Questions and Answers on call for tender RAN Centre of excellence HOME/2014/ISFP/PR/RADZ/0023) First set.

Transcription

1 Questions and Answers on call for tender RAN Centre of excellence HOME/2014/ISFP/PR/RADZ/0023) First set. Q1. Could you please provide Annex 1 in Word, Annex 2 in either Word or Excel, Annex 3A in Excel and Annex 3B in Excel, so that we can easily complete these forms? A1. Yes. The requested forms will be uploaded on the Europa webpage of DG HOME under the specifications to be downloaded. Q2. Could you please consider whether the following numbers in Annexes 3A and 3B are typos? a. On page 12, under task 8.2, in the column of prefixed units, 4 HLCs are requested for the one year scenario. Should that not be 1 HLC? Page 17 of the Tender Specifications states that no more than one HLC per year will take place. b. On pages 5 and 11, the second mention of task 4.1A probably needs to be 4.2A. c. On pages 7 and 12, the second mention of task 8.4E probably needs to be 8.4F. A2. a) Yes. The correct prefixed unit for HLC in the scenario task 8.2, page 12 of Annex 3B - should be read 1 instead of 4. b) Yes. The second mention of task 4.1A on pages 5 and 11 should be read 4.2A c) Yes. The second mention of task 8.4E on pages 7 and 12 should be read 8.4F Q3. Could you please confirm that any subcontractor, which foreseen services represent less than 20% of the contract, does not need to provide the Legal Entity Form (Tender Specifications, page 25) and the Declaration of Honour (Annex 1), even if the sum of services of all subcontractors represents more than 20% of the contract? A3. Yes. We confirm. Nevertheless, any tenderer should include in the tender satisfactory information and evidence about the declared subcontractors in relation to the selection criteria to demonstrate their technical capacity for the part of the services that they are proposed to cover. A clear letter of intent of each subcontractor (legal or natural person) should be provided in the tender, independently of the 20% rule. Q4. Could you please confirm that several specific contracts within one framework contract are seen as several projects on the requested CVs and list of principal services in paragraph V.2.2 (Tender Specifications, page 30-32)? A4. We confirm that, in principle, each specific contract may be counted as a different project. The evidence provided by the tenderers with regard to para V.2.2. of the specifications will be assessed by the evaluation committee based on this principle.

2 Q5. Could you please confirm that one project, due to its complexity and scale, can in principle satisfy more than one of the four criteria requested in paragraph V.2.2.a (Tender Specifications, page 30-31)? A5. We confirm that one contract may be provided as evidence for several selection criteria if it covers different aspects of the services/fields of expertise. In such case, the total value of this contract will not be counted as evidence for these considered selection criteria. Only the part related to the specific aspects of the services/field of expertise may be counted in terms of contract/project value. Q6. Could an individual team member in principle satisfy more than one of the criteria requested in paragraph V.2.2.b (Tender Specifications, page 31-32), by covering more than one profile? A6. We confirm that if an individual team member satisfies more than one of the criteria requested in para V.2.2.b, he could be proposed for more than one profile, provided that the relevant evidence for each considered profile are provided in the tender. Any such organisational scheme, if proposed, may not impact or limit a complete, qualitative and parallel execution of all the considered services to be carried out by these profiles. Q7. We have difficulty understanding the number of expert CVs requested in paragraph V.2.2.b (Tender Specifications, page 31-32). At least 20% of the experts should be senior with at least 10 years of experience, and at least 20 CVs of seniors should be provided. That implies that 1 CV, and thus 1 expert, equals 1% of the total number of experts. The number of CVs of experts with at least 6 years of experience would therefore need to be 50 at least. Is that a correct assumption? A7. When addressing these criteria, the tenderers should provide the information on the proposed team to deliver the services. For some profiles (where it is expected to get in principle several persons in the proposed team), there is some percentage requirements to be satisfied when composing the proposed team organisation. Each tenderer should establish the right size of his/her team taking into account these percentages as well as the other requirements. When a number of CV is requested, this is not to give any guidance for the establishment of the size of the team but this is to ensure that the tenderer's staff technical capacities will exceed the size of the proposed team. It aims to ensure that each selected tenderer has enough staff available with similar expertise to deliver the services during the course of the framework contract. The tenderers should therefore, when providing the minimum number of CV's requested for each profile, identify for each profile the CVs of the persons that he/her proposes in the initial team organisation. The other CVs will constitute a reserve of similar profiles and attest of a sufficient technical capacity for each profile.

