12.07.2015 Views

Procurement of Consulting Engineering Services - Cesa

Procurement of Consulting Engineering Services - Cesa

Procurement of Consulting Engineering Services - Cesa

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Best Practice <strong>Procurement</strong><strong>of</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Port Elizabeth14 April 2011Godfrey RAMALISAWally MAYNEIvor EVANS


Introduction (cont‟d)Issues Facing the Sector - CESAIndustry and Society under distressThe lack <strong>of</strong> technical managementcapacityDelayed paymentFew work opportunitiesLower marginsLack <strong>of</strong> infrastructure maintenanceBribery and corruptionInexperienced <strong>of</strong>ficials andconsultantsPoorly defined scope <strong>of</strong> works andservicesPoor procurement practices(deviations)Inappropriate constructionprocurement models


Introduction (cont‟d)Issues Facing the Sector – Engineers Australia10 - Root Cause <strong>of</strong> Construction Industry Decline1. Inadequate project briefs 6. Inexperienced client projectcoordinators2. Lack <strong>of</strong> integration 7. Poor appreciation <strong>of</strong> optimiseddesign3. Devalued pr<strong>of</strong>essional ethics andstandards8. Lack <strong>of</strong> skilled and experiencedpeople4. Lowest bid selection strategy 9. Poor use <strong>of</strong> technology5. Poor management processes 10.Lack <strong>of</strong> open communicationBy Engineers Australia,2004


Introduction (cont‟d)Issues Facing the Sector - cidbDesign<strong>Procurement</strong>ConstructionCorruption• Inadequatedetails andspecification• Poor designcoordination• Emphasis ontime andbudget• Shortenedproject periods• Lack <strong>of</strong>prequalification• Competitivetendering• Awards <strong>of</strong>contractsprimarily onprice• Skills shortage• Insufficientworkforcetraining• Lack <strong>of</strong>managementcommitment• Lack <strong>of</strong> strictquality control• Corruption• Corruption• Corruption• Corruption


Introduction (cont‟d)Issues Facing the Sector - cidbSurvey:Barriers to Construction QualityParticipants:1. Public clients2. Designers3. Project managers4. ContractorsPoor site managementLack <strong>of</strong> contractor quality expertiseCorruptionInadequate resourcing by contractorsLack <strong>of</strong> understanding <strong>of</strong> qualityLevel <strong>of</strong> subcontractingInadequate informationDetailFocus on cost by contractorsPoor constructability


Introduction (cont‟d)Issues Facing the Sector – MDB‟s• General observation that the quality <strong>of</strong> the constructedproject has been deteriorating• This observation is confirmed by the MultilateralDevelopment Banks (MDB‟s)project managers, executing agencies and internationalconsultants• It is also perceived that good international consultantsare losing interest in MDB-funded projectsWhy has the quality <strong>of</strong> the constructed project deteriorated?


Introduction (cont‟d)Issues - Causes <strong>of</strong> Deterioration in Quality1. <strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> CE services based on PRICE- A major cause is the diminished quality <strong>of</strong> design- Lower quality design results when engineeringservices are procured as a commodity- The procurement <strong>of</strong> engineering services in which costis a factor (QCBS) promotes engineering services ascommodity servicesOther factors contribute as well, including:2. Corruption3. Incompetent contractors4. Poor project management5. Lack <strong>of</strong> resources to manage contractors


Introduction (cont‟d)The Issues – <strong>Procurement</strong> Indaba 2008• Similar concern where raisedOutcomes• Write simplified step-by-step Best Practice Guideline Manual,drawn in collaboration with the cidb• National roll-out• and revised with inputs from 2010 Roadshow


Introduction (cont‟d)Objectives1. To inform and capacitate clients and consulting engineerson procurement best practice2. Instigate delivery <strong>of</strong> consulting engineering services in truevalue–added context3. Instigate compliance to the requirements <strong>of</strong> procurementcontracts ito CIDB & Treasury legislation4. To provide CE‟s and clients a platform to makesuggestions to the best practice procurement guidelinemanual.


Introduction (cont‟d)Our MissionCreate a conducive sustainable procurement environment to enhancedinfrastructure delivery.Ensure that the right firm(s) are appointed for the right jobAppointment at a reasonable level <strong>of</strong> compensationEnsure continued existence and development <strong>of</strong> firm(s) and industryServe the best interests <strong>of</strong> public


Introduction (cont‟d)Best Interest <strong>of</strong> the PublicCost effective, Reasonable feeMoney spent on projects once,no rebuildingSafe, User friendly,Reliable, Useable and AppropriateInfrastructure


Introduction (cont‟d)•"Yes We Can“ - DeliverWorkingTogetherPartneringTogetherWalkingTogetherSharingKnowledge


Introduction (cont‟d)Outline - CESA Guideline Manual/BriefingChapter 1.Chapter 2.Chapter 3.Chapter 4.Chapter 5.Chapter 6.Chapter 7.Chapter 8.Project Life-cycle<strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong><strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Scope - expanded description <strong>of</strong> elements <strong>of</strong> scopeTender Documentation for CESValue – Added <strong>Services</strong> – value <strong>of</strong> additional CESEvaluation <strong>of</strong> tendersPerformance monitoring – Suggested framework for CPE.


Consequences:Appointingthe wrong firmforthe right job‟


Example: Wrong Firm„House & Bridge‟ <strong>Consulting</strong> EngineersSpecialist in portable house and bridgesDesign & ConstructionAssignment: Three relatively easy questions.Question # 1:How much does a house weigh?Question # 2:How much weight can a rural two-lane bridgeHold???


Unskilled firm for the right job“… a house becomes a bridge”


Incompetent firm for the right job“… a bridge that cannot be used”


Inappropriate <strong>Engineering</strong> Consultant for the right job“… delivers a useless house ”


Unqualified firm for the right jobQuestion # 3Would this be covered byPI,Home insurance,car insurance,or,Does it come under the roadside accident fund ???---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------We can all relate to this, e.g.Nov09: “40 000 defective RDP houses to beflattened and rebuilt at a cost > R1-billion”.Feb2011: rebuild about 50000 low-costhouses - thousands more than expected.“… delivers questions rather than intended product”


Inexperienced firm for the right jobWe can relate to this: R4 million bridge swallows a taxi!“… waste <strong>of</strong> Tax Payers Money” and indeed COUNTER REVOLUTIONAY !!!


