Guidance Note: In cases where the Project Owner has developed a "Comparative TOC" during the AD Phase, the Project Owner may need to provide further information regarding how the "Comparative TOC" will be used by the Project Owner to assess AD Phase Evaluation Criterion 1. For further information regarding the development of a "Comparative TOC," refer to Guidance Note 5 - Developing the TOC in Alliance Contracting available from the Department of Infrastructure and Transport Commonwealth of Australia, March 2011 (see www.infrastructure.gov.au).

Alliance Development Phase Evaluation Criteria

Criterion

Guidelines

Evaluation Criterion 1:

TOC

Proponents must, as part of the Project Proposal, tender a full target outturn cost (TOC) to reflect the proposed Project solution and the Commercial and Legal Framework.

Proponents must also comment on potential events that could result in adjustment or variations to the TOC.

The TOC will be evaluated for:

•  compliance;

•  completeness;

•  quantum;

•  margin;

•  risk and contingencies; and

•  innovations in pursuing cost savings and enhancing achievement of the Project Objectives.

Evaluation Criteria 2:

Project solution

The Project solution will be analysed in terms of:

(a)  detailed design capability as detailed in the Proponent's Design Development Report;

(b)  proposed construction methodology and planning schedule;

(c)  Project management systems; and

(d)  any other documents required to be submitted as a deliverable under the Alliance Development Agreement.

Presentations and clarification meetings conducted after submission of the Project Proposal will also be taken into consideration in the evaluation of these elements.

The Proponent's understanding of the Project risks, approach to risk management, and the robustness and efficacy of the Proponent's risk management plan will be assessed.

Provide all your detailed management plans (including, for example, a design management plan, construction management plan, IR plan, risk management or HR plan) demonstrating how the design and construction stage of the Project will be managed.

Evaluation Criteria 3:

People

(a)  Demonstrate that the proposed team is capable and has the necessary skills and experience to deliver the Project and achieve the Project Objectives;

(b)  Provide organisation charts (identifying names and positions for all key roles) and the details of each individual's experience and expertise to fulfil their assigned role;

(c)  Provide details of the proposed ALT members, their current positions, location and relevant experience. Explain how the ALT will provide governance and support leading to achievement of the Project Objectives;

(d)  Demonstrate the availability and level of commitment of each individual identified in the organisation chart in the delivery of the Project;

(e)  Provide a summary of the suitability of each candidate identified with details of previous alliance experience. A short (e.g. two page) CV must be submitted; and

(f)  Provide the Proponent Team Protocols which the Proponent will comply with during the AD Phase.

Evaluation Criteria 4:

Understanding, ability and capacity to participate in this Alliance

Provide details of the Proponent's:

(a)  overall approach to achieve the Project Objectives;

(b)  activity to develop a high performance culture;

(c)  stakeholder management;

(d)  performance of the Proponent's nominees for key leadership (ALT and AMT) roles; and

(e)  [Alliance Management Plan].

This criterion will be evaluated from observations made by the Core Team and the Evaluation Team in the workshops and other interactions with the Proponent during the AD Phase. The Evaluation Team will also use feedback obtained from the Core Team and other stakeholders.

Evaluation Criteria 5:

RFP Response Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation scores from the RFP Phase Evaluation Criteria will be re-evaluated to address any improvement or negative impacts observed, and to accommodate the level of confidence that the Evaluation Team gains in the Proponent throughout the AD Phase.

Evaluation Criteria 5:

Final Project Alliance Agreement

The terms of the Project Alliance Agreement executed by each Shortlisted Proponent and submitted with the Project Proposal will be assessed in respect of their impact upon Project outcomes.

Evaluation Criteria 6:

Local Content

Guidance Note: This will need to be considered by each jurisdiction and inserted on a case-by-case basis. For example, Shortlisted Proponents for Victorian projects would usually be required to complete a Victorian Industry Participation Policy (VIPP) Statement.