Multiple Framework Contract for the provision of services in the field of audits of
external aid actions financed by the European Commission from the European
Development Fund (EDF) and the General Budget of the European Union (EU Budget)
2013/S 192-330430
EuropeAid/134948/C/SER/Multi/
QUESTION(Q) 1. In the original contract notice published in the OJEU, it is noted in
section VI.3.2 that:
Tenderers' attention is drawn to the fact that only legal entities which are registered in an EU
Member State, in a signatory country of the GPA Agreement or in one of the following
countries: Albania, Chile, Colombia, former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Honduras,
Iceland, Iraq, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Montenegro, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Peru, and
Serbia are eligible (in the case of a consortium, this applies to all the legal entities of the
consortium). Bosnia and Herzegovina will be granted access when the SAA enters into force.
The central American countries of Costa Rica, El Salvador and Guatemala will be granted
access when the bilateral agreements with them enter into force. Should an ineligible legal
entity take part this will result in the application concerned (or the grouping as a whole,
should said party belong to a grouping) being disqualified immediately.
As such, we understand that only legal entities registered in one of the named countries may
be accepted as an eligible partner or joint-bidder in a tender submitted in response to this
procurement notice. As such, e.g., an entity registered in Kenya could not be a party to the
submission.
Could you please confirm that our understanding is correct here?
ANSWER(A) 1. Your understanding is correct. The eligible nationalities are limited to the
ones mentioned in article VI.3.2 of the Contract Notice for tenderers and members of
tendering consortia. These restrictions do not apply for subcontractors and entities that
provide resources through undertakings and which are not part of the tendering consortia.
(Q) 2. Our firm is part of an officially recognised network as defined in ISQC 1 and is a
member of the Forum of Firms. Our membership includes network offices worldwide
including in countries that are non-GPA signatories. Assuming our understanding in point 1
above is correct, is it nevertheless possible to draw on the relevant resources, skills and
experiences of the network firms a whole (e.g. CVs of personnel from those offices and
relevant assignment experience)? If so; how does this need to be accomplished? Can we
rely on letters of undertaking from each firm of their willingness to make resources, etc.
available to us as and when a need arises?
1
Version 5 December 2013
In this respect, is this that the following paragraph at section 3.3.2.2 on page 25 of the tender
specifications is intended to confirm:
Tenderers may, where appropriate and for a specific contract, rely on the capacities of other
operators. In that case the tenderer must provide evidence to the contracting authority that it
can dispose of the capacity and resources required for providing the services of the specific
contract, for example by producing an undertaking on the part of those entities to place those
resources at its disposal. Under the same conditions, a consortium of economic operators
may rely on the capacities of members of the consortium or of other entities
(A)2. It is your responsibility to decide whether you can rely on undertakings on the
part of entities to place resources at your disposal such as non-key-experts (see also
answer n° 9 below) or logistical support from offices worldwide including in countries
that are non-GPA signatories. If you decide to do so then you must submit evidence for
example in the form of formal and duly completed and signed undertakings. Note that
restrictions concerning eligible nationalities are not applicable to experts (natural
persons), see Answer n° 10 below.
(Q) 3. 1. In terms of the named team of experts that we are requested to provide at a category
1 and 2 level for this contract, you have requested that we provide (section 3.3.2.2; page 25):
“a statement confirming that the key experts named on the List of Key Experts will be
available at short notice for specific engagements to be contracted under Lot 1 and 2 of the
FWC. The names of the key experts should be mentioned on the Statement on availability of
Key Experts or the list of Key Experts can be attached to the Statement. Tenderers are
informed that the period between the sending of a Request for Services and the concluding of
contract for a specific engagement under the FWC is normally 42 calendar days or 6 weeks.”
As we understand matters; this declaration needs only to be provided by the tenderer and not
the individual experts; would this be correct? Is there a specific template to adopt or follow
here?
(A) 3.1. Your understanding is correct. Tenderers and not individual experts must provide
a statement of availability of key experts which shall include the names of the key experts
or the list of key experts can be attached to the Statement. There is no specific template.
(Q) 3. 2. Does this paragraph mean that only the named experts in the tender submission can
ever be proposed at a category 1 and 2 level within any subsequent Request for Service (RfS)
issued after the signing of the framework contract?
