Terms of reference for service provider to analyse, benchmark and recommend appropriate remuneration and conditions of service model for SAQA Background SAQA was established in terms of the SAQA Act which was later repealed and replaced by the NQF Act. SAQA is not governed by the Public Service Act which regulates the employment conditions of the DPSA. At inception SAQA adopted the basic naming convention of the DPSA to position the different jobs and job grades within SAQA. In 2001/2002 SAQA conducted a general job evaluation and grading exercise using the Patterson Job Grading model. SAQA also adopted a Broadbanding model for Directors and Deputy Directors, which was intended to allow for a more effective recognition and reward culture where employee growth through the acquisition of more complex/higher skills as well as improved performance could be stimulated. This model was later extended to include Assistant Directors through to Administration Clerks. SAQA s main competitors for skills in the market place are the DPSA and other state institutions, SETAs, Quality Councils and the private sector in respect of the generic support services like Finance, Information Technology and Human Resources. SAQA also acted as the de facto breeding ground for the development of skills for the NQF. SAQA s revenue is mainly derived from annual government grants and income from services rendered for the evaluation of foreign qualifications as well as the verification of South African qualifications for staff employed in the Public Service. Over the past few years the SAQA cost structure grew at a rate faster than its revenue streams. This was in recent years exacerbated by the level of government grants/subsidies being slowed down year on year and even reduced. This had the effect of squeezing margins and raised the price of SAQA services rendered for the evaluation of foreign qualifications and verifications of qualifications. Brief SAQA is not bound by the regulations that govern the conditions of employment of the Public Sector although there may be similarities in structure and the naming convention for job grades. Whilst SAQA was initially ahead of the DPSA in terms of its remuneration paid to staff, this difference is currently swinging the other way, with SAQA either being equal to, or behind, the DPSA salary scales in some job grades. The remunerations and business model currently adopted by SAQA with an underlying philosophy to remain within the broad parameters of the public sector is not sustainable in the long run. The public sector is cost insensitive and could generate revenue through measures that SAQA could not. SAQA, on the other hand, needs to respond to marketing and resourcing factors on the basis of affordability and sound business viability norms, without necessarily being driven solely by profit motives. 1 TERMS OF REFERRENCE: ANALYSE, BENCHMARK AND RECOMMEND APPROPRIATE REMUNERATION AND CONDITIONS OF
The impact, therefore, of reduced funding from Government and strained revenue streams resulted in SAQA having to review its funding model and concomitant remuneration and conditions of service philosophy in order to remain competitive and financially viable. Terms of Reference The assignment contemplated should cover, amongst others, the following activities: Analyse current remuneration and benefits dispensation (total package and indirect costs) Total package includes: Basic salary, Pension Fund, Medical Aid, Housing allowance, Annual Bonus and Travel allowance. Leave includes: Annual leave, sick leave Family responsibility leave, maternity leave, Examination leave, Class/course attendance, Special leave (IOD), Learning Leave, paternity leave and recession leave. Performance bonus. Compare with DPSA terms and conditions of employment (including level progression and performance bonuses) Benchmark market relatedness (appropriate and comparable organisations, e.g. QCs, SETAs, Tertiary institutions) Develop a viable remunerations model for SAQA Develop an appreciation, recognition and reward policy Conclusion The above assignment requires the expertise of remuneration and benefits as well as organisation development and design specialists. If the full intervention is to be undertaken, it is envisaged that it would require at least four months, after commencement of analyses, to conclude and for implementation to commence. 2 TERMS OF REFERRENCE: ANALYSE, BENCHMARK AND RECOMMEND APPROPRIATE REMUNERATION AND CONDITIONS OF
CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH QUOTATIONS ARE TO BE SUBMITTED SAQA reserves the right to reject any quotation that, in its opinion, is not according to the specification. The bidder will be disqualified should any attempt be made by the service provider, either directly or indirectly, to canvass SAQA, or any of its employees in respect of the quotation between the date of the quotation and the date of award. SAQA reserves the right not to accept the lowest quotation, as the quality of the proposal and the ability to deliver within a short period of time will play a major role when the proposals are evaluated. Similarly SAQA is not bound to select any of the service providers quoting for this requirement. SAQA reserves the right to award only part of the contract, if it deems necessary. SUBMISSION OF QUOTATIONS Quotations must be received before the deadline as indicated in the Request for Quotation. They must include the signed standard bid documentation and all other relevant documents required and submitted either electronically to msebola@saqa.co.za delivered to the following address: Physical Address South African Qualifications Authority SAQA House Building 1067 Arcadia Street Hatfield, Pretoria, 0083 Standard Bid documentation: The below mentioned documentation must be completed, signed and submitted with proposal: Original Valid Tax Clearance Certificate BBBEE Certificate SBD 4: Declaration of Interest SBD 6.1: Preference Points Claim Form SBD 8: Declaration of bidders past supply chain management practices SBD 9: Certificate of Independent bid determination 3 TERMS OF REFERRENCE: ANALYSE, BENCHMARK AND RECOMMEND APPROPRIATE REMUNERATION AND CONDITIONS OF
Contact detail: Terms of Reference/Technical Contact Detail Mr Victor Booysen: vbooysen@saqa.co.za Quotation Contact Detail/Supply Chain Management Ms Lenette Venter: lventer@saqa.co.za or Mr Malesela Sebola: msebola@saqa.co.za All quotations must be received before 16:00 on Monday 14 September 2015 PRICING AWARDING OF POINTS Preference points for this quotation shall be awarded for: (a) (b) Price; and B-BBEE Status Level of Contribution. The maximum points for this quotation are allocated as follows: PRICE 80 B-BBEE STATUS LEVEL OF CONTRIBUTION 20 Total points for Price and B-BBEE 100 THE 80/20 PREFERENCE POINT SYSTEMS A maximum of 80 points is allocated for price on the following basis: Where 80/20 Pt P min Ps 801 P min Ps = Points scored for comparative price of bid under consideration Pt = Comparative price of bid under consideration Pmin = Comparative price of lowest acceptable bid Points awarded for B-BBEE Status Level of Contribution POINTS In terms of Regulation 5 (2) and 6 (2) of the Preferential Procurement Regulations, preference points must be awarded to a bidder for attaining the B-BBEE status level of contribution in accordance with the table below: B-BBEE Status Level of Contributor Number of points (80/20 system) 4 TERMS OF REFERRENCE: ANALYSE, BENCHMARK AND RECOMMEND APPROPRIATE REMUNERATION AND CONDITIONS OF
1 20 2 18 3 16 4 12 5 8 6 6 7 4 8 2 Non-compliant contributor 0 Bidders who qualify as EMEs in terms of the B-BBEE Act must submit a certificate issued by an Accounting Officer as contemplated in the CCA or a Verification Agency accredited by SANAS or a Registered Auditor. Registered auditors do not need to meet the prerequisite for IRBA s approval for the purpose of conducting verification and issuing EMEs with B-BBEE Status Level Certificates. Bidders other than EMEs must submit their original and valid B-BBEE status level verification certificate or a certified copy thereof, substantiating their B-BBEE rating issued by a Registered Auditor approved by IRBA or a Verification Agency accredited by SANAS. A trust, consortium or joint venture, will qualify for points for their B-BBEE status level as a legal entity, provided that the entity submits their B-BBEE status level certificate. A trust, consortium or joint venture will qualify for points for their B-BBEE status level as an unincorporated entity, provided that the entity submits their consolidated B-BBEE scorecard as if they were a group structure and that such a consolidated B-BBEE scorecard is prepared for every separate bid. Tertiary institutions and public entities will be required to submit their B-BBEE status level certificates in terms of the specialized scorecard contained in the B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice. A person will not be awarded points for B-BBEE status level if it is indicated in the bid documents that such a bidder intends sub-contracting more than 25% of the value of the contract to any other enterprise that does not qualify for at least the points that such a bidder qualifies for, unless the intended sub-contractor is an EME that has the capability and ability to execute the sub-contract. 5 TERMS OF REFERRENCE: ANALYSE, BENCHMARK AND RECOMMEND APPROPRIATE REMUNERATION AND CONDITIONS OF
PRICING SCHEDULE SERVICE PROVIDER: Description Specification Price Incl. VAT Analyse current remuneration and benefits dispensation (total package and indirect costs) Compare with DPSA terms and conditions of employment (including level progression and performance bonuses) Benchmark market relatedness (appropriate and comparable organisations, e.g. QCs, SETAs, Tertiary institutions) Develop a viable remunerations model for SAQA Develop an appreciation, recognition and reward policy Total cost R 6 TERMS OF REFERRENCE: ANALYSE, BENCHMARK AND RECOMMEND APPROPRIATE REMUNERATION AND CONDITIONS OF