3 Q8. Specifically, we have extensive research and policy development experience in radicalisation, conflict resolution, working across territories of the world. We also work with Non-EU players as researchers-advisers, including the former deputy assistant to the President for National Security and a General who took charge of de-radicalisation in Middle East. There is no mention in the FWC of nationality or place of work, of the consortium members, or potential sub-contractors. Could we include non-eu experts as sub-contractors providing under 20% of the contract, or should they be linked to the activities of the Centre through another route? A8. As mentioned in the contract notice, tenderers (and partners, subcontractors) located in a country being part of the GATT may participate to the call for tender. Any tenderer should include in the tender satisfactory information and evidence about the declared subcontractors in relation to the selection criteria to demonstrate their technical capacity for the part of the services that they are proposed to cover. A clear letter of intent of each subcontractor (legal or natural person) should be provided in the tender, independently of the 20% rule. In particular, the attention of the tenderers is drawn on the following selection criteria: (b) The proposed team organisation needs to provide the necessary expertise to fulfil all tasks ensuring the quality requirements as set out in the tender specifications. The team should ideally be composed of experts from different Member States. As a team, the experts must also prove excellent skills in English, very good knowledge in French and German, and be capable of ensuring translation into all EU official languages. (c) "To prove the expertise, experience, skills and know how as outlined above the tenderer must provide evidence of having carried out similar services in the field of radicalisation in the last three years. Similar services are services which are comparable to the tasks as set out in the technical specifications in terms of nature, scale and scope, in particular as regards their European (and where relevant international) dimension of such services/activities (e.g. workshops organised for participants coming from more than 5 Member States, comparative research work covering at least 5 Member States, policy recommendations addressed to an international target audience)." The capacity to fulfil the tasks as described in the tender specifications includes the capacity to further the general approach underlying the RAN, i.e. the enhanced engagement of civil society, recognising that prevention of terrorism and violent extremism is not a matter of law enforcement actions alone, requiring a societal, multi-sector and multi-actor response (see introductory statements, the description of the RAN Centre and the cross-referenced policy documents of the tender specifications). Q9. We have noticed that the deadline for submission of tenders if January 6th Given that January 6th is considered an official National Holiday in our Country and hence not a business working day is it possible to postpone the submission date? Q10. Considering the complexity of the subject and the significant amount of work, as well as the holiday period can you please provide us with an additional delay of 3 weeks to deliver our proposal? Thank you in advance for your understanding.