(A) 3. 2. This understanding is correct. Category 1 and 2 experts are part of the offer and
their names have to be agreed by the Contracting Authority. See also Answer n° 3.3.
2
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 3. 3. If it is possible to add or substitute new or replacement experts at these levels later;
what will the process and requirements in this respect?
(A) 3. 3. Please refer to Article 6.1. “Replacement of Experts” of Annex 1 to the Invitation
to tender “Tender Specifications”.
(Q) 3. 4. Can we include names of persons as keys experts from network firms outside the
main consortium firms (e.g. from a network member firm in a GPA non-signatory country?
(A) 3. 4. No, see Answers n° 1, 9 and 11.
(Q) 3. 5. Can you clarify the intention or meaning of this wording further please? Is the
intent to ensure the named key experts are always available, regardless of any other
circumstances, to undertake an assignment under this framework contract once an RfS is
issued? We recognise that once we propose any expert specifically in response to an RfS for
any assignment, we should not seek to substitute or otherwise replace that person without first
following the protocols set out in section 4 of the tender specifications. However, we are
uncertain as to the how the requirements at 3.3.2.2 then interface with and add further to the
requirements at section 4.
(A) 3.5. Please refer to Article 6.1. “Replacement of Experts” of Annex 1 to the Invitation
to tender “Tender Specifications” which contains the cases in which key experts can be
replaced and the specific procedures to be followed.
(Q) 4. In Annex I.8 of the tender specifications, within the sub-heading: “Contacts with the
Commission”; the tenderer is required to detail (inter alia):
“A central point of contact / reference for coordination and treatment of FWC matters
(quality issues and complaints, systematic and recurring issues with audits and audit related
matters etc.).” Would it be reasonable to assume that this person would not also be on the
named Category 1 and 2 key experts or could such a person fulfil both roles?
(A) 4. The central point of contact coordinates and deals with all FWC matters. This
person may be one of the proposed cat 1 or 2 experts. However, it should be clear that it
would not be appropriate for this cat 1 / 2 expert to deal with quality issues or complaints
which relate to audit or other engagements in which s/he was involved.
(Q) 5. Assuming we were selected as a service provider under the Framework contract and
that we were then awarded and completed an individual contract, could you clarify precisely
what information/documentation would need to be provided as a matter of course with the
interim and final invoices we would submit to the Contracting Authority for payment. For
example, would it be necessary to provide signed timesheets by the engaged experts to
confirm their engagement and the precise time incurred?
3
Version 5 December 2013
(A) 5. Please refer to Articles I.4., II.15 and II.16 of the Framework Service Contract
Models, Annex II.1 and Annex II.2, to the Invitation to tender. This FWC operates with
specific global fee contracts and consequently, timesheets for individual experts will not be
required.
(Q) 6. Are the fees (excluding expenses) specified as payable under the awarded contracts in
the form of fixed lump sums (subject to satisfactory performance in all other respects) or
otherwise to be regarded as “maximum” budgets. Thus, if the total time incurred and charged
(as verified by a timesheet) by any expert is less than the total fees budgeted for that expert;
only the actual incurred time costs, at the agreed daily rate, can be charged to the Contracting
Authority.
(A) 6. This FWC operates with specific global fee contracts: the total sum to be paid for
the services agreed must always correspond to the global price stated in the specific
contract irrespective of the actual number of working hours / days spent.
(Q) 7. In the definitions of qualifying experts set out in the tender specifications, it is noted in
each case that such persons “should have at least X years of experience as a professional
auditor or accountant in public practice”. Can we clarify if individuals who have previously
worked for organisations other than professional accountancy / audit firms in a role that
involves financial compliance and/or systems audit activities are not eligible to have their
time counted in those roles for the purposes of assessment and qualification here? Such
persons might include individuals who have worked for National Audit Offices; national
paying agencies, Ex-post audit services of the EC or other donor institutions as well as NGOs
or corporate organisations which have a specialist financial audit and compliance sector.
(A) 7. Cat 1 experts must have at least 12 years and cat 2 experts must have at least 6 years
of professional experience as a professional auditor in public audit practice.
Please refer to the IFAC definition (Handbook of the Code of Ethics for Professional
Accountants issued by the IESBA (International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants).
A professional accountant in public practice is a professional accountant, irrespective of
functional classification (for example, audit, tax or consulting) in a firm that provides
professional services. This term is also used to refer to a firm of professional accountants
in public practice.