“I told you to use Quality Principles to build this Bridge”Solution:Using Quality Principles- Appointing - Designing -Executing ProjectsOperations and Maintenance


Right firm for theright jobSession1


SESSION 11.1 <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineers South Africa1.2 <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> Industry1.3 The Foothold – Definitions1.4 The Project Life-Cycle1.5 Overview <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Services</strong>


1.1 <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineers South Africa (CESA)


<strong>Consulting</strong> Engineers South AfricaHistory (see page 1)• South African Association <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong>Engineers (SAACE) founded in 1952• Original membership 30 individuals• August 2008 - SAACE transformed to<strong>Consulting</strong> Engineers South Africa (CESA)• Consists <strong>of</strong> 480 private CE firms – stillgrowing• Employing more than 22 000 people


<strong>Consulting</strong> Engineers South AfricaRole <strong>of</strong> CESAPromote interests <strong>of</strong> Members and Clients by:• Regular liaison meetings• <strong>Engineering</strong> comment on legislation etc• Advisory Notes for Members and Clients• New/revised contracts/forms <strong>of</strong> agreement• Guidelines on pr<strong>of</strong>essional practice matters• A peer review and quality management programme• Seminars, workshops and conferences• FIDIC (International Federation <strong>of</strong> CE Associations)


<strong>Consulting</strong> Engineers South Africa - contdPr<strong>of</strong>essionalism and Integrity <strong>of</strong> Members:1. In general:• ECSA registers pr<strong>of</strong>essional individual engineers,technologists etc• CESA „registers‟pr<strong>of</strong>essional <strong>Consulting</strong> Engr Firms2. Credibility <strong>of</strong> applicants• In business > 12 months• Nominated & Seconded by CESA member firms3. Ongoing requirements• Subject to CESA Code <strong>of</strong> Conduct (includes BIMS)• Ownership/principals > 50% Pr Engrs/Techno‟s• Primary work (<strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong>)• QMS in place• Developing Integrity Pact (see Appendix A)


<strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> Industry1.2 <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> Industry• <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> Industry Overview• Construction Industry – Enabler & Regulator


<strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> Industry OverviewThe birth (see page 5)• ‟Engineer‟ first appeared in 15 th Century - in the military• „Non-military engineers‟ in civilian capacity– hence „civil engineers‟• Associations formed to exchange experiences – improve status• <strong>Engineering</strong> formalised as pr<strong>of</strong>ession‣ safeguard health & welfare <strong>of</strong> public‣ prevent unqualified people from selling engineering services• Associations formed to promote learning and the pr<strong>of</strong>ession• Sanitation voted greatest medical advance since 1840 – BMJ• Improved transportation increased world trade volumes by 800 xover last 100 years


<strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> Industry OverviewThe order today• Non-reservation <strong>of</strong> engineering work – tenderpreneurs• Tendering process – Price >>> Quality, engineering as commodity• Ignorance – competence/value <strong>of</strong> CEs unrecognised• Contractors & CEs - world class – Soccer World Cup infrastructure• CEs Environment‣ corruption‣ non-technical managers – 5 year contracts – deployment‣ poor schooling – maths/ science‣ silo effect, non – integration• <strong>Engineering</strong> need recognised by President eg „30 000 engineers by 2014‟


<strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> Industry OverviewThe future• Competitive tendering here to stay – not to drive pr<strong>of</strong>essional fees down• Struggle continues‣ pr<strong>of</strong>essionalism – modern, faster ECSA registration,‣ reservation <strong>of</strong> engineering work – CBE - approve ECSA IDoEW‣ service delivery - use <strong>of</strong> appropriate procurement methods• Up “Change there with isother uponpr<strong>of</strong>essionals us; there is(doctors, no futurelawyer, in theCA, status etc) quo; industrymust adapt. --- Firms must grow in capability and scope <strong>of</strong>services to meet the client demands. We must move „up thefood chain‟ to a new set <strong>of</strong> value-added services for our clients.”FIDIC Report <strong>Engineering</strong> Our Future


The World without Engineers


The World without Engineers


Construction Industry Enabler and RegulatorThe Construction Industry Development Board (see page 3)Established by and gets its mandate from the CIDB Act (38 <strong>of</strong> 2000)Aims:• Promote sustainable growth - construction industry - sustainableparticipation <strong>of</strong> emerging sector• Promote improved performance & best practice - public andprivate sector clients, contractors and other participants• Promote - procurement & delivery management - uniformapplication <strong>of</strong> policy - all spheres <strong>of</strong> government - uniform andethical standards - guided by a Code <strong>of</strong> Conduct• Establish registers - tool - systematically regulate & monitor theperformance <strong>of</strong> industry and stakeholders‣ Register <strong>of</strong> Contractors(RoC)‣ Register <strong>of</strong> Projects (RoP)‣ Register <strong>of</strong> Pr<strong>of</strong> Service Providers (RoPSP)


Construction Industry Enabler and RegulatorRegister <strong>of</strong> Pr<strong>of</strong> Service Providers (RoPSP)Size <strong>of</strong> firm&No. <strong>of</strong> registeredpersonsEmpowermentDatabaseSize / Value <strong>of</strong>completed projects&Financial RecordsExperience/Performance Evaluation


Construction Industry Enablerand RegulatorCode <strong>of</strong> Conduct establishes certain standards <strong>of</strong>behaviour…• Behave equitably, honestly and transparently.• Discharge duties and obligations timeously and with integrity.• Comply with all applicable legislation and associated regulations• Satisfy all requirements established in procurement documents• Avoid conflict <strong>of</strong> interest• Not maliciously injure/ attempt to injure the reputation <strong>of</strong> 3 rdparty


Construction Industry Enabler and RegulatorMonitoring role - CIDB can:• Conduct investigations• Sanction <strong>of</strong>fenders• Suspend <strong>of</strong>fenders from the CIDB RoC• Issue fines to Employers up to R100 000• Intergovernmental Relations Framework Act – liaises with:‣ Treasury‣ Public Protector‣ Auditor GeneralCIDB documentation/prescripts• Standard <strong>of</strong> Uniformity (SFU)• Code <strong>of</strong> Conduct• Practice notes/ Legislation(see Appendix I – useful websites)


1.3 The Foothold – Definitions (see page 9)


<strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> - definitionsConformity <strong>of</strong> Terminology• Terminology in Manual aligned with‣ CIDB documentation‣ ECSA Guideline Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong> & Tariff <strong>of</strong> Fees‣ CIDB‟s Revised SFU in Construction <strong>Procurement</strong>Examples• Bid = Tender• Client = he/she who engages the <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer (CE)• Construction Monitoring = admin <strong>of</strong> Construction Contract forverification only – new term• Contract = Agreement between Client and CE• Contractor = not the CE• <strong>Engineering</strong> & Construction Works contract = includesconstruction, repair, maintenance, alteration, demolition etc <strong>of</strong>building and engineering infrastructures


<strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> - definitionsNoteworthy Examples (cont‟d)• Normal <strong>Services</strong> = Typical services as in ECSA guideline tariffs• Quality = “Totality <strong>of</strong> features <strong>of</strong> a service that bears on its ability tosatisfy stated or implied needs”• Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong> = <strong>Services</strong> undertaken by the CE in relation tothe Scope <strong>of</strong> Work• Scope <strong>of</strong> Work = Portion <strong>of</strong> the Works for which the CE is engaged• Tender Price = Price submitted including all payment conditions,costs and disbursements• Threshold = Monetary value <strong>of</strong> procurement contract above or belowwhich a given procedure may be used


1.4 The Project Life Cycle (see page 11)


The Project Life Cycle9Disposal /Renewal1Identification2Definition8Operations &Maintenance3Feasibility7Construct4Concept &Viability6Procure5Design


The Project Life CycleThe Project Life Cycle (cont‟d)Steps 1 to 3 : Identification, Definition, Feasibility• Identifying the potential project – <strong>of</strong>ten by Owner, Specialist assistance• And defining the best project to meet the need• Reject unsuitable solutions, shortlist suitable alternatives• Select the best project, based on technical and financial feasibility• Asset management planningSteps 4, 5, 6 : Concept & Viability, Design, Procure• Developing the project through all concept and viability stages, confirmviability• Detail design <strong>of</strong> the project to procure construction• Design can be a maintenance/operation assignment• Procuring a contractor to construct – proper tender/contractdocuments, proper evaluation <strong>of</strong> tenders


The Project Life CycleThe Project Life Cycle (cont‟d)Steps 7, 8, 9: Construct, Operate and Maintain, Disposal/ Renew• Construction:‣From site handover to when Owner takes possession <strong>of</strong> theconstructed project‣Final handover after Defects Liability Period expired and defectsrectified• Operation and Maintenance:‣Usually by Owner - According to manuals and own procedures‣O & M - May be contracted out• Disposal/Renewal:‣Actions at end <strong>of</strong> Operations & Maintenance period‣Close down or renew facility etc for another periodNote: CE may be appointed for any one, or all, <strong>of</strong> the steps 1 to 9


1.5Overview <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong><strong>Services</strong> (see page 13)


Overview <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Town planningStructuralQuantity SurveyingProject ManagementMiningMechanicalMarineInformation Systems /…HydraulicsGISIndustrial Process / ChemicalGeotechnicalFacilitiesEnvironmentalElectrical / ElectronicCivilMechanical building <strong>Services</strong>ArchitectureAgricultural0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%


Percentage shareWaterTransportationEnergyMining/QuarryingEducationHealthTourismHousingCommercialAgricultureOtherOverview <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>40.00%Economic Sectors35.00%30.00%25.00%20.00%15.00%Dec-08 Jun-09 Dec-09 Jun-1010.00%5.00%0.00%


Overview <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Value <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>1. Early project stages:• <strong>Services</strong> deliver most value• Functionality & quality <strong>of</strong> the proposed service more important thanCost (Steps 1 to 3)2. After project is well defined:• <strong>Services</strong> are easier to determine• Role <strong>of</strong> high level expertise reduces as project develops• Efficient more routine tasks more important• Correct/comprehensive contract documentation is vital


Overview <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Required Expertise and Value over Project Life CycleStep in Project Life CycleIdentificationDefinitionFeasibilityConcept and ViabilityDesign<strong>Procurement</strong>ConstructionOperations and MaintenanceRequired expertise and potential for valueStrategic concepts and lateral thinking to identify appropriate options.Operational and value options to define projects that are likely to befeasible and cost-effective.Identification and elaboration <strong>of</strong> possible alternatives and costeffectiveness.Project optimisation subject to budget and environmental constraints.Quick and effective design detailing and incorporation <strong>of</strong> latestappropriate technological developments.Good contract documentation, accurate schedule <strong>of</strong> quantities andappropriate procurement optionsConscientious construction administration and monitoring and effectivehandling <strong>of</strong> contractual issuesAsset management and preventative maintenance


Q&A - Session 2


SESSION 22.1 How to Procure <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong><strong>Procurement</strong> ≈ TenderingCompetitive tenderinghere to stayLowerExpertiseTendering <strong>of</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>essionalengineering services isunique<strong>Services</strong> cannot beawarded based onprice/lowest price onlyLowDevelopmentLowestPriceLessOptimizationSuperior qualificationsand experience forms theparamount basis forselecting CEPoor Quality /OutcomePoorPerformance


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Important that Government recognises:• CE‟s are an important pool <strong>of</strong> expertise & skilled resources• High standard <strong>of</strong> engineering & Infrastructure dev vital for growth• National Treasury policy statement:“It is necessary that certain minimum standards <strong>of</strong> quality andefficiency be achieved when appointing consultants”• Need to maintain a basic policy <strong>of</strong> competitive selectionLegal Environment for consulting engineering services:• Constitution <strong>of</strong> South Africa• System is to be Fair, Equitable, Transparent, Competitive, Costeffective• Adopted by ISO in ISO 10845 series for construction procurement


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>TABLE : PILLARS OF PROCUREMENTSystemrequirementFairEquitableTransparentCompetitiveCost- effectivePromotion <strong>of</strong>otherobjectivesQualitative description <strong>of</strong> requirementThe process <strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong>fer and acceptance is conducted impartially without bias, and providesparticipating parties simultaneous and timely access to the same information.Terms and conditions for performing the work do not unfairly prejudice the interests <strong>of</strong> theparties.The only grounds for not awarding a contract to a tenderer who complies with allrequirements are restrictions from doing business with the organization, lack <strong>of</strong> capability orcapacity, legal impediments and conflicts <strong>of</strong> interest.The procurement process and criteria upon which decisions are to be made shall bepublicized. Decisions (award and intermediate) are made publicly available together withreasons for those decisions. It is possible to verify that criteria were applied.The requirements <strong>of</strong> procurement documents are presented in a clear, unambiguous,comprehensive and understandable manner.The system provides for appropriate levels <strong>of</strong> competition to ensure cost-effective and bestvalue outcomes.The processes, procedures and methods are standardized with sufficient flexibility to attainbest value outcomes in respect <strong>of</strong> quality, timing and price, and the least resources toeffectively manage and control procurement processes.The system may incorporate measures to promote objectives associated with a secondaryprocurement policy subject to qualified tenderers not being excluded and deliverables orpreferencing criteria being measurable, quantifiable and monitored for compliance.


