Transparent Procurement
Procedures & Prequalification
of Consultants
By
Syed Adil Gilani
Vice Chairman & CEO
Transparency International Pakistan
1
Address of Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah to the
Constituent
Assembly of Pakistan on his election
as President of the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan
(11th
August 1947)
“One of the biggest curses from which India is
suffering…is bribery and corruption. That really is
a poison. We must put that down with an iron
hand and I hope that you will take adequate
measures as soon as it is possible for this
Assembly to do so.”
In 2004, Pakistan with Transparency International CPI scores of 1.9, India with
2.9 and Bangladesh with 1.2 out of 10 are ranked in the lowest 50 countries 2
amongst 141 countries.
What Procurement Means
Procurement is the engineering term for all
purchases, supplies, tendering of construction
works, turnkey projects and consultancy
services.
PPRA definition of Contractor as contained in
Public Procurement Rules 2004 clarifies this in
more appropriate manner;
“contractor” means a person, consultant, firm,
company or an organization who undertakes to
supply goods, services or works;
3
4
Public Procurement Rules, 2004 (PPR)
PPR have eliminated all discretions in procurement process,
The Vital Rules which have incorporated checks and balances in discretion free
Procurement System are;
Standardization of Procurement Process and tender documents, aadvertise all
prequalification or tenders over Rs 40 thousand on Procuring Agency website
as well as on PPRA website and in at least one English & one Urdu National
Daily Newspaper, Min 15 days,
Provide Prequalification & Tender Documents to bidders which shall include all
relevant information, including the detailed evaluation criteria, Bid award
method, Signing of Integrity Pact, Rights of bidders for complain on evaluation
report prior to award, Standard Conditions of Contract, Specifications which
shall allow the widest possible competition and shall not favour any single
contractor or supplier nor put others at a disadvantage, elimination of culture of
Gallop/Short Tender etc
Announcement of the results of bid evaluation in the form of a report giving
justification for acceptance or rejection of bids at least ten days prior to the
award of procurement contract, and no negotiations with the bidder having
submitted the lowest evaluated bid or with any other bidder
Finalizing of the Evaluation Report after examining all complaints,
Award of all Contracts to Consultants, Contractors & Suppliers only to the
5
responsive lowest evaluated bidder.
LOWEST BIDDER MAY NOT BE
“THE RESPONSIVE LOWEST EVALUATED BIDDER”
The general perception that when the tender is opened the Bid which is
the lowest at the time of Tender Opening is the Lowest Bid and shall be
awarded the Tender.
This perception is not correct.
After Tender Opening preliminary checks are required to determine the
responsiveness of all Bids.
A bid is non-responsive and not to be considered
on any of the
following grounds ;
6
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
It is received after the time and date fixed for its receipt,
Bidder refuses to Sign the Integrity Pact.
It is submitted through fax, telex, telegram or e-mail.
It is not accompanied with valid Bid Security.
It is unsigned.
Its validity of tender is less than specified.
It is submitted for incomplete Scope of Work.
It indicates completion date later than specified.
It indicates that prices quoted are not firm during currency of the contract
except those prices where escalation/adjustments are permitted in the
Conditions of Contracts.
10. It indicates that material to be supplied does not meet the eligibility
requirements.
11. It indicates that Bid Prices do not include the amount of taxes & duties.
12. If Bidder refuses to accept the arithmetic corrections.
13. It
is
materially
and
substantially
different
from
the
Conditions/ Specifications of Bidding Documents.
10. It provides Sub-contracting, contrary to conditions specified in the
Bidding
11. Documents. It fails to comply Mile-Stones/critical dates specified
in
Bidding Documents.
12. The bidder is not valid license holder of the PEC.
7
Quote from National Anti
Corruption Report
“Procurement was of huge
concern to stakeholders,
who
highlighted
the
following weaknesses as
being particularly vital in
allowing procurement to
be the breeding ground
for corruption. “