Consequently, experience obtained as auditor in the public sector (Public sector: national
governments, regional (for example, state, provincial, territorial) governments, local (for
example, city, town) governments and related governmental entities (for example,
agencies, boards, commissions and enterprises) will not be taken into account for the 12
and 6 years minimum period of professional experience.
4
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 8. Eligibility of Legal Entity. Re: Contract notice - Additional Information - VI.3 – 2
eligible nationalities of the candidates.
Tenderers' attention is drawn to the fact that only legal entities which are registered in an EU
Member State, in a signatory country of the GPA Agreement or in one of the following
countries: Albania, Chile, Colombia, former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Honduras,
Iceland, Iraq, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Montenegro, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Peru, and
Serbia are eligible (in the case of a consortium, this applies to all the legal entities of the
consortium). Bosnia and Herzegovina will be granted access when the SAA enters into force.
The central American countries of Costa Rica, El Salvador and Guatemala will be granted
access when the bilateral agreements with them enter into force. Should an ineligible legal
entity take part this will result in the application concerned (or the grouping as a whole,
should said party belong to a grouping) being disqualified immediately. With regards to this
extract from the contract notice, please can you clarify the following:
With regards to GPA, there are a number of ‘parties’ to the agreement, and a number of
‘observers’. Please can you confirm whether both parties to the agreement and observers are
eligible to participate as a consortium partner or as a named sub-contract firm or if only
parties to the agreement are eligible. So for example, would a firm registered in Georgia
(country with observer status) be eligible to participate in the tender.
(A) 8. A legal entity registered in a country with observer’s status will not be eligible.
Legal entities which are registered in a signatory country of the GPA Agreement and
which have ratified it are eligible.
(Q) 9. Whether a firm from a beneficiary country that is not registered in an EU Member
state, is not a signatory country of the GPA Agreement or is not in one of the listed countries
(in the contract notice - Additional Information - VI.3 – 2 eligible nationalities of the
candidates – as shown above), is eligible to participate as a consortium partner or as a named
sub-contract firm. For example, in the case of Morocco, a country that is not in any of the
aforementioned categories, but is a beneficiary country, would a firm registered in Morocco
be eligible to participate in the tender?
(A) 9. Non eligible entities under section VI.3.2, like a firm registered in Morocco, cannot
participate to the tender.
5
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 10. Key Experts –nationalities.
Please can you confirm that key experts with a beneficiary country nationality (i.e. Morocco)
are eligible to:
- be nominated as a key expert for the tender and be listed in the table of experts – Annex
I.5 (Cat I & Cat II)
- participate in this tender as a Cat III & Cat IV member of staff
(A) 10. The basic acts of the relevant funding programmes open the participation to
experts (natural persons) without any nationality-restrictions. Nationality restrictions are
only applicable at the level of the tenderer, not the nationality of the individual experts.
(Q) 11. Sub-contractors. With reference to Page 20/21 of the ITT, sub-contracting would
appear to imply that a sub-contractor would undertake the task for the Tenderer, and that work
would not be reviewed by the Tenderer.
In the case where a tender involves the use of local firms to provide audit resources (for
example senior auditors and assistant auditors) as part of the audit methodology and where the
work of the local auditors was to be reviewed by the Tenderer, please can you advise whether
this arrangement would still be considered as sub-contracting.
(A) 11. The Tenderer is fully responsible at all times for the quality of the work no matter
whether this work is subcontracted or performed by the Tenderer's own staff. The Tenderer
has a duty of care towards the Commission. As this responsibility cannot be subcontracted,
key experts must be provided by the tenderer or the tendering consortium.
Please refer to Article II.7 “Subcontracting” of the General Conditions of Service
Framework Contracts, Framework Service Contract Model, Annex II.1 and Annex II. 2. to
the Invitation to Tender.
(Q) 12. Audits of External Aid Actions
With regards to audits of the various types of external aid actions, please can you confirm
whether the framework contract will cover audits of external aid actions with commitments
from non EuropeAid budget, as well as audits of external aid actions with commitments from
EuropeAid budget and commitments from EDF budget.
(A) 12. This is correct. The Audit Framework Contract covers services in the field of
audits of external aid actions financed by the European Commission from the European
Development Fund (EDF) and the General Budget of the European Union (EU Budget).
