1 / 43

PRAG Services

PRAG Services. Kristel Haiba-Rillo Gabriela Tanase. Kristel Haiba-Rillo. Education: Bachelor in International Business Administration, currently M.Sc studies in Business Administration Relevant professional experience: 2001-2004 Ministry of Finance /CFCU, procurement specialist

johnmwong
Download Presentation

PRAG Services

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. PRAG Services Kristel Haiba-Rillo Gabriela Tanase

  2. Kristel Haiba-Rillo • Education: Bachelor in International Business Administration, currently M.Sc studies in Business Administration • Relevant professional experience: 2001-2004 Ministry of Finance /CFCU, procurement specialist 2004- Ministry of Finance/CFCU, head of department

  3. Gabriela Tanase • Education Bachelor Degree in Environmental Sciences Professional management Certificate Communication and Public Relations–Master • Relevant professional experience 2001-2003, Ministry of Environment/ Directorate for International Programmes and Projects-Expert 2004/- East West Consulting, Director

  4. Training Objectives • Understanding of PRAG procedures for service component in general • Specific understanding on different service procurement procedures • Identification of problematic steps and finding solutions • The future for procurement of services

  5. Agenda (1) • Day 1: Introduction to the basics of the PRAG services 10:30 – 11:00 Introduction of participants and training in general 11:00 – 12:30 PRAG through changes, CIS, DIS and EDIS, main principals of PRAG (presentation) 12:30 – 13:30 Lunch 13:30 – 15:00 Preparation and control of forecasts, procurement notices, short-listing (presentation and case studies) 15:00 – 15:15 Coffee/tee break 15:15 – 16:15 Exercise: evaluation of an application form 16:15- 17:00 New procedure: Competitive Dialogue (presentation) 17:00 – 17:15 Round-up of the Day

  6. Day 2: drafting TD 09:00 – 10:30 Planning the tendering, content of the TD (presentation) 10:30-10:45 Coffee/tee break 10:45 – 11:45 Watch-outs for the preparation of TD, clarifications (presentation) 11:45 – 12:30 Exercise on drafting the ToR (objectives, activities and results) 12:30 – 13:30 Lunch 13:30 – 15:00 Cont. drafting the ToR (profile of the experts versus Evaluation Grid, administrative aspects) 15:00 – 15:15 Coffee/tee break 15:15 – 16:45 Cont. drafting ToR and conclusion on compiling ToR 16:45 – 17:00 Round-up of the Day Agenda (2)

  7. Agenda (3) • Day 3: Evaluation 09:00 – 10:30 Evaluation process within different procedures (presentation) 10:30-10:45 Coffee/tee break 10:45 – 12:30 Exercise on the evaluation of bids (CVs for 2 offers) 12:30 – 13:30 Lunch 13:30 – 15:00 Cont. exercise on the evaluation of bids (organisation and methodology; financial proposal) 15:00 – 15:15 Coffee/tee break 15:15 – 15:45 Cont. exercise on the evaluation of bids 15:45 – 17:00 Key Principles of Tender Award, Cancellation and Modification (presentation) 17:00 -17:15 Round-up of the Day

  8. Agenda (4) • Day 4: Contract management 09:00 – 10:20 Managing contracts according to PRAG 10:30-10:45 Coffee/tee break 10:45 – 12:30 Exercise on Project Reporting 12:30 – 13:30 Lunch 13:30 – 14:30 Contract modifications 14:30 – 15:00 post PRAG 15:00 – 15:15 Coffee/tee break 15:15 – 17:00 Conclusion, assessment test and course evaluation

  9. PRAG through changes • PRAG 2000 - Practical Guide to Phare, Ispa and Sapard contract procedures • PRAG 2003 – Practical Guide to contract procedures financed form the General Budget of the European Communities in the context of external actions /financial penalties were introduced, competitive negotiated procedure, complaints, payment terms (60 → 45),/

