CLARIFICATION no. 10 to call for tender ENV.5/FRA/2010/0001

Transcription

1 16 th February 2010 CLARIFICATION no. 10 to call for tender ENV.5/FRA/2010/0001 Clarification 1: Specifications, Part 2, Section 6.2 Administrative Proposal, page 24, Τhe service provider s educational and professional qualifications and those of the firm s managerial staff and, in particular, those of the person or persons responsible for providing the services (curriculum vitae presented on the EU standard form Question: Our understanding is that Tenderers should provide under this section the CVs of the members of the Service Management Team which is the team to be allocated to the overall management of the Framework Contract (e.g. the Contract Manager, Human Resources Manager etc). Please confirm. Yes, the administrative proposal contains CVs of the managerial and financial staff. Clarification 2: Specifications, Part 2, Section 6.3 Technical Proposal, page 25, Each tender must cover all work packages. Bidding for only part of the work packages is explicitly forbidden and will lead to the exclusion of the tender. a) It is our understanding that the Technical Proposal will be exclusively consisted by the Tenderer s response to the questions of Annex 10 and Annex 11. Please confirm. b) After examining the requirements of Annex 10 and 11 we did not manage to identify a clear correspondence between the questions of these Annexes and some of the Work Packages. In this sense we kindly ask you to clarify under which part of our offer (i.e. in our response for which point of Annex 10 or 11) should Tenderers analyse their approach for the execution of the following Work Packages: 1. WP 1 Project Management 2. WP 3.1 Business Modelling 3. WP 3.2 Requirements 4. WP 7 Other tasks in the scope of the contract The tenderer chooses the content of its complete offer concerning the technical proposal but it must include the answers (and the supporting documentation) to questionnaires in annex 10 and 11 as described in Part 2, point 6.3, bullet 2. Concerning WP1, the tenderer should analyse his approach mainly under points 1.1, 3.4, 4.7 and 6 in annex 10 and under all points in annex 11 (especially from 3.2 until 3.7) The subtitle "2.3.1 Analysis and Design" in annex 12 has been left by mistake and should be removed. The point 2.3 of annex 12 is covering all sub work packages of WP3, not just "analysis and design".

2 Concerning WP3.1 and WP3.2, the tenderer should analyse his approach mainly under points 4.6 and 4.7 in annex 10 and under all points in annex 11 (especially 3.3 and 3.6). Concerning WP7, this is a generic package for which tasks and activities will be defined during specific contracts. The tenderer should then focus on the quality of services in general (mainly under point 6 in annex 10 and mainly under points 1.3, 2.5, 3.6 and 3.7 in annex 11). Clarification 3: The technical and professional capacity and in particular the similar technical experience (list of services, Project References, etc) should be covered by the Consortium as a whole including the subcontractors. We understand that the Project References to be submitted by the subcontractors of the Tenderer will be taken into consideration for assessing its technical and professional eligibility. Please confirm that our understanding is correct. Yes Clarification 4: Could you please specify if there is a restriction on the number of pages per response? Is there any other restriction concerning the presentation of the Tenderer s responses? There is no restriction on the number of pages although, as mentioned in Part 2, point 6.3, unrelated information may result into penalty points Clarification 5: Specifications, Part 1, Section 5.2 Description of Profiles, pages a) Section Project Manager Usage of project management tools, specifically those used by the Commission Could you please define which are the project management tools used by the Commission which a PM should have knowledge of? This is typically concerning MS-Project. Knowledge of other similar tools is also accepted. b) Section Architect Minimum 3 years with requested enterprise architecture tools, software models or business process analysis tools - Please define which are the requested enterprise architecture tools, software models or business process analysis tools in which an Architect should have at least 3 years of experience with. Does this requirement refer to tools that will be explicitly requested during the ordering phase of the contract (i.e in the specific orders) and thus is not a requirement for the current tendering phase? Please clarify This is typically concerning tools supporting UML like Rational Software Modeller and also Visio with Drawing Stencils for Modelling Notation. Similar tools are also accepted such that the knowledge of the tools themselves is not a requirement for this tendering. The knowledge of particular tools may be a requirement for the specific orders. c) Section Senior Analyst Programmer and Analyst Programmer 2 (1) years of experience in the programming languages, at least one currently used in the Commission Please define in detail which are the programming languages which the proposed SAPs and APs should have 2 (respectively 1) years of experience with.