External aid actions primarily relate to actions managed by EuropeAid Cooperation Office
and EU Delegations. However, any other Commission DGs which are implementing
external aid actions financed from the Budget or the EDF (these include in particular DG
ECHO, DG ELARG, DG TRADE and FPI but occasionally other DGs such as for example
AGRI) may use the Audit Framework Contract.
6
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 13. Secondary Competition
Please can you confirm that following award of a maximum of 4 framework contracts with
contractors, that:
(Q) 13.1. There will be a secondary competition amongst all of the contractors (maximum of
4) for each Specific Request for Service (RFS), irrespective of the framework contractors
ranking (1 – 4) for the overall framework contract.
(A) 13.1. Your understanding is correct. Please refer to II.1.5 of the Contract notice and
Article 4 and Article 5 of Annex I “Tender Specifications” to the Invitation to Tender.
(Q) 132. No preference will be given to the order of the framework contractors ranking 1 – 4
for the award of the contract in response to the RFS.
(A) 13.2. Your understanding is correct. Please refer to Article 4 “Procedures for
concluding specific contracts under Lots 1 and 2” and Article 5 “Procedures for concluding
specific contracts under Lot 3”of the “Tender Specifications”, Annex I to the Invitation to
Tender.
(Q) 13.3. Please can you also confirm that the scoring for this secondary competition will be
80% technical, 20 % financial.
(A) 13.3. Please refer to Article 4 “Procedures for concluding specific contracts under
Lots 1 and 2” and Article 5 “Procedures for concluding specific contracts under Lot 3”of
the tender specifications, Annex I to the Invitation to Tender.
(Q) 14. Assessment of project experience/technical and professional capacity.
The technical quality evaluation grid provided in the ITT (P28) does not appear to list
allocation of scoring for Technical and Professional capacity of a bidder – relevant audit
services provided in the last 3 years. Please can you clarify how details of the list of relevant
audit services completed in Annex I.2 will be assessed, or confirm whether this section is an
area where the Tenderer is purely required to ‘pass’ an internal threshold set by the European
Commission, in order to be considered eligible as a potential contractor.
(A) 14. The professional experience of the tenderers is part of the selection criteria as per
Article 3.3 of the Tender Specifications, Annex I to the Invitation to Tender, therefore it is
a yes/no assessment on the basis of minimum requirements . The technical quality
evaluation grid is part of the award criteria as per Section 3.4 of the Tender Specifications,
Annex I to the Invitation to Tender and is based on a score in order to elect the best offers.
7
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 15. Use of local auditors
With regards to staffing and performance of audits, please can you advise whether it is a
requirement that a local auditor be a part of the audit team for each audit in any given country
where the audit is being performed?
(A) 15. Please refer to Articles 4.2 and 4.3 of Annex I “Tender Specifications” to the
Invitation to Tender and to the website with the terms of reference for audits.
http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/frameworkcontract/audit2010/tor_for_financial_and_systems_audits_en.htm
For example you can refer to section 4.2 (Qualifications, Experience and Team
Composition) of the ToR for financial audits. Local knowledge (e.g. language skills,
knowledge of relevant laws, regulations and rules) may be required (this is optional) on a
case-by-case basis. This doesn't necessarily mean that the expert / auditor must be a local
but in practice that will often be the case. There is normally never a formal requirement to
use local auditors.
(Q) 16. Staffing of the consortium
With regards to the financial offer (P30 of the ITT), it is stated that financial offer of tenders
will be made on the basis of the average overall fee rate weighed for each category, as shown
below:
Cat I – Partner – 20%
Cat II – Audit Manager – 30%
Cat II – Senior Auditor – 30%
Cat IV – Assistant Auditor – 20%
Please can you clarify whether the weighting per category, is also an indication of the amount
of time that each category of expert will be required to spend on each audit.
(A) 16. Please refer to Article 3.4.2 Financial Offer of the “Tender Specifications”, Annex
I to the Invitation to Tender which states:
Comparison of financial offers of tenderers will be made on the basis of the average
overall fee rate weighed for each category as follows:
Category I: 20%; category II: 30%; category 3: 30% and category 4: 20%.
The amount of time is not used in the computation.