Pakistan has no coherent
single law setting standards
and
no
effective
legal
protection against collusion
and corruption in the award of
government contracts. Instead,
there is an accretion of
complex
laws,
rules,
regulations,
codes
and
manuals which create a web
of lengthy and cumbersome
practices and customs. (Unlike
other developing countries,
donors’ procurement rules do
not prevail over local rules,
although the Ministry of
Finance has tried to enforce
this.)
8
Quote from National Anti Corruption Report Manipulation of the procurement process
The rules and regulations are
manipulated
to
deter
competition, thwart objectivity
and transparency and give
officials
wide
and
unsupervised
latitude
in
applying or ignoring the tangle
of rules. The ground for
corruption is laid at every stage
of the procurement process, as
seen in the box below
Overall: head of Procuring
Agency
certifies
that
procurement process is urgent,
thereby avoiding requirement
for
competitive
bidding;
projects/contracts split to avoid
competitive
bidding
requirements above a certain
cost ceiling; officials take
advantage of the year-end
(May-June)
period,
when
departments are trying to
spend their budget allocations,
to rush through procurements
which then escape proper
procedures and monitoring;
9
Quote from National Anti Corruption Report Manipulation of the procurement process
Technical
Feasibility:
improper feasibility studies
may be undertaken to
overvalue projects, to the
benefit of officials; studies
may also be undertaken by
consultants with links to
contractors;
Tender Documents: project
specifications are prepared
to
favour
particular
contractors;
Registration/pre-qualification and
Invitations for bids: process is kept
bureaucratic
(e.g.
numerous
unnecessary conditions to fulfill) and
lengthy
to deter
competition;
advertisements in low circulation
publications;
published
tender
notices are followed by a number of
short addenda, which if missed by
bidders in their tenders would lead
to their disqualification; short notice
for submission of bids whilst
favoured bidder had prior notice and
time to prepare; officials will create
their own fictitious companies to bid
and approve them through this
stage of the process;
10
Quote from National Anti Corruption Report Manipulation of the procurement process
Preparation of bids:
collusion
between
competitors will lead to
inflated
pricing;
‘pooling’, whereby one
bidder
"buys"
his
competitors’
bids,
changing their values,
submitting the lowest
bid far in excess of the
market price; multiple
bids by contractor
operating
under
different names;
Bid Evaluation: financial
envelopes are often opened
before technical; unrealistic
and outdated Schedules of
Rates are used to defeat good
bids by "outsiders"; delays are
created to generate kickbacks
11
Quote from National Anti Corruption Report Manipulation of the procurement process
Negotiations: no rules exist
for the negotiation period, but
is often the period when
collusion and coercion occur.
Prices may be renegotiated
and adjusted after contracts
have been let.
This manipulation of often
quite acceptable rules only
allows corruption because of
the
inherent
lack
of
transparency and public
participation
in
the
procurement process. Without
this, any set of procurement
laws and rules can be
manipulated
for
selfenrichment.
The public are usually denied the
opportunity to be informed of, monitor or
participate
in,
aspects
of
the
procurement or development affecting
their community and country. There is no
other mechanism by which the public
may be satisfied about the integrity of
the process.
The blame does not lie entirely with the
government side of course. There are
builder’s mafias, collusion between
bidders and widespread bribery by
national companies. However, in terms
of grand corruption, multinationals, and
therefore their governments must share
the blame, as many tend to view
corruption as a Pakistani trait, which
they are content to accept, by the use of
"agents."
12
Use of Procurement Manual
This Manual is intended to
provide
necessary
clarifications
and
assistance
in
the
procurement process
in
Pakistan
Steel
with
essential in-built Checks
and Balances to ensure the
desired transparency in all
its procurement.
The Manual does not contain any
new rules of procurement, but is
compiled from existing World Bank /
PEC procedures combined with the
recommendations of the NACS
2002 policy and Public Procurement
Rules, 2004 . However it explains in
more detail how specific aspects of
procurement should be handled to
be consistent with the Guidelines. It
is a source of “how-to” information
about the tasks and elements that
comprise the procurement process.
13
Use of Procurement Manual
Chapter I
The Procurement Manual describes the review of
policy and institutional aspects of transparent public
procurement that have a broad applicability, about
which questions are most frequently asked.
Subsequent chapters deal with specific procurement
topics, taking them generally in the chronological order
in which they occur, from the initial analysis of a
procurement systems and capacity, through the
procurement planning stages and into project
implementation and contract administration.
14
The Four considerations that guide
the rules for Procurement are:
a) Ensuring economy and efficiency in project
procurement.
b) Giving eligible, responsive and technically Qualified
bidders a fair opportunity to compete on a level
playing field,
c) Encouraging the development of Domestic Producers
Constructors and Engineering Services Providers
d) Providing for Transparency in the Procurement
Process.
15
Tendering Process


Organize Project
Management /
Implementation
Teams
Prepare
Prequalification
Documents (In case
the Pre-qualification
is being undertaken)