  10. PRAG through changes • PRAG 2006 – Practical Guide to contract procedures for EC external actions /new procedures, evaluation criteria more specified, administrative requirements more flexible/ 1.Introduction, 2.Basic rules, 3.Service contracts, 4.Supply contracts, 5.Works contracts, 6. Grants 7.Relations with Int.org… New! 8.Legal texts + 9.List of annexes

  11. Implementation Systems • Centralised Implementation System • Decentralised Implementation System (ex-ante, ex-post) - DIS • Extended Decentralised Implementation system – EDIS

  12. CIS The EC is the Contracting Authority and takes decisions on behalf of the beneficiary country + EC responsibility + centrally monitored • Different approaches applied • Confuses the beneficiaries

  13. DIS Ex-ante: decisions taken by the CA with prior approval from the EC Ex-post: decisions taken by the CA without prior approval from the EC if stated in the Financing Agreement + trainer in place + direct link with the system establishers • time-consuming • too many different interpretations

  14. EDIS Full responsibility for processing EU funding is placed with the beneficiary country. The Commission will only have examination role over the programmes + local legislation applied + faster process? • full responsibility • more reporting to EC

  15. PRAG – Guide or Law? PRAG 2006: : „In case of non-respect of the procedures established in the present Guide, the expenditure related to the operations involved are ineligible in terms of Community financing” BE AWARE!

  16. EU Procurement and servicesESSENTIALS ELIGIBILITY (1) • Nationality – open to equal terms to all natural and legal persons to the EU Member States and the countries covered by the Regulation under which the contract is financed • Origin – all supplies and materials purchased under a procurement contract financed from the instrument must originate in a State as defined in the nationality rule

  17. cont. Eligibility Eligible countries • Member states: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, UK • Candidate Countries: Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania, Turkey • Other countries (CARDS):Albania, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia-Montenegro

  18. cont. Eligibility • Possible reasons for applying derogation: - specific nature of projects require involving nationals of ineligible countries (i.e. non-citizens integration projects) - the needed equipment is only available of non-eligible origin (i.e. compatibility with the existing system etc)

  19. Grounds for exclusion (2) • PRAG Article 2.3.3 NEW! Only for contracts with a value of 50,000 EUR and more, the proofs regarding exclusion and selection criteria are still required, optional for contracts with a lower value. In the latter case, no pre-financing or interim payment may be made

  20. Administrative and Financial penalties (3) • Tenderers or candidates who have been guilty of making false declarations will receive penalties representing 2-10% of the total value of the contract being awarded • Contractors who have been found t have seriously failed to meet their contractual obligations will receive penalties 2-10% of the value of the contract in question (rate may be increased to 4-20% in the event of a repeat offence within 5 years of the first infringement. • Early warning system! • No penalties for the CA?!

  21. Visibility (4) • Visual Identity Guidelines For services: the specific marks on the elaborated materials (public reports, training materials, brochures, internet pages etc), EU flag present at public events (seminars, trainings, conferences etc). Visual Identity Guidelines should be annexed to the TD and contract – so that the Consultant should take care of respecting the requirements

  22. NEW! Conflict of Interest (5) • Any firm or expert participating in the preparation of a project must be excluded from participating in tenders based on this preparatory work, unless they can prove to the Contracting Authority that the involvement in previous stages of the project does not constitute unfair competition

  23. Awarding principals (6) • Transparency • Proportionality • Equal treatment • Non-discrimination The best tender complying with the selection and award criteria must be selected

  24. No retroactive awards (7) • Contracts or contract addenda cannot be awarded retroactively (NEW! confusing clarification: “i.e. after the end of execution period”)

  25. Use of standard documents (8) • very strict • Complicated/unknown rules, huge amount of documents • Language = less local firms interested + clear instructions + shared responsibility + complicated/unknown rules = less complaints

  26. Record keeping (9) • Written records of the entire tendering and contracting procedure must be kept confidential (?) and retained by the CA for 7 years after the final payment • !!! Not respecting this requirement might lead to repayment of funds