8
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 17. Mobilisation following contract signature
We understand from the Invitation to Tender (ITT) that it is expected that the contractor will
be able to provide experts at short notice for specific engagements to be contracted under Lot
1 and 2 of the FWC (P 25 of the ITT). Please could you provide an approximate typical
timeframe between the signing of a contract for a specific engagement under the FWC and the
mobilisation of audit resources when you would expect the audit work to commence.
(A) 17. Please refer to the website with the terms of reference for audits.
http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/frameworkcontract/audit2010/tor_for_financial_and_systems_audits_en.htm
For example you can refer to section 6.2 (Planning and Fieldwork) of the ToR for financial
audits.
Start of the audit. The date of signature of the Commission's order form or other applicable
contractual document for the audit is the official starting date of the audit.
The Auditor should contact the Entity as soon as possible to prepare the audit and to agree
a date to start the fieldwork but not before the audit has been formally announced by the
Commission. This should not be later than 7 calendar days from the starting date of the
audit.
(Q) 18. Page limitations & Annexes
(Q) 18.1 Please can you advise whether the page limit outlined for the methodology is a strict
limitation or should this be used for guidance purposes to get an overview of the level of
information that is required to be included in the tender.
(A) 18.1 The page limitations in Annex I.8 and Annex I.9 to the Invitation to Tender are
maximum number of pages which is are mandatory and this shall be respected. The
description / narratives shall be sufficient, clear and self-explanatory. That means that it
should not be necessary to refer to annexes to understand the methodology.
(Q) 18.2 In order to support information provided in the methodology, will the contracting
authority accept annexes, so for example: organograms or listings?
(A) 18.2 Yes, this can be useful to illustrate or detail information provided in the
descriptions / narratives (see (A) 18.2 but it is not necessary.
9
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 19. Eligible nationalities
In section VI of the contract notice: Complementary information, point VI.3) Additional
information point 2, the eligible nationalities of the candidates are listed. Could you please
kindly clarify if this criteria applies only to legal entities involved in a consortium or also for
subcontractors? Given the geographical spread of the contract, we assume it is the former but
would appreciate your confirmation on this point.
(A) 19. This criterion does not apply for subcontractors nor for the nationality of individual
experts. It does apply to the nationality of the tenderer(s).
(Q) 20. Submission of tender
Although in the invitation to tender it is requested to submit the tender in one original and 3
copies, in the service tender submission form (annex III to the invitation to tender) it is stated:
“one signed original of this tender submission form must be supplied, together with five
copies and a CD-ROM”. Could you please confirm that one original, 3 copies and a CD-ROM
are correct?
(A) 20. Please read as provided for in the invitation to tender: 1 original, 3 copies and 1
CD-ROM.
(Q) 21. List of audit services
With regards to the annex I.2 (lot 1) and I.3 (lot 2): technical and professional capacity – list
of relevant audit services provided in the past 3 years, we would like to know whether project
references implemented only by consortium members and subcontractors can be included or
is it possible to also include references from our wider international network of firms by for
instance producing an undertaking on the part of these entities? If the latter is acceptable,
please could you also confirm vis-à-vis question 1 (Q 19) above that these can be worldwide
or if there are any specific eligibility criteria to adhere to?
(A) 21 Audit services provided in the past 3 years and listed in the application must have
been implemented by the tenderer or members of the tendering consortium only.
10
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 22. Exclusivity statement
Could you clarify if all our auditors involved in this contract (i.e. NOT freelancers)
irrespective of the XXX network firm they are employed by are under the obligation to sign
an exclusivity statement? It goes without saying that any full time employee we put forward
for the execution of this framework contract is by definition exclusively working for our firm
or one of our Member network firms and no other.
(A) 22. All key experts stated on the list of key experts (Section 3.3.2.2 of the Tender
Specifications, Annex I to the Invitation to Tender) must sign an exclusivity statement.
11
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 23. Auditors not employed by the submitting legal entity
Could you clarify if we are entitled to put forward auditors who are not employees of the legal
entity which is submitting for this framework contract, but are employees of member firms of
our network?
(A) 23. The following text replaces the previous text.
For specific contracts, tenderers can put forward auditors who are employees of the
member firms of their network, if any, but who are not employees of the legal entity or
entities which are bidding for this framework contract. However, this does not apply to
key experts.