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong><strong>Procurement</strong> - Need to maintain a reasonable Balance betweenCompetition & CompensationCompetitionCompensation


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Primary Legislation Regulating <strong>Procurement</strong> - Refer to Table 3.2, page 11Constitution <strong>of</strong> the Republic <strong>of</strong> South Africa (Act No. 108 <strong>of</strong> 1996) - Section217 states that government procurement systems must be Fair, Equitable,Transparent, Competitive and Cost EffectiveFair, Transparent, Competitive, Cost EffectiveEquitablePublic FinanceManagement Act(Act No. 1 <strong>of</strong>1999)Municipal FinanceManagement Act(Act No. 56 <strong>of</strong>2003)ConstructionIndustryDevelopmentBoard Act (ActNo. 38 <strong>of</strong> 2000)Preferential<strong>Procurement</strong>Policy FrameworkAct (Act No. 5 <strong>of</strong>2000)Broad BasedBlack EconomicEmpowermentAct (Act No. 53 <strong>of</strong>2004)PFMA MFMA CIDB PPPFA BBBEEPublic SectorClientsPublic SectorClientsPublic andPrivate SectorClientsPublic SectorClientsPublic andPrivate SectorClientsCompliance with CIDB‟s “Standard for Uniformity in Construction <strong>Procurement</strong>” (SFU) –compulsory for organs <strong>of</strong> state


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Objectives <strong>of</strong> <strong>Procurement</strong>• <strong>Procurement</strong> - engaging skilled pr<strong>of</strong>essionals – not a commodity• Aim <strong>of</strong> competitiveness - ensure LT value not ST low-cost design• Transparency – encourage development & maint. <strong>of</strong> skills & expertise• CIDB Guidelines can provide the necessary resultsMethods <strong>of</strong> <strong>Procurement</strong>1. Financial Offer2. Financial Offer plus Preference3. Financial Offer plus Quality (Functionality)4. Financial Offer plus Quality plus Preference• Prescribed by CIDB Standard for Uniformity (SFU)• <strong>Services</strong> must provide cost-effective & value-added performance• Depends on innovativeness, expertise and competence• Inclusion <strong>of</strong> Quality is essential


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>CIDB : Recommends - QCBSQuality and Cost-Based Selection(QCBS) – Method 4• Accords with CIDB‟s SFU (Standardfor Uniformity)• Based on CIDB‟s Best PracticeGuidelines for Competitive Selection• CIDB states - Method 4 applies in allbut small minority <strong>of</strong> cases• Method 4 is mandatory for publicbodiesFIDIC: Recommends - QBSQuality -based Selection (QBS)• An owner identifies the generalscope <strong>of</strong> work and develops aselection schedule.• A request for qualifications is issued.• Statements <strong>of</strong> qualifications areevaluated.• A short-list <strong>of</strong> qualified firms to beinterviewed is determined.• Interviews are conducted and thefirms are ranked.• The owner invites the highest rankedfirm to assist in defining a detailedscope <strong>of</strong> work


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>„Spanner in the Works‟ (see Appendix B)• the KwaZulu Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg, case no 10878/2009ruled that Quality score cannot be combined with Price & Preference• relegates functionality/ Quality to a pre-qualification criteria (using aminimum threshold).• Thus, rendering „CIDB Method 4‟ to be invalid.• The incorporation <strong>of</strong> quality-based principles in the execution <strong>of</strong> projects isessential to the achievement <strong>of</strong> the stated goal.‣ A reversal <strong>of</strong> the trend <strong>of</strong> diminished quality outcomes on projects.‣ This reversal can be accomplished by reverting to Best <strong>Procurement</strong>Principles – Quality Based Selection.


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Competitive Selection ProceduresPP2A (Nominatedprocedure)PP2B (Openprocedure)PP2C (Qualifiedprocedure)PP2D (Quotationprocedure)PP2E (Proposalprocedure)PP2F (Proposalprocedure)PP2G (Shoppingprocedure)Tenderers that satisfy prescribed criteria are admitted to an electronic database. Tenderersare invited to submit tender <strong>of</strong>fers based on search criteria and their position on thedatabase. Tenderers are repositioned on the database upon appointment or upon thesubmission <strong>of</strong> a tender <strong>of</strong>fer.Tenderers may submit tender <strong>of</strong>fers in response to an advertisement by the organisation todo so.A call for expressions <strong>of</strong> interest is advertised and only those tenderers who have expressedinterest, satisfy objective criteria and who are selected to submit tender <strong>of</strong>fers, are invited todo so.Tender <strong>of</strong>fers are solicited from not less that three tenderers in any manner the organisationchooses, subject to the procedures being fair, equitable, transparent, competitive and costeffective.Tenderers submit technical and financial proposals in two envelopes. The financial proposalis only opened should the technical proposal be found to be acceptable.A two staged system: Non-financial proposals are called for. Tender <strong>of</strong>fers are then invitedfrom those tenderers that submit acceptable proposals based on revised procurementdocuments. Alternatively a contract is negotiated with the tenderer scoring the highestnumber <strong>of</strong> evaluation points.Written or verbal <strong>of</strong>fers are solicited in respect <strong>of</strong> readily available supplies obtained fromthree sources. The supplies are purchased from the source providing the lowest FinancialOffer once it is confirmed in writing.


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Points to Note:1. Quoting from CIDB Best Practice Guideline A7 - <strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong>pr<strong>of</strong>essional services should be undertaken on:• demonstrated competence & qualifications (for services required)• capacity & capability (to provide the quality <strong>of</strong> the service)• fair & reasonable Financial Offers (not only least cost)2. Constitution requires procurement to be cost effective & have bestvalue outcomes in terms <strong>of</strong>:• quality,• downstream & life cycle costs,• timing• financial Offer• least resources to manage & control procurement process.3. Selection on basis <strong>of</strong> quality – does not necessarily mean the bestquality available but quality appropriate for the assignment.