Revise and Clear
Prequalification
Document (if
necessary)
Obtain Approval
Advertise
Prequalification
Documents
16
Tendering Process



Prepare
Applications
(Suppliers)
Manage Application
Process
Draft Bidding
Documents



Obtain Approval of
Bid Documents
Evaluate and Select
Pre-qualified Firms
Obtain approval
17
Tendering Process


Prepare
Applications
(Suppliers)
Distribute List of
Pre-qualified Firms
to All Applicants
and Issue Bidding
Documents

Opening of Bids

Evaluate and Select
Lowest Responsive
Evaluated Bid

Evaluation Report
Declaration to bidders
for inviting Objections
within 15 days.
18
Tendering Process

Re Examine Evaluation Report
and Objections.

Revise and Finalize Evaluation
Report and Submit the
Recommendation to Award the
Bid to the Lowest Responsive
Bidder to Authority for
Approval, and Award the Bid to
the Lowest Responsive Bidder


Public access and
transparency.- As soon as a
contract has been awarded the
procuring agency shall make all
documents related to the
evaluation of the bid and award
of contract public:
Provided that where the
disclosure of any information
related to the award of a
contract is of proprietary nature
or where the procuring agency
is convinced that such
disclosure shall be against the
public interest, it can withhold
only such information from
public disclosure subject to the
prior approval of the Authority.
19
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants

Because it is too time
consuming to invite
and evaluate proposals
from all consultants
who want to compete,
Selection is based on
limited competition
among qualified firms
who have the required
experience and are
capable of delivering
the required services
and desired level of
quality.

From the consultants’
point of view, the use of
a shortlist reduces the
number of proposals to
be prepared, raises
proposal quality, and
increases the chances
of the consultant
winning the
competition. For the
PIA, it is an effective
way of attracting the
best candidates for the
assignment.
20
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants

Procedures for hiring
consultants
provide
that, first, consultant
opportunities
are
advertised. Then, on the
basis
of
those
consultants
who
submitted expressions
of interest in response
to the advertisement
the Procuring Agency
prepares a shortlist of
consultants who will be
invited to present their
proposals.

Integrity Pact.
High value and high
profile procurements in
particular, above Rupees
Ten Million for
procurement of Services,
Goods and Works are to
be based on Integrity
Pacts. The Standard
prescribed “Integrity Pact”
is given in the Manual.
21
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants

Consultants may associate with each other. Such an
association may be for the long term (independent of
any particular assignment) or for a specific
assignment. The “association” may take the form of
a joint venture or of a sub-consultancy. In case if the
an association is in the form of a joint venture, the
association should appoint one of the firms to
represent the association. All members of the joint
venture shall sign the contract and shall be jointly
and severally liable for the entire assignment. Any
association in the form of joint venture or subconsultancy among short-listed firms shall be
permissible only with the approval of Procuring
Agency
22
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants
Allocation of Sub Criteria.


Sub-criteria and their weighting determine the outcome
of the evaluation, they should be chosen considering the
aspects that are critical to the success of the
assignment. Evaluation criteria and sub-criteria,
associated points, and the rating
system form an arithmetic model to assess the technical
merit of the proposals. The more reliable the model, the
more accurate the evaluation and the greater the
possibility that
Procuring Agency
will select the
proposal of the consultants who are best suited for the
assignment. All sub-criteria points shall be included in
the prequalification documents for information of the
applicants.
23
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants
Fair Competition.