Each legal entity and/or member firm of a network which provides key experts (i.e.
category 1 and 2 experts) must be a member of the consortium, and therefore:
 shall be clearly indicated as a consortium member on the Service Tender Submission
Form in Annex III of the invitation to tender (with all details required by this form)
 shall, if that tender wins the contract, sign the framework contract (become a contractor)
or, alternatively, commit itself to execute the contract jointly and severally with the
contractor;
 shall be registered in countries which are eligible for the purpose of this tender
procedure (see contract notice published in the OJ Section VI.3.2);
 shall sign and submit a declaration of availability for the key experts it employs and
which are included on the list of key experts for this tender procedure (See Article
3.3.2.2 of the tender specifications);
(Q) 24. Page limitations and annexes
Could you clarify if bidders are allowed to include annexes in excess of the maximum number
of pages indicated in the tender specifications? Indeed, you have set a minimum number of
expert CVs to be included, but if we surpass this minimum we are bound to surpass the
minimum number of pages allowed. Could you clarify if CVs and project references form part
of the proposal or can be included in annex?
(A) 24. See Answers A18.1 and A18.2.
12
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 25. Network of firms – statement of legal entity on capacity and resources
In addition to the evidence required under 3.3.2.2 relating to the technical and professional
capacity, and the current list of the Member Firms in our network (as required in the
Tenderer's Declaration in Annex IV), we plan to include in our tender a statement from our
legal entity, signed by our authorised representative, confirming that we will have at our
disposal, via our network of Member Firms, the capacity and resources required to carry out
the audit engagements worldwide. Given that, in the event our tender is successful, the
signature of any contract, audit opinion etc. would be the sole responsibility of our legal entity
(as single contractor), could you please confirm if the above-mentioned statement from our
legal entity would be acceptable and sufficient?
(A) 25. See the modified Answer A23.
(Q) 26. Network outside EU/GPA countries
In the contract notice it states that this call for tender is reserved to legal entities based in the
EU Member States or in GPA countries. Nevertheless, we are asked in the tender
specifications to ensure we can cover audits worldwide. Could you confirm that we may rely
on the capacity of our network outside of the EU/GPA countries in order to be able to meet
the requirement to cover audits worldwide.
(A) 26. See Answer A25. The legal entity submitting the tender may rely on the capacity of
the member firms of its worldwide network including member firms which are not based in
EU/GPA countries.
(Q) 27. Request for extension of the deadline to submit tender files
We fully appreciate that there was no requirement from the Commission to provide immediate
responses to any clarifications submitted regarding the tender, however, we do feel that a
response to our query re eligibility of firms based in certain countries was fundamental before
we could look to organise appropriate groupings of firms to form an ‘eligible’ consortium.
We felt this was a particularly poignant question as from our own experience of performing
previous EuropeAid and EDF audits, it is normally the case that beneficiary countries are
eligible to participate, however the notice appeared to indicate the contrary for this particular
assignment, and we needed to be absolutely sure on which countries were eligible for
participation before proceeding with tender preparation.
We now acknowledge kind receipt of your response to this, and our other queries, but would
note that more than 5 weeks of the tender preparation time has already passed. We are
13
Version 5 December 2013
effectively only now able to form our consortium grouping in the knowledge of which firms
are eligible to be included in the tendering consortia. As I am sure you will understand,
organising a consortium grouping and collating all necessary documentation from the
consortium firms, does take a considerable amount of time.
We understand that all potential tenderers are in the same position, but I am writing to enquire
if in light of this fundamental position only being clarified yesterday, and with only 4 weeks
remaining of an original 9 weeks preparation time, is the Commission considering an
extension to the current tender deadline (06/12/2013) to take into account the time that has
already lapsed whilst awaiting clarification on the key question re eligibility.
(A) 27. The deadline to submit tender files will be extended. This change will be published
with a corrigendum in the Official Journal as soon as possible.
(Q) 28. Key Experts
In light of your responses to clarifications questions 1, 3.4, 9 and 11, can you confirm that a
named “Key Expert” can be employed by a specified subcontractor firm which is not based in
a GPA signatory country?
(A) 28. This understanding is not correct. See the modified Answer A23.
(Q) 29. Inconsistency in clarifications
Additionally, in reading the updated list of clarifications, it seemed to me that there is an
apparent inconsistency in the responses given to Q3.4 and Q23 respectively. Could you also
kindly clarify on this matter as well please.