3 Please refer to the "Information System hosting guidelines". We principally use Coldfusion, Weblogic and Oracle technologies. Clarification 6: Specifications, Part 3, Section 2.2 Technical and professional competence, page 28 Tenderers are requested to submit a list of relevant permanent staff as documentation. In case a tenderer wants to draw on non permanent resources, these resources must be indicated as well a) It is our understanding that the above mentioned requirement refers to the connection matrix between profiles and CVs (for permanent and non-permanent staff) requested under question 4.8 (page 61) of Annex 10. Please confirm. Yes, although the matrix is sufficient for permanent staff b) Our understanding is that the connection matrix should contain only the names of the Candidates for whom CVs have been submitted in the proposal (i.e correspondence between name and CV number). Please confirm. Yes Clarification 7: Specifications, Part 3, Section 2.2 Technical and professional competence, page 28 Tenderers are requested to provide a minimum of 3 CVs for permanent staff for each profile. A given CV may only be used for one profile. All CV must be presented via the form in annex 13 or via the European Curriculum Vitae format. Only CVs submitted on one of these two formats will be considered. a) Please confirm that the CVs requested under this point are the ones requested under Question 4.7 (page 60) of Annex 10. Yes b) Please confirm that the European Curriculum Vitae format referred above (in which the proposed CVs should be presented) is the one which can be downloaded from the address: +CV/navigate.action Yes Clarification 8: Specifications, Part 3, Section 3 Award Criteria, page 28 a) We understand that the award criteria will be exclusively assessed in relation to the Tenderer s responses in the Questions of Annex 11 Questionnaire for Award Evaluation. Please confirm Responses to questions of annex 11 and the provided supporting documentation will be used to assess the award criteria. These answers and the provided supporting documentation must be as complete and as clear as possible. They cannot contain unrelated information as mentioned in Part 2, point 3.6, bullet 2.

4 b) According to our understanding there is a clear correspondence between the following elements/criteria and the points under wich they will be evaluated - page 28, 3.1 Overall Management (max 15 points) criterion will be assessed in relation to the Tenderer s response to the Questions of Annex Quality of the Tenderer s proposal for the overall management of the service page 65 - page 28, 3.2 Ordering of Services (max 10 points) criterion will be assessed in relation to the Tenderer s response to the Questions of Annex Quality of the Tenderer s proposal for the ordering of the service pages page 28, 3.3 Delivery of work defined in the work packages (max 75 points) criterion will be assessed in relation to the Tenderer s response to the Questions of Annex Quality of the tenderer's proposal for the delivery of tasks in the work packages pages Please confirm that our understanding is correct The evaluation of the overall management criteria (max 15 points) will be based on answers to questions of annex 11.1 and the provided supporting documentation. The evaluation of the ordering of services (max 10 points) will be based on answers to questions of annex 11.2 and the provided supporting documentation. The evaluation of the deliver of work defined in the work packages (max 75 points) will be based on answers to questions of annex 11.3 and the provided supporting documentation. Clarification 9: Specifications, Part 3, Section 3 Award Criteria, section 3.3 Delivery of work defined in the work packages (max 75 points), page 28,. For each work package, individual scores will be evaluated as described in below table. WP.1 Project Management - 12 WP.2 Set up of Environment and take over - 8 WP.3 Specifications - 17 WP.4 Development - 17 WP.5 Deployment - 5 WP.6 Hand over - 8 WP.7 Other tasks in the scope of the contract - 8 Total - 75 a) Could you please explicitly define under which points of the Annex 11 Section 3 Questionnaire will each of the above criteria be assessed and awarded with the respective points? b) Our understanding regarding the evaluation method to be used for the assessment of Tenderer s proposal is described below: - Tenderer s response to Question 3.2 of Annex 11 (page 68) will be assessed under the WP2 criterion described above and will receive a maximum of 8 points - Tenderer s response to Question 3.3 of Annex 11 (page 68) will be assessed under WP3, WP4 and WP5 criteria described above and will receive a maximum of ( ) 39 points - Tenderer s response to Question 3.4 of Annex 11 (page 68) will be assessed under WP6 criterion described above and will receive a maximum of 8 points Please confirm that our understanding is correct.