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Points to Note (cont‟d):4. Calling for/ preparation <strong>of</strong> Tenders:• Scope <strong>of</strong> Work and <strong>Services</strong> (SOWS):‣ fully describe SOWS - comparable tenders are received‣ fully describe SOWS - reduce time & effort for tender preparation• Total Input Cost:‣ can be considerable - small projects can be > potential fee & jeopardise finances <strong>of</strong> the service provider overall economy <strong>of</strong> the project.• Guideline:• CE‟s potential fee should be 20 times > cost <strong>of</strong> preparing tender• alternatively, cost to prepare tender should not > 5% <strong>of</strong> potential CE fee• potential CE fee has to cover - Staff costs, overheads, expenses and pr<strong>of</strong>it• tenders should not be solicited for small projects,


<strong>Procurement</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> <strong>Services</strong>4. Calling for/ preparation <strong>of</strong> Tenders (cont‟d):The following procedure should preferably adopted by client or CE (as agent<strong>of</strong> client)• Consider grouping small projects together (see Appendix C – frameworkagreements) to reduce number <strong>of</strong> contractual relationships and complexity• Request proposals for term contracts - where consulting engineer cansupport the client on a partnership basis for all small to medium projectsover a longer period (see Appendix C – term contracts)• Listing manuals and procedures as requirements so lengthy technicalproposals are not required (only proposed staffing & track record)(see Appendix D - useful procurement cycle checklist)(see also Appendix E – good comparison <strong>of</strong> international best practice)


Q&ATeaBreakSession 3


Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong> & Tender DocumentationSESSION 3Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>TenderDocumentation


3.1 Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>


Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Definition• Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong> = “<strong>Services</strong> which a CE must provide in relationto scope <strong>of</strong> Work”• Must be clearly defined to ensure proper pricing and clear andunambiguous understanding by tenderer• In many instances this is lacking – uncertainty and unrealisticpricing result• Recommended listing deliverables to be produced by the CE, i.e.products <strong>of</strong> his work (studies, reports, designs, drawings, etc)


Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>: Planning Studies, Investigations and Assessments(i) Consultation with the client or client‟s authorized representative.(ii) Inspection <strong>of</strong> the site <strong>of</strong> the project.(iii) Preliminary investigation, route location, planning and a level <strong>of</strong> designappropriate to allow decisions on feasibility.(iv) Consultation with authorities having rights or powers <strong>of</strong> sanction as wellas consultation with the public and stakeholder groups.(v) Advice to the client as to regulatory and statutory requirements, includingenvironmental management and the need for surveys, analyses, tests andsite or other investigations, as well as approvals, where such are requiredfor the completion <strong>of</strong> the report, and arranging for these to be carried outat the client‟s expense.(vi) Searching for, obtaining, investigating and collating available data,drawings and plans relating to the works.(vii) Investigating financial and economic implications relating to theproposals or feasibility studies.


Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>: Normal Project Delivery Stages1. Inception2. Concept & Viability / Preliminary Design3. Design Development/ Detailed Design4. Documentation and <strong>Procurement</strong>5. Construction6. Close Out


Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Detailed examples (see Appendix F)• Refer to Appendix F, Numerous Normal <strong>Services</strong> tasks under Stages 1 - 6• Includes Activities/Deliverables• Recommended as a reference or checklist per stagePrincipal Consultant• Refer to Appendix F, Additional <strong>Services</strong> to Normal <strong>Services</strong>• Includes Activities/Deliverables• Recommended as a reference or checklist per stage


Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Key Factors common to every scope, in Developing the Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>• Obligations <strong>of</strong> the Parties• Health and Safety• Sustainability• Information available• Scope must reflect Client‟s intentions to enable tenderers to identify tasksand estimate times to be spent by personnel, and hence to quantify andprice the tenderFailure to prepare Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong> in sufficient detail• Tenderer has to make assumptions• Misinterpret Client‟s requirements• Price unnecessarily for Risks• Resultant prices too low or too high• Fails the interests <strong>of</strong> Client, <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer and Project


Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>Key Factors in Developing Scope <strong>Services</strong>Obligations <strong>of</strong>thepartiesHealth andSafetySustainabilityInformationavailableThe tasks required and listed by the Client should clearly all fall within the obligations <strong>of</strong> the<strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer (the successful tenderer). If a listed task falls within the Client’sobligations but requires a <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer to perform it, it should be described as being“on behalf <strong>of</strong> the Client” to avoid implying it is solely the <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer’s obligationand accord with the obligations <strong>of</strong> the parties as stated in the intended contract for theservicesLegislation such as the OHS Act lays down comprehensive actions to be taken by partiesresponsible for safety. This includes the Client, who may wish to delegate specific actions ortasks to an OHS practitioner. The previous practice where the Client simply nominated the<strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer as the Safety Agent is no longer permitted due to conflict <strong>of</strong> interest.Environmentally sustainable design and energy efficiency are becoming a commonunderlying requirement in every project, with obligations on the Client and consultingengineer. The Client’s sustainability policy should be made known to theconsulting engineer, who in turn should be tasked with advising the Client on the projectsustainability and/or assisting to set sustainability targets.The execution <strong>of</strong> the assignment will be based on information available at itscommencement, which may have to be augmented in order to perform the servicesrequired. It is important that the extent <strong>of</strong> information available to theconsulting engineer, and information yet to be obtained by him, be clearly identified at theoutset, to avoid any misconceptions. Where the client is unable to define the scopeaccurately, for example if the assignment is an investigation or study whosenature and extent are unknown, then it is important to tell the tenderers what theclient has allowed for, by way <strong>of</strong> budget or estimate <strong>of</strong> manhours


Scope <strong>of</strong> WorkDefinition• Not the same as Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong> <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer• Scope <strong>of</strong> Work = portion <strong>of</strong> the Works for which the <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer isengaged or the document which specifies and describes the supplies,services engineering and construction works to be provided (by theContractor) including special requirements, constraints etc.ExampleA client wishing to construct a Casino complex consisting <strong>of</strong> three distinctcomponents being the Building, a Parking Area and an access road, mayappoint a consulting engineer to undertake Stages 3-6 <strong>of</strong> the normalengineering services for the Parking Area.In this case the scope <strong>of</strong> services can be defined as set out in Appendix Fwhile the scope <strong>of</strong> work may only involve the Parking Area. Some thoughtwill have to go into preparing the scope <strong>of</strong> work as it interfaces with otherworks such as stormwater run<strong>of</strong>f from the building and the interface with theaccess road and gate house.


Scope <strong>of</strong> WorkPoints to Note• The scope <strong>of</strong> work for each service provider should be carefullydetermined to ensure that no overlaps and duplication in terms <strong>of</strong> scope <strong>of</strong>work exist.• In some cases the consulting engineer will be required toappoint specialist sub-consultants in which case the consulting engineerwill ensure that no duplication in terms <strong>of</strong> scope occurs.