(A) 29. Answer 23 has been revised and is consistent with Answer A3.4.
14
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 30. Letters of undertaking
Answer 23 states “Member firms of the network of the submitting legal entity are de facto
consortium members”. Please can you therefore confirm whether we can present our global
network of firms without letters of undertaking? If yes, please note that question 2 below
becomes redundant.
Linked to the above question, if undertakings are required for each member firm from our
network of firms to ensure coverage of the applicable beneficiary countries, please confirm
whether letters of undertaking would be sufficient or do we need to consider each entity as an
intended subcontractor and also include declarations of honor (annex VIII)? If we need to
provide all this documentation to cover all applicable beneficiary countries, please note that
tenderers may take time to collect all the required documentation from all firms in beneficiary
countries. As it has been mentioned that it is up to tenderers to determine whether local
offices should be included, we draw attention to Q&A 15 which strongly implies that the
involvement of local auditors is expected, stating: “This doesn’t mean that the expert / auditor
must be a local but in practice that will often be the case.”
(A) 30. Please refer to the modified Answer 23 for resources falling under Key Experts
(Category 1 and 2 Experts).
For other resources (e.g. logistical support or category 3 experts), a letter of undertaking must
be provided by the firm (whether it be a subcontractor or a member firm of the tenderer’s
network which is not included as a consortium member) providing these resources. The
letter(s) of undertaking must be included in the tender, or, if the identity is not known at the
time of submission of the tender, at the time of applying for the agreement of the Commission
for subcontracting (see 3.1 Annex 1: Tender Specifications and Article II.7 of the FWC)
(Q) 31. Proposed changes in tender specifications
Looking at the specifications and Q&As provided on the availability of (up to) 15 Category 1
and 2 experts at short notice for all potential contracts, we need to establish a mix of
technically compliant experts to cover all potential needs, regions, types of assignments,
languages, etc. In practice there may be difficulties to have in that selected list of 15 senior
experts the best-fit “ideal” profile depending on the specific requirements and circumstances
of a given engagement. The current modalities as they are defined do not provide much
flexibility with the definition of only 15 “fixed” Key Experts and their potential replacement
options which are quite strict. Can these above-mentioned modalities be softened to allow for
proposing alternates in these cases which fit better with the requirements put forward vis-à-vis
the engagement?
(A) 31. The tender specifications cannot be changed. Please also refer to Answer A3.3.
15
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 32. Template for the declaration of availability of key Experts
Linked to the above question (Q 31), there is no template provided for the declaration of
availability of Key Experts, aside the guidance to include the actual list of Key Experts. If no
simple model text or template can be provided, we assume that it is left at the discretion of
tenderers to determine the remaining content? However, there is an obvious concern that
tenderers may not be perceived as being compliant should the sought formulation not be
provided due for instance to diverging interpretations of this requirement. Could you please
therefore elaborate on the items and terms to be covered and included in such a declaration?
Without such guidance, we might assume on the one hand that tenderers could be compliant if
they provide a general statement, with the list of experts, to the effect that the experts in the
list are the persons intended to be made available for specific contracts; alternatively, we
might equally assume that the intention of the declaration is to state in more specific way that
at least one person from the list will be involved with any given specific contract. Please
could you provide additional guidance on this to avoid this uncertainty as our understanding is
that this is a yes/no compliance issue?
(A) 32. No template for the statement of availability of key experts will be provided.
Please refer to the provisions of Article 3.3.2.2. of the tender specifications:
“A Statement on availability of Key Experts. Tenderers must provide a statement
confirming that the key experts named on the List of Key Experts will be available at short
notice for specific engagements to be contracted under Lot 1 and 2 of the FWC and for
training to be delivered under Lot 3. The names of the key experts should be mentioned on
the Statement on availability of Key Experts or the list of Key Experts can be attached to
the Statement. Tenderers are informed that the period between the sending of a Request for
Services and the concluding of contract for a specific engagement under the FWC is
normally 42 calendar days or 6 weeks. As regards audit training they will be informed
about planned audit trainings as soon as these are known. “
(Q) 33. Replacement of Key Experts
Linked to the above 2 questions (Q31 and 32), in certain cases, to enable a higher level of
quality in the delivery of services, it may be advisable to deploy Category 1 and / or Category
2 experts from legal entities based in beneficiary countries that are not permitted to be among
the tendering group. Our understanding is that this is not permitted as such experts cannot be
on the list of Key Experts but will this be possible in practice, if deemed appropriate, as they
might provide clear benefits In terms of quality and also cost-efficiency? If the intention is to
ensure that experts from the tenderers are systematically deployed for engagements, could
there be a more flexible approach that could include exceptions and also allow for the
deployment of Category 1 and / or Category 2 experts who are locally based even when other
level experts from the tendering group are also involved?