5 Further to the above we have failed to recognise a clear correspondence between the remaining criteria referred above (i.e the Work Packages) and the remaining questions of Annex 11 section 3. In this sense please clarify in detail under which documents (points of the Questionnaire of Annex 11) will WP1 Project Management and WP7 Other tasks in the scope of the contract be assessed and awarded with the respective points (i.e the remaining 12+8=20 points). Respectively please clarify under which criteria (Work Packages) will each of the remaining Questions (i.e 3.1, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7) be evaluated and what is the maximum points to be allocated to each of them. c) Annex 11 Section 3 Questions must be responded in relation to the fictive system PROD described in Annex 12. The QTM sub tasks of Annex 12 though do not include some Work Packages which according to the criteria of page 28 will be evaluated and awarded with some of the total 75 points. To be more precise Annex 12 sub task do not include the following Work packages: 1. WP 3.1 Business Modelling 2. WP 3.2 Requirements 3. WP 7 Other tasks in the scope of the contract Please clarify how the above mentioned Work Packages will be evaluated and demonstrate the appropriate question (if relevant) under which this work packages should be analysed. d) Please provide us with the respective correspondence between the points to be awarded (for the Overall Management (max 15 points), and Ordering of Services (max 10 points) criteria) and each Question of Annex 11 (sections 1 and 2) The relation between questions and points is not so straight since several questions are overlapping several work packages. In addition, since sub-tasks are not described in details, the tenderer may identify, for example, that additional project management is necessary to ensure the quality of the deployment part of QTM2. Concerning point c), amongst others, please also refer to the answer to your clarification request 2. Clarification 10: Specifications, Annex 8, Sample Request Form for Fixed Price Orders, page 46, Evaluation Method Grid Question: It is our understanding that this part of the Request Form refers to the evaluation/assessment formula that will be used for the evaluation and awarding of each of the specific orders. Please confirm. Yes. That method must be provided in the specific request form (or defined in the TA attached to the specific order) Is this formula standard/known or will it be defined on a case by case basis according to each request s specificities? This is not standard. It will be defined on a case by case basis. Clarification 11: Specifications, Annex 10, Question 4.6, page 60

6 a) It is our understanding that Tenderers should provide one separate expertise information table for each of the profiles described in the Tender specifications (making up a total of 10 expertise information tables). Please confirm b) Could you please clarify whether the figures required in these tables refer to the total staff of the Tenderer or only to the Candidates (CVs) proposed in the proposal? c) Could you please clarify whether the minimum number of expertise required is 1 for all expertise fields AND for each profile? For example for what reason should a User Interface Designer or a Technical Writer have expertise in Business Objects or in Oracle RDBMS? Please elaborate Please refer to answer on question 5 of Questions & Answers (2). Please also refer to answers on questions 15, 16, 17 and 18 of Questions & Answers (4). Clarification 12: Specifications, Annex 10, Question 4.8, page 61 Question: Please confirm that the Connection Matrix should only contain the names of the (minimum 30) Candidates for which CVs will be presented in the offer. Yes, and the matrix is not mandatory for non permanent staff Clarification 13: Specifications, Annex 10, Question 5.1, page 61, The references should be for different customers in a fixed price, time & means or quoted time & means context in your premises a) Our understanding is that we need to provide client reference contacts of customers for services delivered either on Tenderer s premises (e.g. Fixed Price or QTM orders) or at the Client s premises (i.e Time and Means Orders). Please confirm Yes, for FP both service delivery locations are accepted. b) Is there a maximum on the number of client reference contacts that the Tenderers are allowed to present? No, until they are actually in relation to similar projects and contracts Clarification 14: Specifications, Annex 10, Question 5.3, page 62 The minimum size of the projects must be in total 100 persondays. The references must concern contracts executed in 2007, 2008 or 2009 a) Our understanding is that projects/contracts which have started before 2007 but have at least a part (corresponding to at least 100 person days) executed within the timeframe are accepted as valid project references for the above mentioned requirement. Please confirm. b) Our understanding is that ongoing projects/contracts (which have at least 100 person days executed in ) are accepted as valid project reference for the above point. Please confirm. c) Could you please clarify whether Framework Contracts are accepted as valid project references for the above mentioned requirement?