Scope <strong>of</strong> WorkExamples <strong>of</strong> Scope <strong>of</strong> WorkBuildingsRoadsStructuresElectricalThe work in respect <strong>of</strong> site boundaries and fencing, foundations, electrical, airconditioning, wet services, fire protection, structural, ro<strong>of</strong>ing, waterpro<strong>of</strong>ing,stormwater, etc should be clearly allocated. If the design is to be undertaken by amultidisciplinary pr<strong>of</strong>essional team (Architect, Quantity Surveyor, Engineer, etc.) theresponsibilities <strong>of</strong> the consulting engineer in such a team must be clearly indicated.The beginning & end <strong>of</strong> the road should be indicated, whether the scope includesstructures, hydrological analysis and drainage, stormwater, roadside furniture,pavement layerworks, traffic analyses, selection <strong>of</strong> borrow pits, road marking, signageetc. It should also be indicated who will be responsible for liaison with interested andaffected parties and for ensuring public participation.The scope <strong>of</strong> work should be clearly indicated in respect <strong>of</strong> site investigations,foundations, interaction with other structures and facilities, design review, andsimilar.The scope <strong>of</strong> work should be clear in respect <strong>of</strong> bulk services provision, power lines,substations, power connections and liaison with utilities, back up power, earthing,lightning protection, security services, access control, data and telephony, lighting,electrical reticulation and switchboards, etc.


Scope <strong>of</strong> WorkExamples <strong>of</strong> Scope <strong>of</strong> Work (cont‟d)MechanicalDamsMunicipal<strong>Services</strong>Clarify, if air conditioning, wet services, pumps, lifts, escalators, fire protection etc.are to be performed by one or more specialist engineers.The Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong> and Scope <strong>of</strong> Work should be described, in detail to enabletendering consultants to identify the level <strong>of</strong> accreditation <strong>of</strong> design staff to beidentified. The Scope <strong>of</strong> Work should be clear in respect <strong>of</strong> geological andhydrological investigations to be undertaken prior to preliminary and detail design,plus the extent <strong>of</strong> design to be undertaken by contractors, and likewise the Scope <strong>of</strong>Work in the electrical and mechanical disciplines.The Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong> and Scope <strong>of</strong> Work should be clearly described for theconsulting engineer to accurately identify the range <strong>of</strong> services to be designed by him(e.g. Roads, Stormwater Drainage, Sewerage, Water Supply, etc.) and which are to bedesigned by others, including the extent <strong>of</strong> simultaneous working and coordinationrequired. The extent <strong>of</strong> construction to be undertaken by emerging contractors orusing labour-based methods should also be clear.


Scope <strong>of</strong> WorkFramework AgreementThe Framework Agreement is designed to allow the client to invite tendersfrom consulting engineers to carry out work on an “as instructed” basis over aset term. Generally The Framework Agreement is between two parties thatestablishes their terms for services over a set period <strong>of</strong> time, within a broadscope <strong>of</strong> work, without guaranteeing any quantum <strong>of</strong> services. The rationalebehind using such agreements is that it saves the client from having toprocure from the market each time a service, covered by the FrameworkAgreement, is required.Framework Agreements are only entered into with consulting engineers whohave the resources and capability to carry out the services envisaged andmust include the means by which the consulting engineer is remunerated forthe instructed work. Hence the evaluation <strong>of</strong> tenders for FrameworkAgreements must be based on quality as well as price – and not price alone.


Tender documentation3.2 Tender Documentation for <strong>Consulting</strong><strong>Services</strong>


Tender documentationTender DocumentationPurpose• In line with principles and documentation <strong>of</strong> the CIDB• To achieve uniformity, in interests <strong>of</strong> a more efficient industryModel for Uniformity• CIDB‟s “Construction <strong>Procurement</strong> Toolbox”• Process <strong>of</strong> Offer and Acceptance• Tenderers provide inputs to complete their submissions (<strong>of</strong>fers)• These = inputs to the contract to be concluded after acceptance <strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong>fer• Separation <strong>of</strong> component documents• Complete enquiry documentation = critical to project‟s successCIDB tables to assist compiling documentation – see Appendix G


Tender documentationDocuments relating to the Tender (CIDB)Table B-1T1 Tendering proceduresT1.1 Tender Notice andinvitation to TenderAlerts tenderers to the nature <strong>of</strong> services required by the client; shouldcontain sufficient information to enable an appropriate response.T1.2 Tender Data States applicable conditions <strong>of</strong> tender and establishes the rules applyingfrom the time tenders are invited to the time a tender is awarded.T2. Returnable documentsT2.1 List <strong>of</strong> ReturnabledocumentsT2.2 ReturnableSchedulesEnsures that everything the client requires a tenderer to submit with histender is included in his tender submission.Contains documents the tenderer is requested to complete for the purpose<strong>of</strong> evaluating tenders and other schedules which upon acceptance becomepart <strong>of</strong> the subsequent contract.


Tender documentationDocuments relating to the Form <strong>of</strong> AgreementTable B-2C1. Agreements and Contract DataC1.1 Form <strong>of</strong> Offer andAcceptanceFormalises the legal process <strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong>fer and acceptanceC1.2 Contract Data States applicable conditions <strong>of</strong> contract and associated contract specificdata, which collectively describe the risks, liabilities and obligations <strong>of</strong> thecontracting parties and the procedures for administration <strong>of</strong> the contract.For consulting engineering services this would be an Agreement, as opposedto General Conditions <strong>of</strong> Contract used for construction services.C2. Pricing DataC2.1 Pricing Instructions Provides criteria and assumptions, which it will be assumed (in the contract)the tenderer has taken into account in developing his Financial Offers.C2.2 Activity Scheduleor Schedule <strong>of</strong> TasksC3. Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong> and Scope <strong>of</strong> WorkC4. Site InformationRecords the Financial Offers to provide the services, which are describedelsewhere - in the Scope section.This is generally not required in procurement <strong>of</strong> consulting engineering services, being applicable toconstruction services contracts only. However to ensure uniformity in tendering, available informationon prior studies, existing services etc should be included.


Tender documentationStandard Coloured Pages/Dividers• T1.1 Tender Notice and Invitation to Tender White• T1.2 Tender Data Pink• T2.1 List <strong>of</strong> Returnable Documents Yellow• T2.2 Returnable Schedules Yellow• C1.1 Form <strong>of</strong> Offer and Acceptance Yellow• C1.2 Contract Data Yellow• C1.3 Form <strong>of</strong> Guarantee/Securities White• C1.4 Adjudicator‟s contract White• C2.1 Pricing Data/Instructions Yellow• C2.2 Activity/Work Schedule Yellow• C3 Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong> and Scope <strong>of</strong> Work Blue• C4 Site inspection Green


Tender documentation<strong>Procurement</strong> References – see Appendix I• Revised Standard for Uniformity in Construction <strong>Procurement</strong> (SFU)• CIDB Construction <strong>Procurement</strong> Best Practice Guideline C3 –Adjudication• CIDB Pr<strong>of</strong>essional <strong>Services</strong> Contract• FIDIC Client/ Consultant Model <strong>Services</strong> Agreement• Standard Pr<strong>of</strong>essional <strong>Services</strong> Contract by NEC• Other:ooPROCSA Form <strong>of</strong> AgreementCESA Short Form <strong>of</strong> Agreement