(A) 33. No, only key experts specified on the list of key experts can be deployed. Please
also refer to Answer A3.3.
16
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 34. Finally, linked to the above 3 questions (Q31 – 33), could you confirm our
understanding that we cannot present Category 1 and / or 2 experts who work for member
firms in non-eligible countries as natural persons?
(A) 34. This understanding is correct. Please refer to Answer A23.
(Q) 35. International network members
Clarification Q23, do we understand it correctly that, since our lead firm (based in a GPA
country) is a part of an international Network, are all the members of our international
network de facto member of the consortium even if they are not located in the GPA
Countries?
(A) 35. Please refer to the modified Answer A23.
(Q) 36. International network members
If the answer on the first question (q 35) is negative, can you confirm that all the members of
our international network based in the GPA countries are de facto consortium members?
(A) 36. Please refer to the modified Answer A23. Members of your network are only
consortium members if they are specified at point 1 of the Service Tender Submission
Form, Annex III to the Invitation to Tender as leader or members of a consortium.
(Q) 37. Format of CVs
Could you give some guidance regarding CV templates? We have all our CVs in Europass
format. Your format differs from this. Is it acceptable to use Europass CV format or do we
have to rewrite all our submitted CVs?
(A) 37. The model CV provided in Annex XI “Technical and professional capacity” to the
invitation to tender should be used.
(Q) 38. Shortlist of bidding companies
With reference to the above Procurement Notice, I would like to know whether the shortlist of
bidding companies is already established and whether or when this list will be published in
the respective Procurement Notice. Please use the private address below.
(A) 38. This is an open call for tenders and it does not require publication of a shortlist of
bidding companies.
17
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 39. Alleged contradictory information
The legal entity submitting the tender is part of an official network of firms.
Answer 1 and answer 2 of the 12 Nov Q&A, state that the list of key experts (cat 1 or cat 2)
can only contain employees of the legal entity (or consortium of legal entities) submitting the
bid. Member firms of the network (not part of the consortium submitting the bid) can only
provide non-key-experts or logistical support.
Answer 23 of the 12 Nov Q&A state that member firms of the network of the submitting legal
entity are de facto consortium members. Key experts employed by consortium members can
be stated in the list of key experts.
We see a possible contradiction in the above answers. Can you please clarify?
(A) 39. Please note that Answer A23 has been modified.
(Q) 40. Experts
Answer 3.2 states that only named experts in the tender submission can ever be proposed as a
category 1 and 2 within any subsequent RfS.
Answer 15 states that for a specific RfS local knowledge may be required. This doesn't
necessarily mean that the expert / auditor must be a local but in practice that will often be the
case.
Our question is if we are allowed for a specific RfS to propose a category 1 or 2 resource from
our local firm (separate legal entity, part of our network, but not EU, not GPA). These cat 1 or
2 local resources would come in addition to the proposed key experts (which were on the list
of key experts in the framework contract).
(A) 40. For each specific RfS you have to propose key experts in category 1 and/or 2
which are specified in the List of Key-Experts.
18
Version 5 December 2013
(Q) 41. Our company would like to apply for multiple framework service contract for the
provision of services in the field of audits of external aid actions, financed by the European
Commission from the European Development Fund (EDF) and the general budget of the
European Union 2013/S 192-330430. Could you, please, tell me which documents we are
supposed to submit?
(A) 41. Please refer to the contract notice, published in OJ/S S192 on 03/10/2013, reference
number 2013/S 192-330430. Information in electronically form is at the following address:
https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/europeaid/onlineservices/index.cfm?do=publi.welcome&nbPubliList=15&orderby=upd&orderbyad=D
esc&searchtype=RS&aofr=134948
19
Version 5 December 2013