7 d) Could you please clarify whether contracts/projects concerning the delivery of Time and Means services are considered as accepted project references? e) Could you please clarify whether contracts/projects which involve the delivery of services both at the Client and the Tenderer s premises will be considered as accepted project references? Yes to all questions. TM based contracts will also be accepted (even if it has been mentioned "projects executed at your premises") Clarification 15: Specifications, Annex 11, Question 2.1, page 66 You receive the request form for a FP project. Describe how you work to propose a correct offer to the Commission. Detail all documents that you will send and their proposed timing. You must include at least one practical example for the request and the offer. a) Could you please clarify in detail what Tenderers should include in their response in order to successfully reply to all elements of the above question? Please refer to answer on question 2 of Questions & Answers (7). b) Our understanding is that Tenderers should prepare a fictive request for FP services and provide it as an example along with the Tenderer s hypothetical response to this fictive request. Please clarify whether our understanding is correct. This is correct concerning the practical example(s), but the tenderer must also describe the process in general (i.e. not based on examples). c) In case that our understanding is correct in point b) above please elaborate on whether Tenderers should present a complete offer in response to the practical example/fictive request or just to provide a Table of Contents or a short description of the contents of the hypothetical Tenderer s response. Concerning the practical example, the level of details is left to the appreciation of tenderer. The objective is to give enough details to describe the process d) Could you please elaborate on the term at least one? Does this mean that a Tenderer presenting more than one examples will be awarded with more points and if yes what is the optimum number of examples to be presented by Tenderers? We understand that one example is sufficient for obtaining the maximum points. Please confirm. Additional examples will not necessarily award more points. Although, it may be easier for the tenderer to illustrate the process via several examples, to focus on specific aspects. Clarification 16: Specifications, Annex 11, Question 3.1, page 68 How will you present your offer for the work described in the specific request (QTM based) for the PROD project? Question: Could you please clarify in detail what Tenderers are expected to provide under this requirement? Our understanding is that the presentation of the Table of contents of the hypothetical offer or a short description of the various parts of the offers would be sufficient. Please confirm or elaborate further. The objective is to provide enough details in the offer to describe the process (focussing only on the technical part). The level of details is left to the appreciation of tenderer.