4 A9 & A10. The deadline of the call for tender HOME/2014/ISFP/PR/RADZ/0023 cannot be extended. The call for tender is opened during a sufficient period of time allowing any potential bidder to take the necessary steps to submit their offer by 6/1/2015. The contract notice for Call for tender HOME/2014/ISFP/PR/RADZ/0023 has been sent to the OPOCE for publication on 17/10/2014; the contract notice was published 12 calendar days later as usual. According to the procurement rules, the contracting authority could have fixed the deadline for submission 52 calendar days from 17/10/2014 but has decided that the submission deadline will be 6/01/2015 to let a longer period of time in order that any interested tenderer can prepare a qualitative and competitive bid for this important call for tender. Q11: For price items AE7 and AE8 in the financial grid model of Annex 3a, could you confirm the respective source and target language? Does AE7 refer to 1) translation from EN/FR/DE into EN/FR/DE, 2) from another language into EN/FR/DE, or 3) from EN/FR/DE into another language? Similarly, does AE8 refer to 1) translation from another language into EN/FR/DE, 2) from EN/FR/DE into another language, or 3) from another language to another language? A11: Source languages are EN/FR/DE for both interpretation (AE5 and AE6) and translation (AE7 and AE8). Target languages for interpretation are EN/FR/DE. Target languages for translation are EN/FR/DE (AE7) and any other EU language (AE8). Q12: Tenderers are asked to supply a price for translation per page. Could you confirm the average number of words per page? Does the industry standard of 250 words/page apply? A12: In footnote 11 on p. 9 of the technical specifications, it is mentioned that "Throughout the tender specifications, 1 page is understood as containing characters (without spaces)". Q13: Could you confirm that the reference to subcontractors in the remark on the bottom of page 32 at the end of paragraph V.2.2 includes subcontractors whose intended share of the contract is less than 20%? And could you confirm that this implies that such subcontractors could contribute to meeting the criteria, jointly with the tenderer, on experience with previous projects (paragraph V.2.2.a) and the criteria on the CVs (paragraph V.2.2.b) of both the team and the reserve as described in your answer to question 7? A13: We confirm that the reference to subcontractors in the remark on the bottom of page 32 at the end of paragraph V.2.2 includes subcontractors whose intended share of the contract is less than 20%. We also confirm that such subcontractors could contribute to meeting the criteria, jointly with the tenderer, on experience with previous projects (paragraph V.2.2.a) and the criteria on the CVs (paragraph V.2.2.b) of both the team and the reserve as described in answer 7. Q14: Could you confirm that the projects mentioned in paragraph V.2.2.a need not have ended, if the value of the part of project which has been delivered exceeds the value requested? A14: Projects mentioned in paragraph V.2.2.a need to be accepted/paid by the client to be considered as evidence in relation to the technical capacity selection criteria. This includes closed projects and part of the on-going projects already accepted/paid by the client. So on-going projects

5 already accepted/paid the client for a value of at least euros could qualify to meet the first and second criteria of paragraph V.2.2.a, and on-going projects that the client has already accepted/paid for a value of at least euros could qualify to meet the third and fourth criteria of paragraph V.2.2.a. Q15: On the call for tender, published on October 29th, you mention in footnote 1 (administrative information) to submit the various forms in a certain number of copies. The financial en legal entity forms have been provided by you. However, we cannot find the identification form. Could you please provide this in Word or will the cover letter suffice as identification? A15: Identification form hereunder. identification tenderer.doc Q16: Pg. 29 of the Tender specification: You indicate that the threshold of the annual consolidated turnover will be verified at consortium level. We can meet the demand of ,- turnover for 2011, 2012 and However, if one of the two companies can only submit the numbers for financial year 2013, since the company has been established in 2013, can you please confirm that we still satisfy this demand? A16: The threshold of the annual turn-over will be verified at consortium level. If one of the partner of a consortium has been established in 2013 (or 2012) and may not provide balance sheets and related turn-over for the three requested years, the assessment of the financial capacity will be done based on the turn-over of the other members of the consortium. Q17: We would like to confirm with you whether we can include institutions such as the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) and CEPOL, the European Police College Organisation in Budapest as partners in the tender. Could they participate in an advisory position ie. in an advisory board? A17: Institutions such European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) and CEPOL, the European Police College Organisation, are not eligible as tenderers or partner or subcontractor for the call for tender HOME/2014/ISFP/PR/RADZ/0023 as they are European bodies already funded by the European Union Budget. Call for tender HOME/2014/ISFP/PR/RADZ/0023 aims to procure services to European Commission, represented for the purpose of this call for tender by DG HOME. With that respect, any Institutions or European bodies (and any related human resources) may not be part of any tender. A participation in an advisory board proposed in the tender is not possible either. Should exist a need to get these European bodies on board, the European Commission will contact them directly. Q18: In Annex 3a, Price List, and Annex 3b, Price Grid Scenario, tenderers are encouraged to expand sections if needed. Is this understood to mean that additional rows and therefore price items can be included and that existing price items can be further qualified? Would tenderers, therefore, be allowed to include new price items and change existing items under AEP, AE and any of the specific tasks 1-9? In which case, how would you ensure a fair comparison of tenders?