  27. Service contract award procedures

  28. New service contract award procedures • Negotiated procedure • Competitive dialogue • Dynamic purchasing system

  29. International Restricted Procedure (stage 1) • NEW! No global contract forecast required with PRAG 2006 • Publication of individual contract forecast – at least 30 days before publishing the PN • Call for interest based on the Procurement Notice (sent to OJ at least 15 days before the expected publication date + ToR) • Establishing Shortlist Panel • Shortlisting • Approval of Shortlist report/notice • Publication of shortlist notice

  30. Contract forecast • Obligatory for contracts worth 200,000 EUR or more • Should be published at least 30 days before the publication of procurement notice • Gives brief indication of the subject, value and content of the tender/contract • Publication of forecast does not bind the CA to launch a tender or conclude a contract • No expressing interest by the service providers at this stage

  31. Procurement Notice • Sent to OJ at least 15 days before the expected publication date • PN sent for approval to ECD together with draft ToR • Any publication in the local media should be organised by CA – identical to the PN published in OJ, same timing • Minimum deadline for submitting applications is 30 days from the date of the notice’s publication (might be longer)

  32. Procurement Notice • Should include information for the would-be-service-providers in order to help them to identify whether their capacity is relevant and sufficient for performing the services • Selection Criteria: • Clearly formulated • Easy to verify on the basis of the information submitted using the standard form • Allow a clear yes/no assessment to be made • Any selection criteria should be of the kind that is possible to be evaluated based on the standard application form

  33. Shortlist Panel • Non-voting Chairperson and Secretary + odd number of voting members (min 3) • Voting members must: • Have a reasonable command of language • Have experience in the field in order to be able to give assessment • Composition of Shortlist panel should be approved by ECD NEW! If no objections received within 5 working days the panel is considered approved

  34. Shortlisting • Establishing a long list summarising all applications received • Eliminating candidates who are ineligible • Applying the published selection criteria without modification • Shortlist: 4-8 candidates • If < 4 then cancellation • If > than 8 additional criteria stated in the PN should be applied SHORTLIST REPORT – approval round + shortlist notice

  35. Practical exercises • Based on the given Project Fiche compile the Procurement Notice • Fill in an application form based on the Procurement Notice elaborated

  36. NEW! Competitive Dialogue • Definition: CD is a procedure whereby the CA conducts a dialogue with the candidates admitted to that procedure, with the aim of developing on or more suitable alternatives capable of meeting its requirements, and on the basis of which the candidates are invited to tender

  37. Competitive Dialogue (dir 2004/18) • For particular complex contracts • If CA cannot define technical and/or legal solution • Combination of restricted and negotiated procedure – enhanced transparency • Aiming at identifying the needs of the CA and finding one or more suitable solutions as a basis for competitive tendering

  38. Competitive Dialogue • Selection of (at least 3) candidates • Publication of a notice in the EU OJ • Description of needs and requirements in the notice or in descriptive document • Selection of candidates (like in restricted procedure

  39. Competitive Dialogue • Dialogue with selected candidates • In general separately and confidentially • Successive stages possible in order to reduce number of solutions • In case of a multi-stage dialogue a reduction in numbers may be applied but the number of tenderers after last stage may not be less than three • Records should be made of every dialogue that shall be signed by the participants and that shall be dispatched to everyone

  40. Competitive Dialogue • Award • After identification of solution: invitation to submit final offer • Most economically advantageous offer according to award criteria stated in the invitation • Fine-tuning possible but no substantial change in the offer

  41. Competitive Dialogue • What happens if no suitable solution has been proposed: • A new procedure can be initiated • A negotiated procedure can be initiated (if justified and the original terms of the contract are kept)

  42. Competitive Dialogue • For complex projects, the CA does not always know what the market can offer • Restricted procedure: legally right, but too rigid. Risks to prevent innovative solutions to be proposed • Negotiated procedure: not transparent enough • Interest for the CA: to have the possibility to have discussions with service-providers (also the interest of the service-providers) However, such a procedure is interesting for suppliers only if their ideas are protected!

  43. Round-up of the day

More Related