8 During the drafting of the offer, the contractor must take into account that the sub-tasks content and order is not yet known and that his offer will be subject to reopening of competition. Clarification 17: Specifications, Annex 11, Question 3.2, page 68 How do you propose to manage the subtask QTM1 (take-over) of the specific contract, assure the delivery and manage the acceptance process?. a) It is our understanding that Tenderers should provide in their response to the above question their detailed approach/methodology for the execution of the QTM1 subtask (including all tasks and activities to be performed) along with the description of the processes and activities to be performed for the management of the sub task (i.e including the activities of WP1 Management of the project related to this subtask such as the WBS of the activities, the Deliverable tracking Matrix, the planning of the activities (Gantt Charts), the internal procedures of the contractor applicable to this subtask etc). Please confirm that our understanding is correct. Absolutely, this sub-task contains activities related to WP2 take-over but should also include any activities from other work packages needed to deliver the service (and referring to their offer of the initial QTM request, as proposed in answer of Annex11, Question 3.1). The tenderer should also detail the sub-task request (he may use the related form in annex 8), propose the effort estimation, etc. Since this is concerning a sub-task, the proposal is not subject to reopening of competition. b) Please confirm that the same applied to Questions 3.3 and 3.4 of Annex 11 Yes Clarification 18: Specifications, Annex 11, Question 3.6, page 69 How will you measure that the project deliverables comply with the RUP@EC methodology? Page 7 of the specifications states that Tenderers cannot be provided with access to the RUP@EC documentation before the start of the specific contract. Given that the Tenderers are requested to provide their approach for measuring compliance with the RUP@EC methodology, could you please provide us with the RUP@EC related documentation? Compliance with RUP is sufficient. The important aspect is the measurement method. Clarification 19: Specifications, Annex 12, Section 3, page 74 a) Could you please clarify whether Tenderers have to provide an effort estimation analysis per subtask in the frame of their response/proposal to the hypothetical QTM request (PROD system) required in the award criteria? Yes, but this takes place for the sub-tasks request.

9 b) In case that your answer to the above question is positive please confirm that Tenderers have to use the FPA method (where applicable) in order to estimate the necessary workload for the execution of the QTM subtasks. Yes, since FPA is explicitly requested and where applicable. Please also refer to the answer of Questions & Answers (1). c) Furthermore, given that the QTM request of Annex 12 describes the workload required per profile (section 4, page 74), we understand that the effort estimation refers to the breakdown of the provided effort among the various sub tasks and activities of the QTM request. Please confirm or elaborate. Yes, this is the total estimated effort for the whole request (including all sub-tasks) made by the Commission. Please refer also to answer 9 of Questions & Answers (4). d) Could you please clarify whether the effort provided in Section 4 of Annex 12 refers to the maximum estimated effort, meaning that Tenderers may propose fewer but not larger workload per profile? This is not a maximum. If the tenderer estimates that larger workload per profile is requested or if another allocation of effort through the profiles should be applied, this can be reflected in the offer (subject to reopening of competition). Clarification 20: Please confirm that (according to your reply to question 4 of the second part of clarifications) in the frame of the preparation of offers in response to specific requests, any costs related to travel costs, accommodation costs and daily allowances will be calculated separately from the costs associated with the cost of the workload required (i.e the workload required per profile multiplied by the price of the profile) There is perhaps a misunderstanding from the answer to question 4 of "Questions & Answers (2). By writing that "costs must be part of the offers concerning the specific requests on a case by case basis", this meant that prices per profile must take these costs into account at the time of the specific offer (respecting the condition to not exceed the initial maximum prices). Please also refer to Part 2, point 6.1, bullet 3 and annex 7. Clarification 21: Specifications, Annex 7 Model for Calculation of Prices for this offer and future specific requests, page 44 Could you please define what Tenderers have to complete at the last row ( TOTAL COST ) of the Annex? Should they provide with the sum of the all prices per man day for all the profiles OR with the weighted average sum of these prices according to the weight factors provided in the Corrigendum to the specifications? This is the sum of all the prices per man day. Clarification 22: Specifications, section Types of ordering pages 9-11

