Prior to receipt of binding bids, the government project team should prepare an internal document detailing procedures for the evaluation of binding bids. The Evaluation of binding bids document will include:
∙ roles and responsibilities of the relevant government parties
∙ guidelines for consistent application of the evaluation criteria, including the rating of specific responses provided by potential proponents
∙ the weightings (if any) assigned to the individual selection criteria
∙ a schedule which links specific information requirements to individual selection criteria
∙ the process for assigning ratings to responses to individual criteria
∙ the process for determining the overall ratings (which measure value for money) for individual binding bids.
The evaluation committee should evaluate the binding bids, supported by specialist advisers as required. The independent probity auditor should oversee the evaluation process to ensure that it is conducted in a fair and equitable manner.
The objective of evaluating binding bids is to determine which project delivery option will deliver the best value for money in meeting the service requirement. While the specific evaluation criteria will vary between projects, key criteria are likely to include:
∙ a comparison of the whole-of-life cost with the public sector comparator. In undertaking this comparison, it is important to take into account the fact that proponents may propose project arrangements with very different state tax implications, for example, stamp duty. Accordingly, bids should specify state taxation costs to allow these to be taken into account in assessing the true cost to government
∙ the approach to delivery of the output specification
∙ the technical solution being proposed;
∙ the proposed commercial approach, including the risk allocation
∙ any departures from the benchmark project agreements.
Government reserves the right to, at its absolute discretion, accept, evaluate and select non-conforming bids, but shall not be obliged to do so. Non-conforming bids would need to be submitted with conforming bids.
The evaluation committee should prepare a binding bids evaluation report summarising the binding bids received, providing an assessment of each binding bid against the public sector comparator and evaluation criteria, and providing a recommendation, either:
∙ to proceed with the preferred public private partnership proposal on such terms as the evaluation committee considers commercially acceptable or
∙ to proceed with traditional procurement should the public private partnership proposals not provide value for money.
The selection of the preferred proponent should be completed as quickly as practicable to minimise bidding costs.
The evaluation process described above may need to be adjusted on a case-by-case basis to accommodate specific project circumstances. The specific evaluation process to be adopted would be detailed as appropriate at the commencement of the binding bid stage in the project brief and in the evaluation of binding bids document.
The steering committee will report to the Premier, the Treasurer and the Portfolio Minister following its consideration of the binding bids Evaluation Report. The Ministers will then present a joint submission to Cabinet detailing their recommendations.