Sub Clause 6.3 of the PEC Standard Guideline
restricting the number of qualified firms, is deleted,
to enable all qualified firms to have fair opportunity
to participate in the competition.
This has therefore to be ensured that the
Prequalification should not be used to limit
competition to a predetermined number of potential
bidders. All applicants who have the qualifications to
perform the proposed contract should be prequalified and bidding documents made available to
all those who stands pre-qualified. No upper limit
therefore should be imposed on the number of prequalified potential bidders.
24
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants
Copy of the PEC Standard Guidelines for Evaluation
of Proposals for Procurement of Engineering
Services issued on May, 2002 by Pakistan
Engineering Council Islamabad and amended by TIPakistan in June 2005 is attached as Annexure IV.
The Use of the Standard Guidelines For Evaluation of
Proposals for Procurement of Engineering Services
issued on May, 2002 by Pakistan Engineering
Council Islamabad along with the with modifications
as prescribed by the Public Procurement Rules,
2004.
25
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants
All consultancy contracts except single source
selection of engineering experts if falls under the
preview of direct contracting, or negotiated
tendering under the Public Procurement Rules 2004,
should be processed on the two envelope system,
evaluated on the basis of technical competence with
minimum passing marks of 75% .
The Use of the Standard Guidelines For Evaluation of
Proposals for Procurement of Engineering Services
issued on May, 2002 by Pakistan Engineering
Council Islamabad along with the with modifications
as prescribed by the Public Procurement Rules,
2004.
26
EVALUATION OF
APPLICATIONS
Evaluation of the Experience
Similarly the general experience should also be
considered after certain limitation in numbers
because after certain number, more projects may
not add much to differentiate between the
competitors. Weightage of general experience
shall be 30%. A maximum of 10 to 20 projects
should be enough number to fetch full hundred
percent points. A sample is proposed as follows:27
EVALUATION OF
APPLICATIONS
Evaluation of the Specific Experience
No. of Projects
1st Project
2nd Project
3rd Project
4th Project
5th Project
For Max. 5 Projects
50 Percent
75 Percent
85 Percent
95 Percent
100 Percent
For Max. 3 Projects
70 Percent
90 Percent
100 Percent
-
28
EVALUATION OF
APPLICATIONS
Evaluation of the General Experience
Where Maximum Number of
Projects is fixed as 20
Numbers of
Projects
Min: 3
4-5
6-7
8-10
11-13
14-16
17-20
Proposed
Criteria
20%
40%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Where Maximum Number of
Project is fixed as 10
Number of Projects
Min: 2
3-5
6-7
8-9
10
Proposed Criteria
25%
60%
85%
95%
100%
29
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants
Other Factors
There are some other factors which do have a
bearing on the overall proficiency of a firm in
meeting its obligations later during the currency of
the contract. For example, when training of Client’s
staff is a requirement on the project, the firms having
previous experience and resources could be better
placed to perform that part of the assignment.
Similarly experienced home office professional staff
as well as availability of equipment/software and
facilities are useful for timely handling of critical
issues and in time availability of
equipment/facilities respectively. These and such
other factors which differentiate between otherwise
excellent firms should be considered as weighted
qualifications
30
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants
Evaluation of Quality of Staff
For the sake of assigning weightage to judge capability of
the firm on the basis of expertise of its staff, the following
steps may be adopted:i) List the type of essential expertise required for the
project.
ii) The number of discipline- types included in the list
should be the most important ones and be limited to a
maximum of 5.
iii) Assess the relative importance of each expertise viz-aviz the requirements of the project.
iv) Assign number of credit points to each expertise/the
staff member nominated for that expertise.
31
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants
2
i)
ii)
iii)
D
D
Nominated experts should be evaluated on the basis of the
following three items of qualification as demonstrated in their
C.Vs:Academic Qualification
Professional Experience
Specific
General
Experience of working environment
Nationally
Internationally
Specific Area within the Country
Which is based on:
Specific Province
60%
Regional Language
40%
20-30 Percent
60-70 Percent
80%
20%
10 Percent
60%
20%
20%
32
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants
1.
2.
Evaluation of applications should preferably be carried out
individually by the committee members on forms jointly
developed by the committee and using the predetermined weightage award sub-criteria. Sample Forms
for evaluation of experience and staff are placed at AnnexC, Forms C-1 and C-2 for the committee’s reference and
guidance. After finalization of the evaluation, each member
should compile the grading list containing a Summary of
points and the Annex-C, Forms C-1 and C-2 a copy of
which be submitted to the Convener of the Committee
before a formal meeting is convened by him.
Note: Evaluation criteria and sub-criteria on which the
evaluation will be conducted shall be included in the
prequalification documents.
33
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants
FINALIZATION OF SHORT-LIST

1
The selection committee should hold a meeting to
review the evaluation/grading carried out by the
individual committee members. The basic aim is to
review the capabilities of consultants securing above
qualifying marks in the individual grading on each list.
Since the members have evaluated the firms on the
basis of an agreed criteria hence it has considerable
advantage of organized discussion and consideration of
those firms only which are not unanimous choice. The
discussion will yield a more balanced grading of firms and
finalization of the short-list. Additionally, discussions in
this meeting shall reduce the likelihood of unsupported
personal bias.