6 Is it possible to include new sub-tasks or to modify sub-tasks? Or is it only possible to include sub- /sub-tasks to further detail sub-tasks as defined in the current tables in Annex 3a and 3b? A18: As explained in section V.3 of the specifications, "the (framework) contract will be awarded according to the award criteria, on the basis of the economically most advantageous tender". The fair and equal assessment of the tenders will be based on the technical offers and their related financial offers (i.e. the total price scenario based on the grid and quantities mentioned in Annex 3B with a maximum of 5 Mio ). Any expansion of the price grid items may only consist in a sub-division of sub-tasks. It is not possible to include new tasks or sub-tasks. The tenderer may decide to expand the list of items of Annex 3A (consequently also in Annex 3B) to provide further details on the proposed services. Expanding the list of items shall not affect Annex 3B scenario as the quantities (volume of services) for the tasks and sub-tasks are already pre-defined. Expansion is only made to further detail the costs/prices for a sub-task to be consistent with the level of detail(s) provided for the technical offer. For example: Task 8 has 5 sub-tasks in Annexes 3A and 3B. Sub-task 8.4 is already subdivided into 5 sub-sub-tasks. If a tenderer needs to further detail the components of sub-task 8.4F, he can expand the list with 8.4F1 and 8.4F2 etc.). Q19: According to Article I.3 Prices of the proposed contract, it is estimated that reimbursement of expenses (travels, accommodations) will represent about 50% of the ceiling value of the contract. Given the proposed payment schedule (30% pre-financing, followed by an interim payment (TBD) and the payment of the balance after the approval of the relevant deliverables (TBD)), and the number and size of the events to be organised annually, we would like to know: - whether expenses will be paid as they are incurred, or whether they will only be reimbursed as part of the three scheduled annual payments, and - if there is any flexibility in the payment schedule? An initial cash-flow projection for this contract shows that the contractor will run the risk of being substantially out of pocket before the interim and final payments are made. This could preclude us (and other SMEs) from bidding. A19: The payment schedule described in the specifications is the schedule for the payment of staff and infrastructure costs (fixed price in a specific contract to be signed). The refund of travel and accommodation costs will take place on a quarterly basis subject to the acceptance of the quarterly report and related annexes. Also note that the percentage of 50% is a reasonable estimate based on the past experience of the RAN project and the expected action plan for the duration of the framework contract. This estimate is not binding for the Commission.

