1 / 7

SAUDE Feb 2010 Stirling Conference Centre

SAUDE Feb 2010 Stirling Conference Centre. University of Glasgow Professional Services Consultants Framework. Benefits & Opportunities Compliance with University procurement policy –transparency, governance, best value

dorie
Download Presentation

SAUDE Feb 2010 Stirling Conference Centre

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. SAUDE Feb 2010 Stirling Conference Centre University of Glasgow Professional Services Consultants Framework

  2. Benefits & Opportunities • Compliance with University procurement policy –transparency, governance, best value • Test the market from the previous narrow range of consultants, to ensure the consultants employed were the best available in the market place. • Improved project delivery time • Reduce the number of OJUE Competitions. Compliance with EU legislation • Consistency of appointment & operational management • Certainty of cost, consultant quality and service delivery

  3. Scope and Shape • Following a peer review of other options we settled on individual appointments rather than IDT's.  • This was due to the problems that can arise with IDT's; • ·        Poor performance of 1 party brings down team • ·        Problems with payments not getting through in time • ·        Insurance issue • We will put the team together from its constituent parts • Following extensive discussion with our solicitors we established that we could, under the legislation, utilise a call off mechanism by straight rotation, starting alphabetically.  Other options of mini tendering or highest ranked / first refusal were rejected

  4. TenderAspiration • Open tender, with mandatory criteria (suppliers to self select when they were not eligible to apply), and thereafter evaluation criteria which tenders were scored against. • Asked for % fees against 6 lots, and six silos, for works by value grouped against refurb. and new build works up to a maximum construction value of £5M • Tender will last for 2 years with option of 2 x 1 year extensions and fee review at year 1 (due to low fees submitted) • Tender was written in house with the assistance of our solicitors D&W • Tender was split 40%  price and 60% technical merit • Tender was uploaded onto Tenders.ac.uk. This has been replaced with a new portal under procurement Scotland, which is superior and more transparent.

  5. Market Impact • 163 applications were received • Approx 40 were rejected for not complying with mandatory criteria, therefore 123 to be scored. • This process took approx 10 months • Appointments 2nd Week January 2010 • Currently progressing introduction of consultants and management of Framework internally.

  6. Lessons learned • Don’t used the open tendering method for such a complex and potentially appealing tender, particularly when the market is at the bottom of the worst financial downturn in decades, and when the perception is that only the public sector has budgets remaining? • If you do - Find a 'silver bullet' within the mandatory criteria to prevent unsuitable suppliers getting through to the scoring element of the exercise • Be more explicit about what we expect to read about within the response to the technical merit questions • Be more explicit about how the price element will be scored. • Be more explicit about the format which tenders should be presented, as this should expedite the assessment and scoring process

  7. Q & A’s

More Related