Consistent call-off evaluation
Review participants express concerns that a value-based approach to procurement at framework level is often not followed through in the evaluation approach used when calling off specific projects or programmes of work. They comment that framework providers, clients and managers should avoid the inefficiencies caused by:
■ Lowest price evaluation creeping back in at call-off
■ A preference for single stage call-off pricing compared to deeper cost analysis through ESI call-offs
■ Expensive delays in the call-off process
■ Call-off questions that are disproportionate to the value and complexity of the project
■ Call-off questions that repeat questions used in framework evaluation
■ Expensive call-off design competitions that make qualitative proposals unaffordable.
Successful call-off evaluation also depends on the quality of the framework call-off brief. A Gold Standard brief sets out the maximum information as to client's required outcomes and all other relevant factors, including client goals and objectives, the project's Should Cost Model, relevant time and regulatory constraints and lessons learned from other framework projects.
Framework providers and managers should invest in Gold Standard framework call-off processes and supporting guidance that help clients to:
■ Express the outcomes they are seeking to gain from the framework projects
■ Use qualitative questions that are proportionate and relevant to these outcomes
■ Enable prospective suppliers to optimise their qualitative proposals.
|
The Environment Agency Rye Harbour Trial Project reports that the framework team used a 'three-stage selection process that enables the EA to comply with all relevant procurement legislation and enables early contractor involvement', and that 'One of the biggest benefits of Cost Led Procurement in this respect was the ability for the Environment Agency to streamline the upfront processes involved in the procurement of this project, enabling them to move forward very quickly' (Annex 3 case study 7). |
|
The Property Services Cluster Trial Project framework reports that 'the constructor partners, Osborne, Miller and Mansell (now Balfour Beatty) were jointly appointed from the.... framework through a mini-competition for all of the work included in the Tranche. This process took seven weeks, allowing for full and early contractor involvement.' (Annex 3 case study 6). |
|
The SCMG Trial Project framework alliance reports 'Reduced risks, cost savings and time savings through accelerated constructor/supply chain briefing process', and 'Time savings, such as through quicker build-up of prices leading to earlier start on site and reduced client/consultant time/ costs. (Annex 3 case study 8). |
In order to take full advantage of qualitative proposals, including social value proposals and net zero GHG emissions proposals, a Gold Standard framework procurement process and framework contract set out the systems by which these proposals will be:
■ Accepted and implemented at framework level and project level or
■ Reserved for later review and adoption, at the option of the framework provider and framework clients or
■ Shared for wider review and adoption by other framework suppliers.
|
LHC reports that 'Within recent frameworks we have introduced the LHC Lifetime Values which comprise a set of social, community and environmental measures. In designing the specification and evaluation criteria for the procurement of our frameworks we consider these Lifetime Values, and we ensure that our assessment of bidders' responses support the achievement of these values'. |
In order to implement the Playbook commitment to collaborative contractual relationships, the evaluation criteria for frameworks and framework call-off can include assessment of:
■ Collaborative profile and experience
■ Cultural compatibility
■ Client relationship management
■ Supply chain relationship management
■ Stakeholder management.
Gold Standard evaluation of collaborative commitments is detailed and measurable. It looks closely at a prospective supplier's objectives, requirements. expectations and risk management approach. Evaluation of prospective suppliers can also include behavioural analysis of individuals although, in the absence of contractual constraints, this cannot prevent those individuals leaving an organisation after its appointment.
|
Recommendation 21: Evaluate proposals for frameworks and call-offs proportionately and consistently using balanced criteria that include quality, social value and net zero GHG emissions In response to industry proposals that more proportionate and consistent evaluation systems for framework procurement and call-off will reduce waste and duplication, creating efficiency savings for clients and industry, this review recommends that framework providers, clients and managers establish and apply balanced evaluation criteria that examine all relevant aspects of value, that enable differentiation between qualitative bids, that reflect expected client outcomes and that incentivise improved value objectives aligned to government priorities including social value and net zero GHG emissions by 2050. |
Specific actions include:
Framework strategy
■ Consider and establish:
■ a clear understanding of value linked to desired and required outcomes
■ how these outcomes align to the government's wider priorities, including net zero GHG emissions by 2050
■ how procurement of the framework programme and framework projects can drive value-based procurement
■ an evaluation system and criteria that focus on value over cost
■ a system and criteria that include evaluation of social value where the requirements are related and proportionate to the subject-matter of the contract
■ quality criteria that are sufficiently well developed and detailed to allow for the differentiation in scores between competing bids, so as to avoid close or identical quality scores that result in cost-based evaluation.
■ Consider and establish work allocation procedures that reflect the objectives, success measures and targets of the clients and framework provider, and that incentivise performance by the prospective suppliers of their framework level and project level commitments.
Framework procurement
■ Evaluate supplier proposals in response to:
■ a statement of value linked to desired and required outcomes and linked to the Government's wider priorities, including net zero GHG emissions by 2050
■ a statement of how the framework programme and framework projects will drive value-based procurement
■ an evaluation system and criteria that focus on value over cost
■ evaluation of social value where the requirements are related and proportionate to the subject-matter of the contract
■ quality criteria that are sufficiently well developed and detailed to allow for the differentiation in scores between competing bids.
■ State the links between work allocation procedures and performance incentives.
Framework contract
■ State the systems by which qualitative proposals, including social value proposals and net zero GHG emissions proposals, will be:
■ accepted and implemented at framework level and project level
■ reserved for later review and adoption, at the option of the framework provider and one or more framework clients
■ confidential to one framework supplier
■ shared for wider review and adoption by other framework suppliers.
■ State a call-off evaluation system that is consistent with the framework evaluation system.
■ State the links between work allocation procedures and performance incentives.