Navigation

last updated: 3rd August 2011
Action Risk Solutions
Submissions are not evaluated in the same way - Open to challenge that decision process was unfair

- Use a standard approach and methodology such as whole life costing or other appropriate scoring-based system

- Document the decision process, evaluating the submissions against the published selection ( at pre-qualification stage) and award criteria

Lack of evidence of decision process - Open to challenge that decision process was unfair

- Use a standard approach and methodology such as whole life costing or other appropriate scoring-based system

- Document the decision process, evaluating the submissions against the published selection ( at pre-qualification stage) and award criteria

Insufficient record of decisions

- Open to challenge that decision process was unfair

- No record of decisions should these be challenged at de-briefing or by a Freedom of Information question

- Use a standard approach and methodology such as whole life costing or other appropriate scoring-based system

- Document the decision process, evaluating the submissions against the published selection ( at pre-qualification stage) and award criteria

Clarifications change the nature of a bidder’s submission - Open to challenge that the response to a clarification materially changes a bidder’s submission - Where a clarification materially changes a bidder’s submission the competition should be stopped and re-run or the bidder withdraws or is excluded from the competition
Whole life costing model not used as part of evaluation process - Important aspects that could differentiate bids may not be considered - Consideration should be given to evaluating all 4 dimensions (financial, technical, quality, environmental and social) as these are all elements of a sustainable solution
Rating:
0
Your rating: None

Comments Comments