At a glance
We looked to see whether there had been genuine competition between bidders. We found that DET: ■ managed to create good tender lists and maintain competitive tension throughout the tender processes. These processes were, for the most part sufficiently transparent to ensure that the market was well informed. Transparency could be further enhanced if the contracts were more accessible to the public ■ retained qualified external advisors, identified the contractual issues likely to arise and developed a considered approach to the evaluation process ■ included broad educational objectives, which proved difficult to relate directly to school infrastructure proposals ■ set its current school buildings specifications as the minimum requirement, which provided greater certainty in relation to the final product but offered little scope for further innovative design ■ evaluated all aspects of the bids received and then chose as preferred bidder the one that offered it best value ■ employed the public sector comparator for added competitive tension, particularly in the final stages of negotiation with the successful proponents ■ assumed that the public sector comparator could not achieve efficiencies from bundling new schools, as this would have exceeded the level of funding available using traditional means. |