Imported Content] Based on their submission, the recommended
Respondent, in meeting the contract requirements, will not be utilising imported
products or services.
[OR]
[If Imported Content] The imported products/services and their value, which the
recommended Respondent will be using in meeting the contract requirements,
are as follows:
a).
b).
c).
5.
BUY LOCAL BENEFITS
In selecting the recommended tender, the Buy Local benefits can be summarised
as follows:
a).
They are a local business;
b).
Maximising the use of local suppliers / subcontractors;
c).
They received the highest score for the Buy Local qualitative criterion; and
d).
Other – eg employment, skill development initiatives, employing Aboriginal
People.
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 25 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
Buy Local Reporting Requirements
The below information is provided to assist public authorities with their annual Buy Local Reporting
requirements
[The Buy Local Reporting Requirements table is:

provided to record information necessary for completing the Buy Local questions on systems such as Tenders WA,
and also to assist agencies to confirm the accuracy of Buy Local Reports at the end of each annual reporting period;

to be completed for each Request prior to the Evaluation Report being signed off;

designed to provide information for a single contract awarded to a single contractor. If there is more than 1 contract
and/or 1 contractor, the table should be amended to suit.]
Contract Title
[Insert contract title]
Request Number
[Insert Request number]
Contract Authority or Customer
[Insert Contract Authority or Customer name]
Total Contract Value (including ext. options)
[Insert total value for all contracts awarded under this
Request number]$[insert value] (inc GST)
[Copy and paste this table, or insert extra
columns, for each contract and/or supplier]
Contract [insert 1, 2, 3...]. Supplier: [insert name]
a) Is the Contractor a small business,
employing less than 20 people?
Yes [OR] No
b) What is the Contract Delivery Point
[Insert Perth, Gascoyne, Goldfields- Esperance, Great
Southern, Kimberley, Mid West, Peel, Pilbara, South West,
Wheatbelt]
c) Value of Contract with this particular
Contractor (including ext. options)
[Insert value of the individual contract with this supplier ONLY
IF IT IS KNOWN. If this value is not known, eg a panel of
suppliers without predetermined work allocated, leave this
section (and corresponding sections on Tenders WA/CDMS)
blank]$[insert value] (inc GST)
d) Where is the Contractor located for the
purposes of this contract?
[Insert region (Perth, Gascoyne, Goldfields- Esperance, Great
Southern, Kimberley, Mid West, Peel, Pilbara, South West,
Wheatbelt) or leave blank if lcoation is outside WA],
[Insert state (or country if located outside Australia)]
e) Is the Contractor a local business
(according to page 46 of the Buy Local
policy)?
Yes [OR] No
f) Was the contract awarded to a local,
regional business located within the
Contract Prescribed Distance? (Regional
based contracts only)
Yes [OR] No [OR delete options and leave blank if not a
regional contract delivery point]
g) Was the contract awarded as a direct
result of applying a Regional Price
Preference? (Regional based contracts only)
Yes [OR] No [OR delete options and leave blank if not a
regional contract delivery point]
If yes, what was the total value of the
$[insert value] (inc GST)
regional price preference that was applied?
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number]Page 26 of 27
FINANCE v 171115
EVALUATION REPORT
APPENDIX F – RISK REGISTER
[Insert a risk register here.
There is no single risk register or table that must be used in this section. The Risk Register provided in the Department of Finance ‘Risk
Workbook’ template can be used, or any other risk register, table or other means of documenting risk.
As a minimum, this appendix should describe the risks identified, along with their ratings and treatment strategies employed. ]
The Appendix title can be edited as appropriate.]
[DRAFT/FINAL] EVALUATION REPORT – REQUEST NO [Insert the Request Number] Page 27 of 27
FINANCE v 171115