7 Q20: As regards to subcontractors, it is our understanding that we do not need to identify, name and get a letter of intent for all subcontractors (ie. service providers such as room hire, catering, translation service, video company). A20: As stated in section of section V.1. of the specifications, a subcontractor should provide all requested administrative evidence for the exclusion and selection criteria if he is declared to deliver 20 % or more of the services. Below 20% of subcontracting services, a subcontractor should provide evidence to demonstrate that he satisfies to the technical capacity criteria in relation with the services he is mentioned to deliver. This last statement is nevertheless not an obligation if the tenderer or consortium fully met the selection criteria for the technical capacity without relying on the subcontractor's capacity. Q21: Can a tenderer sub-contract with an entity that has already formed a consortium with another tenderer? In other words, if there are two separate tenderers, can they use the same sub-co or partner for the same tender bid? A21: A legal entity/natural person may only submit one tender as tenderer or partner in a consortium applying for the bid. A legal entity/natural person may be subcontractor in several bids. Also note that a subcontractor should provide all requested administrative evidence for the exclusion and selection criteria if he is declared to deliver 20 % or more of the services. Below 20% of subcontracting services, a subcontractor should provide evidence to demonstrate that he satisfies to the technical capacity criteria in relation with the services he is mentioned to deliver. This last statement is nevertheless not an obligation if the tenderer or consortium fully met the selection criteria for the technical capacity without relying on the subcontractor's capacity. Q22: Is it possible for experts / analysts (as per p.31 of the tender specification) to be included in more than one bid? A22: Experts / analysts who would be proposed in the team organisation described in a tender may only be included in several bids if they are subcontractors. Any expert / analyst (natural person) being partner of a consortium applying for the call for tender or being on the payroll of such a partner or on the payroll of a tenderer him(her-)self may not be proposed in more than one bid. Q23: Annexes 3a and 3b include a budget item 9.1 for the elaboration of a concept paper for the further development of the website. However, there is no budget item that relates to the actual development of the website, nor in fact to the support and maintenance of the website. Task 9.2 refers to the elaboration and upload of content, while task 9.3 refers to support and maintenance of

8 the e-community. Can you clarify how tasks related to website development, maintenance and support will be budgeted? A23: The description of the task 9 from p.18 of the specifications clearly described that the contractor does not have to establish any new website. "The RAN Centre s website will be hosted and managed by the Commission on DG HOME's Europa Portal. This implies that the overall look and navigation structure would need to be followed. The contractor is tasked to prepare all content related to the RAN Centre s activities and which are to be published on that website. The contractor may also be tasked to upload content in the event that significant amounts of new material need to be published on the website within a short period of time. In that case, a security convention will need to be obtained. " Under task 9.1 the contractor will have to explain how the content should be presented on that page. Commission IT staff department will create the necessary headings (as this is currently done for the RAN ; RAN Centre will have a dedicated entry under Networks RAN area). The contractor will prepare the content to be up-loaded by us (task 9.2 see general explanation in the introduction to Task 9). In short, there is no need for website development (if this is something different from what is described above). The tasks only relate to content management editorial work, including content upload on the dedicated entry inside HOME Portal. Support or maintenance of the RAN Centre's website should be read as content management related issues. This is not about a (new) website, but about a dedicated entry on DG HOME's Europa Portal, under Networks-RAN area. Q24: Considering the significant amount of cash flow of expenses/reimbursements with regard to the payments of experts, trips, events, etc. we would like to ask why the Interim payment (under point I. 4.3) and payment of the balance ( under point I.4.4.) (p. 18 of the FRAMEWORK SERVICE CONTRACT template in the tender specifications) foresees 60 days for the contracting authority to make payments from receipt of the invoice, and not 30 days as in the case for the I.4.2 Pre-financing. A24: A period of 60 days is needed to review and accept the quarterly monthly report linked to the payment. As this report shall include all the necessary information/evidence for the expenses/reimbursement of the past quarter, the necessary review and acceptance requires a sufficient time. Concretely the invoice may be submitted with the quarterly report and the 60 days period include both operational review and acceptance of the report and the processing of the payment. The budget of a specific contract is typically split into two major parts: - the staff costs with a payment schedule of 30% pre-financing, 30% at mid-term (linked to a quarterly report) and 40% at the end of the period (linked the final/yearly report). - the travel and accommodation (and variable) costs with a quarterly payment For a 12 months specific contract, the payment schedule is the following: 30% of staff costs as pre-financing at the signature of the contract, a first payment for travel/accommodation (any variable costs) at the acceptance of first quarterly report, 30% of staff

9 costs + a second payment for travel/accommodation (any variable costs) at the acceptance of second quarterly report, a third payment for travel/accommodation (any variable costs) at the acceptance of third quarterly report and 40% of staff costs + a fourth payment for travel/accommodation (any variable costs) at the acceptance of annual report.