All the applicants scoring qualifying marks shall be
shortlist.
34
PREQUALIFICATION
of Consultants


The PEC Bye Laws under “General Regulations”
require that the status of the Partners, Directors,
Owners for the sake of conflict of interest must
also be verified before its inclusion in the shortlist.
For this purpose, the applicants should be
required to provide this information in specific
terms and any misrepresentation should be
made a ground for rejection. Firms may also be
forewarned that in case of their selection, any
such links, if detected during the currency of
their contract, would be reported to the PEC for
cancellation of their registration/licence leading
to their blacklisting.
35
Evaluation of Proposals
of Consultants
STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR
EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS FOR
PROCUREMENT OF ENGINEERING SERVICES
May 2002
PAKISTAN ENGINEERING COUNCIL ISLAMABAD
Transparency International Pakistan has incorporated the
procedures prescribed in the Pakistan Steel Procurement
Manual and is in conformity with the Public Procurement
Rules 2004 and National Anticorruption Strategy NACS
2002. Authority means PPRA and Procuring Agency means
Pakistan Steel
36
Letter of Invitation
(LOI)
INTRODUCTION
2.
DOCUMENTS
3.
PREPARATION OF PROPOSAL
Technical Proposal
Financial Proposal
4. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS
5. PROPOSAL EVALUATION
6. NEGOTIATION
7. Award
8. Sample Form of Contract
1.
INFORMATION TO CONSULTANT

Section I
Information for Consultants

Section II
Data Sheet

Section III
Technical Proposal Standard Forms

Section IV
Financial Proposal Submission Forms

Section V
Terms of Reference
37
Letter of Invitation
(LOI)
DEFINING SCOPE OF SERVICES AND DRAFTING
THE TERMS OF REFERENCE (TOR)
OUTLINE OF THE TOR
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
BACKGROUND
OBJECTIVES
SCOPE OF SERVICES
EXPERTISE REQUIREMENT
TRAINING AND SKILLS TRANSFER
INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
REPORTING/APPROVAL OF REPORTS
CLIENT PROVIDED DATA, SERVICES, PERSONNEL AND
FACILITIES
38
Evaluation Criteria
Selection of consulting firms require the (shortlisted) firms to prepare and submit technical
proposals on a competitive basis as out-lined in the
sample Letter of Invitation provided in the Section4 of this document. The technical proposals received
have to be evaluated in accordance with the criteria
approved by the approving authority and listed in the
LOI
39
Evaluation Criteria
There are three factors which should be
considered for assigning weightage to the technical
proposal and the price quoted by the firms for overall
ranking, which are:


Technical complexity of the assignment.
Impact of the assignment on future implementation
process.
Comparability of proposals vis-à-vis the respective
output.
40
Evaluation Criteria
There are three Methods suitable for Services in
PP Rules.



Single Stage – Two Envelope Procedure
Two stage bidding Procedure
Two stage - Two envelope bidding Procedure
41
Evaluation Criteria
The number of points to be given under each of the evaluation
criteria are:
Points
i)
Experience of the Consulting firm related to the assignment
[20]
ii)
Adequacy of the proposed work plan and methodology in responding to
Terms of Reference
[40]
iii) Qualifications and competence of the key staff for the Assignment [35]
iv)
Suitability of the transfer of knowledge (training)
[05]
Total Points:[100]
42
Evaluation Criteria
A Master Plan Consultancy Project is taken as Example
The number of points to be given under each of the evaluation
criteria are:
Points
i)
Experience of the Consulting firm related to the assignment
[25]
ii)
Adequacy of the proposed work plan and methodology in responding to
Terms of Reference
[40]
iii) Qualifications and competence of the key staff for the Assignment [35]
Total Points:[100]
The minimum aggregate technical score required to pass is 75
points.
43
Evaluation Criteria


1. Project Related Experience 25 Points
Foreign Firms
a) Master Planning and Development (Maximum 08 points)
(Minimum 05 points)
Satisfactory completion of two master plans of sizeable projects
with industrial and port related activities will score 5 points. Each
additional project will score one additional point.
b) Financial analysis and evaluation of Public/Private Sector
partnership projects . (Maximum 11 points) (Minimum 6 points)
Satisfactory completion of two major private sector investment
projects with financial analyses, evaluation, and award(negotiations
and contract documentation) project will score 5 points. Each
additional project will score one additional point.
(A Sizable Project is of minimum 6 months duration and minimum 30
man-months effort)
44
Evaluation Criteria