10 Could you please describe in detail the roadmap for the ordering of each of the three types of ordering? More specifically please clarify in detail which are the typical timeframes for each of the ordering process stages i.e - the time allowed (if any) for the Contractors in order to express their willingness to submit a proposal - the typical time allowed for the Contractors in order to prepare and submit their proposals - the availability of the Commission for any technical meetings with the Contractor in order to clarify the request s requirements - the typical time allowed for Candidates (for TM orders) in order to be available for interviews - the typical time allowed to the Contractor of a SC in order to provide with his offer for a QTM subtask etc. That information is not provided by the Commission since this is to the tenderer to make such proposals, typically via answering the questionnaire in annex 11. It is although possible that these timeframe values are explicitly requested in the specific orders. Clarification 23: Specifications, Annex 12, Section 3, page 74 Our understanding is that the example of Annex 12 refers to a QTM request that will be addressed to all Contractors of the Framework Contract during the reopening of competition stage. In this sense and according to the requirement of page 10 (Quoted Time and Means Orders) the Tenderers are requested to provide their technical proposals based on the requirements, the profiles and workload. This example is not referred to the second phase where the Contractor should complete the QTM sub-task form. Please confirm that our understanding is correct. Indeed this is not referring to the second phase (sub-tasks). Although, in his answer to Annex 11, questions 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5, the tenderer must present how he will manage that second phase. Clarification 24: Specifications, Part 1, Section Quoted Time and Means Orders (QTM), page 10-11, The offer must include a technical proposal based on the requirements, the profiles and workload (person-days) For each sub-tasks, the contractor sends the Commission a proposal with the details of the sub-task and its execution (including the workload, time schedule and the deliverables) on the basis of a number of person days with the requested profile(s) a) Our understanding is that as far as Quoted Time and Means Orders are concerned the following processes will apply: - The Commission sends the QTM Order to all the Contractors of the Framework Contract (FC Contractors) detailing the various sub-tasks to be executed and the total number of days (Phase I of the process). - The Contractors reply with their technical proposal for the request and the Contractor with best value for money proposal signs a Specific Contract ( SC Contractor ).

11 - When appropriate, the Commission sends a request to the SC Contractor for the execution of one or more of the QTM subtasks of the SC (Sub task Order) and the Contractor replies with his proposal including details for the sub-task s execution (i.e workload, time schedule and deliverables). After reaching an agreement, both sides sign a form and the SC Contractor executes the requested work. No work will be performed without the prior Commission s order for the execution of one or more subtasks (sub tasks orders) and mutual agreement with the Contractor. (Phase II of the process). Please confirm that our understanding is correct. Yes. Although in Phase I, the Commission may not yet be able to detail the sub-tasks content, but just sub-tasks type. The opposite can also be true, since the Commission may already be able to give all details (specifications, for ex.) of all or parts of the future sub-tasks content. In addition, the sub-tasks number and the sub-tasks submission order may also not be defined. This is typically the case for corrective maintenance where only the type of activity can be defined, their amount can also be estimated, but not their occurrence, their number and their exact content. b) Regarding the content of the offers of the Contractor during the two different phases of the process, we would appreciate your clarification on the following points: 1. Phase 1. The Tender specifications at page 10 state The offer must include a technical proposal based on the requirements, the profiles and workload (persondays). i) Given that the QTM Order specifies the total number of person-days, what kind of workload allocation are the FC Contractors to make at this Phase? Is it a break down of the total effort per subtask? For example, for the PROD QTM Order, this could be X person days for WP-1, and so on summing up to the total of 240 person days of the Order. Is it correct? The workload must not be based only on sub-tasks (QTMx). The breakdown can also be organised otherwise (for example, a matrix between WPx and profiles or deliverables and profiles). Please also refer to answer to your request of clarification 19, point d). ii) At this phase, where no use cases are known, the allocation can not be based on the UCP method. Please confirm that our understanding is correct. At that phase, it is possible (but not mandatory) that use cases or other specifications are already provided to FC contractors. iii) At this phase, neither the weighting of the deliverables or services nor the acceptance schema for the deliverables are required. Please confirm that our understanding is correct. This is typically the case. To be as efficient as possible, if one deliverable is already known and exactly defined at Phase 1, an acceptance schema may be required. If all deliverables are known, weighting may also be defined. This would enable FC contractors to make their offer as accurate as possible for the reopening of competition.

