Spode 1F Works · UK public procurement notice

Lot awarding rule: The tender evaluation is divided into two stages - the Procurement Supplier Questionnaire and the Award Stage evaluation, as detailed below. The standard PSQ Evaluation pertains to the evaluation of Parts 2, 3 & 4 (Qualification Questionnaire) of the tender document. Your self declaration element of this selection stage will only be checked for the winning supplier before award, unless it is necessary to check at an earlier stage to ensure the proper conduct of the procedure. There are a number of project specific selection stage questions which are deemed relevant and proportionate to this contract. To ensure proper conduct of the procedure they will be assessed prior to the second stage evaluation for all bidders. PLEASE NOTE: With regards to the PSQ (Qualification Questionnaire) which relate to Parts 2, 3 and 4 it should be noted that you must achieve a PASS for each part of these evaluations in order for your tender to be compliant. A FAIL for 1 or more of these questions will result in your tender submission being disqualified. The Award Stage Evaluation will be based on the tender award criteria Most Advantageous Tender (MAT). This pertains to the Technical Questionnaire Section of the tender document in respect of the qualitative evaluation and the Commercial Questionnaire section of the tender document in respect of the pricing evaluation. Technical (Quality) Evaluation The maximum MAT score of 100 marks is broken down into 40 marks for the Technical (QUALITY) evaluation and 60 marks for the Commercial (Price) evaluation. Tenderers are required to complete the Technical and Commercial Questionnaire sections of the tender document accordingly. The 40 marks available for the Technical (Quality) evaluation is further broken down into a number of sub- criteria as follows: 7 marks - Ensuring the safety of and minimised disruption to other site users 7 marks - Programme of works 6 marks - Heritage related issues will be considered 10 marks - Social Value The score for each of the above technical criteria will be arrived at by applying the mechanism detailed below: Scoring mechanism Score 5 marks - where the evidence demonstrates that all of the tender requirements have been met. Response provided is excellent. Score 4 marks - where the evidence demonstrates that most of the tender requirements have been met. Response provided is good. Score 3 marks - where the evidence demonstrates that some of the tender requirements have been met. Response provided is satisfactory. Score 2 marks - where the evidence demonstrates clear gaps in meeting the tender requirements and is not comprehensive. Response provided is below average. Score 1 mark - where the evidence demonstrates a significant flaw in meeting the tender requirements. Response provided is poor Score 0 marks - where no information is provided for the relevant criteria. Commercial evaluation The 60 marks applicable to the Commercial (Price) evaluation will be calculated using the following formulae: Lowest total tender price divided by bidders total tender price (ie the bid under consideration) multiplied by 60 = marks awarded. (For clarity the total commercial score will be to 2 decimal places) Total Score The Technical and Commercial scores will then be added together to give an overall score out of 100 marks to provide the overall ranking. (For clarity, the total M.A.T score will be to 2 decimal places)