Q&A LUNCH Session 4


SESSION 4 - Value-added <strong>Services</strong>


Value-added <strong>Services</strong>Value, Financial Offer, Quality• Acceptance <strong>of</strong> lowest price denies opportunity to assess value• <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineers are accustomed to tendering competitively• Pr<strong>of</strong>essional services, unlike products, are not well defined• Requires careful descriptions in Scope <strong>of</strong> <strong>Services</strong>, Scope <strong>of</strong> Work• Still a tendency to rely on price, ignore quality (Treasury: Functionality)• Remuneration should reward desirable performanceWhat performance is achieved from the lowest price? (examples…..)• Typically, the cost <strong>of</strong> consultancy services for larger projects is less than 10%<strong>of</strong> capital cost <strong>of</strong> a construction project• And about 1% to 2% <strong>of</strong> the project‟s lifetime cost


Value-added <strong>Services</strong> The procurement <strong>of</strong> consulting engineering services has the greatest impacton the life-cycle cost <strong>of</strong> the project, yet it is the least costly componentRepresentation <strong>of</strong> typical Life Cycle Cost and Impact on Project SuccessLife-Cycle Cost5% 55% 40%Impact on Project Success60% 20% 20%<strong>Engineering</strong> Construction Operations & Maintenance


Value-added <strong>Services</strong>Project Life-Cycle Cost2%18%<strong>Consulting</strong> EngineerContractorOperation & Maintanance80%


QualityValue-added <strong>Services</strong>Appropriate level <strong>of</strong> Quality10B8C6A4204 5 6 7 8 9 10Price


Value-added <strong>Services</strong>The Concept <strong>of</strong> “Value”“Value” should• secure for the client value-for-money services• achieve minimum life-cycle costs (long term value for money)• ensure the project will fulfill its intended purposeThe tender process must allow the tenderer to show that• value-for-money services are <strong>of</strong>fered• minimum life-cycle costs are critical to the project‟s success• the Financial Offer will demonstrate the value <strong>of</strong> inputs <strong>of</strong>fered• take Client‟s quality evaluation criteria into accountQuantifying “Value”• Needs to be a factor in considering tenders• Include in determination <strong>of</strong> tender score• Assess Preference, Quality, and Financial Offer (Price) individually• <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer to tender accordingly


Value-added <strong>Services</strong>Guidelines for Pricing <strong>of</strong> Tenders – the “Golden Rules”• Project success relies on acceptance by client <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer‟sfinancial <strong>of</strong>fer and conditions or conditions <strong>of</strong> exclusions• <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer needs to have his interests protected• Client needs to be comfortable with contract financial arrangements• “Golden Rules” apply to preparation <strong>of</strong> the financial <strong>of</strong>ferGolden Rule No. 1 – Know the project requirements• No two projects the same – <strong>of</strong>fer• Must be a clear and unambiguous Scope – clarify if necessary• Determine methodology, inc. innovation, value-adding procedures• Take Client‟s quality evaluation criteria into account


Value-added <strong>Services</strong>Illustration <strong>of</strong> Total CostsGolden Rule No.2 – Know your costs involvedUnbillable hoursAuditing & AccountingMarketingCompany OverheadsTransport equals Company OverheadsInterest & Finance chargesHead <strong>of</strong>fice charges Multiple <strong>of</strong> Staff Cost, plusMaintenance & DepreciationRates, Elec Water etc. added to Staff Costs Staff CostInsurancesRentals & Leasesi.e, Total CostsSkills leviesAllow ances Staff Cost divided by billable hoursOv ertimeSubscriptioms equals gives Rate / hourCo. Contrbns. Med-aidCo. Contrbns. Pension "Cost to Company", or, Add for Pr<strong>of</strong>itUIFLeav e pay "Total Cost <strong>of</strong> Employment" gives Charge-out Rate / hourBonusesBasic Salary


Value-added <strong>Services</strong>Golden Rule No. 3 – Know the Client‟s situation• Able to produce and adhere to a clear and sufficient scope• Ability to fund or timeously secure funding for the project• Adequate resources to administer the contract• History <strong>of</strong> fees paid on time• Sufficient technical capability for reviews and approvals• Need for development (training, mentoring, etc)• Experience in using consulting engineering services• Able to responsibly evaluate & award consulting/construction contractsFinalising the Tender Price• Feedback from Golden Rule No 3 is to be considered where aspectswithin Client‟s ambit must be examined, for influence on level <strong>of</strong> thefinancial <strong>of</strong>fer


Value-added <strong>Services</strong>Adjustments from Golden Rule No 3• Pr<strong>of</strong>it mark up• Pricing for contingencies or risk• Pricing work not called for but necessary (if not done by Client)• Pricing for unrealistically tight or slack deadlines• Pricing for work assumed but not required• Adding a margin in lieu <strong>of</strong> qualifying the tender• Provision for productivity delays to be expected in executing the work for theclientPrice Benchmarks• Important to test pricing against a norm and indicate adequacy <strong>of</strong> price• Appropriate Benchmark: ECSA Guideline Tariff <strong>of</strong> Fees – see Appendix H• Percentage <strong>of</strong> Project Cost (sliding scale) x Factor for Stage and Type• Also ECSA recommended hourly rates – arrive at “Benchmark Fee”• Adjust up or down for project concerned, with a Benchmark Multiplier, to get an“Adjusted Benchmark Fee” considering specific circumstances


Value-added <strong>Services</strong>Benchmark MultipliersMultiplierCircumstances0.6 – 1.0 “Favourable”1.0 “Normal” or “Reasonable”1.0 – 1.6 “Negative”Specific circumstances• Is scope complete and clear?• Is Client well versed in procuring consulting services?• Does Client have adequate resources for competent tender evaluation?• Does <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer have a successful project record with the Client?• Can hours be saved from earlier similar work, or previous experience?• Is staff proposed well priced, ideally suited and competent for the project?• Is the <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer better placed than most for specialist services?


Value-added <strong>Services</strong>Specific circumstances (cont‟d)• Is project location advantageous for the <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer?• Will the risks perceived be easy or difficult to handle?• Is level <strong>of</strong> complexity <strong>of</strong> the project normal or will it be very complex?• Will the risks perceived be easy or difficult to handle?• Is level <strong>of</strong> complexity <strong>of</strong> the project normal or will it be very complex?• Does the <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer have a low order book and need the work?• Will start date and duration require price adjustment, if no escalation?