12 2. Phase 2. During the specific order request phase, the SC contractor needs to provide the EC with a proposal with the details of the sub-task and its execution (including the workload, time schedule and the deliverables), Specification page 11. Given that the SC Contractor will have already defined the allocation of workload to each subtask (see question 1i) could you please specify the differences (if any) between the two proposals in terms of workload? In other words, is the SC Contractor allowed to modify the number of person days for a specific subtask during this phase of the process? The question is also applicable to the technical proposal component of the two proposals. The workload must not be based only on sub-tasks in Phase 1. During Phase 1, the SC contractor does not necessarily commit to a specific workload schema per sub-task. The workload in Phase 2 can be detailed more precisely if there is no previous commitment taken in Phase 1. c) In relation to the Questionnaire for award evaluation, please specify the following: 1. Points 2.1 and 2.2 refer to Phase I of the process. Please confirm. 2. Point 3.1 refers also to Phase I (QTM) offer. The only difference between Point 2.2 and Point 3.1 is that 3.1 refers to the specific request described in Annex 12, whereas point 2.2 refers to any QTM request. Is it correct? 3. Are Tenderers allowed to use the request of Annex 12, as a practical example for Point 2.2? Point 2.2 refers to phase 1 and Phase 2 of any QTM based specific request (point 2.1 is FP based). Point 3.1 refers to phase 1 of the QTM specific request described in annex 12. It is not forbidden to use the PROD project as a basis of the practical example(s) for point 2.2. Clarification 25: Regarding the requirement for the Quality Indicators and Service Performance Values, please clarify the following: a) Tenderers are required to define themselves which Quality Indicators they intend to monitor and report as well as which Service Performance Values they will consider as acceptable. Will Tenderers be evaluated on the means they will use to monitor and report these indicators as well as the proposed measures in case of non-conformance or the Quality Indicators themselves will be also assessed? Tenderers will be evaluated on the choice of these indicators, the means used for their monitoring and the measures foreseen in case of non-conformance. b) For the overall management and ordering process, the proposed Quality Indicators are intended to be request independent therefore their applicability to all FC services is ensured. However, this is not the case for Point 3.6 where Quality Indicators and Service Performance Values refer only to the PROD request, according to the Tender Specifications and the clarifications already provided by the EC. Could you please confirm that these Indicators will not have applicability to the delivery services and are only meant to provide an indication of the Tenderers approach on this subject? Furthermore, could you please confirm that no Quality Indicators and respective Performance Values are requested for the delivery of TM and FP services? Indicators provided in answer to point 3.6 should although be compliant (at least not contradictory) with the general indicators proposed in answers to points 1.3 and 2.3.

13 Quality and performance indicators are requested for all types of requests. The tenderer can propose the same or different indicators per type of ordering, if appropriate. Clarification 26: Specifications, Annex 11, Question 3.2, Question 3.3, and Question 3.4 page 68 AND Specifications, Annex 12 a) According to our understanding the Work Packages of the example QTM request of Annex 12 are grouped under three different sub tasks namely: 1. Sub-task 1 which includes WP2 Take Over 2. Sub-task 2 which includes WP3, WP4 and WP5 (i.e specifications, development and deployment of the system) 3. Sub-task 3 which includes WP6 Hand Over It is also our understanding that the activities of WP1 Management of the project are incorporated in the activities for the management of each of the three sub-tasks and does not constitute a separate or stand alone sub task. In this sense we have concluded that in our responses for Questions 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4, apart from the methodology for execution of each of the involved WP activities, the Tenderers should also include the related to the sub task WP1-management activities (e.g the project meetings that will take place during the execution of the sub task). Please confirm that our understanding is correct or elaborate further. Yes, activities from WP1 should be incorporated to all sub-tasks. Please refer also to the answer to your clarification requests 2 and 9. b) WP1 Management of the project includes the preparation of the project quality plan. It is our understanding that this activity will include the planning for the overall project execution and will be performed during the Sub-task 2. Please confirm that our understanding is correct The drafting of the project Quality Plan should be foreseen for sub-task 1. The project coordination and reporting activities should be foreseen for the 3 sub-tasks.