1. Project Related Experience 20 Points
Local Firms
a) Master Planning and Development (Maximum 08 points)
(Minimum 05 points)
Satisfactory completion of two master plans of sizeable projects
with industrial and port related activities will score 5 points. Each
additional project will score one additional point.
b) Financial analysis and evaluation of Public/Private Sector
partnership projects . (Maximum 06 points) (Minimum 04 points)
Satisfactory completion of two major private sector investment
projects with financial analyses, evaluation, and award(negotiations
and contract documentation) project will score 3 points. Each
additional project will score one additional point.
(A Sizable Project is of minimum 6 months duration and minimum 30
man-months effort)
45
Evaluation Criteria
2. Adequacy of Proposed Work Plan
i.
Addressing the TOR
Max. 15 marks (Min. 6 marks)
ii.
Proposed Methodology, Tasks Details Max. 20 marks (Min. 9 marks)
and Workable Programme of Assignment
iii.
Innovation in approach
Max. 5 marks (Min. 3 marks)
46
Evaluation Criteria
Note on Awarding Points.
In case a proposal appears to be unacceptable under this
criterion, i.e., it doesn’t deserve to be rated “poor”, it may be
considered non responsive.




Grade.
Percentage Marks
Poor
Satisfactory
Good
Very Good
50 %
70%
90%
100%
47
Evaluation Criteria
3
Key Personnel Max 35 Points
Note: The Experts Required for the Project and Man Months indicated in
RFP are Mandatory and can not be Reduced. Applicants are allowed
to increase as per their Proposed Bid
Foreign Firms
(Max. 20, Min. 12)
( master/charter or equivalent and minimum 10 years/two sizeable projects experience in
their respective fields), nominated for the project
1 Team Leader
10 Points
Experience of 2 Projects as Team Leader
Experience on similar nature Project 1 point /project
5 Points
Max 5 Points
Each Expert will score 2 points ,
2 economist
3 legal expert
4 financial expert
5 maritime
Above personnel additional experience of each project will score one additional point.
48
Evaluation Criteria
3
Key Personnel
Local Firm
(Max. 15, Min. 9)
( master/charter or equivalent and minimum 10 years/two sizeable projects experience in
their respective fields), nominated for the project
1 Resident Engineer /Dy Team Leader
Max
4 Points
Experience of 2 Projects as Resident Engineer/Dy Team Leader
3 Points
Experience on similar nature Project 1 point /project
Max 2 Points
Each Expert will score 2 points each ,
2 Town Planner
3 Geologist
4 Senior Surveyor
5 Civil Engineer Roads
6 Structure Engineer
Max
11 Points
Above personnel additional experience of each project will score one additional point.
49
Evaluation Criteria
Review by Committee and Selection


After the members of the evaluation committee
have completed their individual evaluations in
accordance with the evaluation sub-criteria
announced in the documents, the convener
should convene the committee meeting. The
committee would then jointly consider the
individual evaluations and the scores, discuss
the merits of each view point and choose the
best proposal after assigning a technical scores
to each of the proposals. It is extremely
important that all proposals are accorded its
realistic scores.
50
Review by Committee and Selection

The committee may proceed with the review in an organized manner
by adoption of a formal agenda which could include the
following items:i)
Finalization of technical scores of proposals on the basis of
arithmetic averages of the scores awarded by each member.
ii)
Finalization of comments on the proposals which crossed
the minimum passing score of 75% threshold, as these
proposals shall only compete on financial proposal.
iii)
Elements from all proposals which are considered to be useful
for rendering improvement in the methodology to carry out the
assignment.
iv)
Finalization of the “Evaluation Report” for submission to
appropriate forum for its approval, and public declaration for 10
days, before financial proposals are opened.
51
MAINTENANCE OF RECORD AND FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION
46.
Record of procurement proceedings. (1) All procuring agencies shall maintain a record of their
respective procurement proceedings along with all associated
documentation for a minimum period of five years.
 (2) Such maintenance of record shall be subject to the
regulations framed in this regard from time to time.
47.
Public access and transparency.- As soon as a contract has
been awarded the procuring agency shall make all documents
related to the evaluation of the bid and award of contract public:

Provided that where the disclosure of any information
related to the award of a contract is of proprietary nature or
where the procuring agency is convinced that such disclosure
shall be against the public interest, it can withhold only such
information from public disclosure subject to the prior approval
of the Authority.
52