Value-added <strong>Services</strong>Specific circumstancesBenchmarkMultipliers[ Favourable (0.6 – 1.0)/ Reasonable ( 1.0) / Negative (1.0 – 1.6)] F R NIs scope complete and clear? 1.0Informed client 0.9Previous appointments 1.2Savings – Previous experience 0.6Project location 1.0Staff – cost, suited & competent 0.8risks perceived be easy or difficult to handle? 1.3level <strong>of</strong> complexity <strong>of</strong> the project normal or will it be verycomplex?Does the <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineer have a low order book andneed the work?AVERAGE ( this example) 0.940.71.0


Value-added <strong>Services</strong> – Conclusion 1Adjusted Benchmark (“Yardstick”) Fee• Average <strong>of</strong> the sum <strong>of</strong> all the particular fees used• Still based <strong>of</strong> ECSA recommended fee scalesThere is no such thing as a “discounted” feeWarning:Firms that consistently quote large discounts on the ECSA feeguidelines have a high risk <strong>of</strong> inferior work and a high number<strong>of</strong> PI claims – rendering them uninsurable


Value-added <strong>Services</strong> – Conclusion 2“ It is unwise to pay too much, but it is worse topay too little. When you pay too little, yousometimes lose everything because the thing youbought was incapable <strong>of</strong> doing the thing youbought it to do.”John Ruskin (1819 – 1900),Author & Scientist, Oxford University


Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersSession5


SESSION 5 - Evaluation <strong>of</strong> Tenders


Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersReferences• CIDB Best Practice Guideline No. A4 : Evaluating Quality in TenderSubmissions (guidelines)• CIDB Inform Practice Note No. 9 ; Evaluation <strong>of</strong> Quality in tenderSubmissions (overview)Evaluation <strong>of</strong> Tenders• Applies where Quality consideration is an essential part <strong>of</strong> theevaluation process – which should apply to the vast majority <strong>of</strong> tendersfor <strong>Consulting</strong> <strong>Engineering</strong> services• <strong>Procurement</strong> Method 4 generally appropriate for <strong>Consulting</strong><strong>Engineering</strong> services (Quality and Cost-Based Selection)


Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersMethod 4 – Financial Offer plus Quality plus Preference• Score Quality, rejecting all <strong>of</strong>fers that fail to score minimum points forQuality, stated in Tender Data• Score tender evaluation points for Financial Offer• Confirm tenders eligible for preferences claimed and if so score tenderevaluation points for preferencing• Calculate total tender points• Rank tenders from highest number <strong>of</strong> tender evaluation points tolowest• Recommend Tender with highest tender evaluation points for award,unless compelling reasons not to do so


Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersEvaluation criteria• Essential that tender documents state evaluation criteria and scoringsystems to be used in tender adjudication• If a criterion is stated, clarity required how the criterion will be adjudicatedand weighted, relative to other criteria• CIDB Standard for Uniformity Sect. 4.4.3 calls for specific Tender Data:‣ Method to be used in evaluation‣ Weighting between Financial Offer (W1), Quality (W2), andPreference (W3)‣ Quantified descriptions <strong>of</strong> preferences incl. how granted and scored‣ Refer also to Construction Scorecard (Construction Sector Charter,Govt Gazette: Board Notice 862 <strong>of</strong> 2009)‣ Details <strong>of</strong> Quality Criteria and Sub-criteria and manner <strong>of</strong> scoring


Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersRecommended Approach(to be Fair, Equitable, Transparent, Cost-effective)• Quality <strong>of</strong> outputs/deliverables to satisfy client requirements• Service with reasonable skill and care <strong>of</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>essionals• Advice independent <strong>of</strong> any affiliation causing conflict <strong>of</strong> interest• Repeat/straight forward projects : Cost-effective design important• Feasibilities, Complex projects : experience, expertise important• Weighting, Quality / Financial Offer is less for repeat type projects• All tenders to have a minimum number <strong>of</strong> Quality points, to proceed• Ratio Quality / Financial Offer plus Preferences depends on project value• Preferential <strong>Procurement</strong> Framework Act :‣ Assignments under R500k value, Ratio 80:20 mandatory‣ For higher value assignments, Ratio 90:10 mandatory‣ (Threshold as in Pref. <strong>Procurement</strong> Policy Framework Act Regs)Refer Tables based on CIDB references with certain CESA adjustments, pertaining toScoring against Ratings


Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersRecommended Detail Procedure1. Score Quality with 3 Quality reviewers, adjust if major scoringdifferences2. Reject tenders not attaining minimum Quality score, inform them inwriting3. Inform tenderers <strong>of</strong> time & date for opening Financial Offers andannounce these at the meeting4. Calculate Final Evaluation Scores according to CIDB Standards forUniformity5. Apply Definitions and formulae (see next slide)6. Mutually exclusive criteria recommended, to limit duplication7. Black persons are addressed in allocating Preferences8. Reviewers need to be experienced. If not available in the Client, thenspecialists or <strong>Consulting</strong> Engineers (unconnected with the tender)should be retained by the Client to assist with evaluations9. See recommended Tables and Examples


Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersDefinitions & formulae for Public Sector (Organs <strong>of</strong> State)Scoring financial <strong>of</strong>fersN FO= W 1X A where,N FO= the percentage score achieved for financial <strong>of</strong>fer,W 1= The percentage score given to financial <strong>of</strong>fer and equals : (refer to Table 7-2or 7-3 for level <strong>of</strong> project percentage score according to the nature <strong>of</strong>projects)A = P M/PP m= the comparative <strong>of</strong>fer <strong>of</strong> the most favourable tender <strong>of</strong>ferP = the comparative <strong>of</strong>fer <strong>of</strong> the tender <strong>of</strong>fer under consideration.Scoring Quality (functionality)W Q = W 2 X S O /100 where,W Q = the percentage score achieved for quality,W 2 = the percentage score for quality, equals (100 – W 1 )S O = the score for quality allocated to the submission under consideration.


Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersDefinitions & formulae for Public Sector (Organs <strong>of</strong> State)Scoring preferencesN P = NOP X EP/100 where,N P = number <strong>of</strong> preference points achieved,NOP = maximum tender evaluation points provided forin the Regulations pertaining to the Preferential <strong>Procurement</strong> PolicyFramework Act (Act 5 <strong>of</strong> 2000) (100 - W 3 evaluation points),EP = the percentage <strong>of</strong> equity ownership by HDIs within the businessenterprise.


Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersDefinitions & formulae for Public Sector (Organs <strong>of</strong> State)Total scoreN T = W C + N P where,N T = Total score awarded to the tenderer under consideration (max 100).W C = Score for Quality and financial <strong>of</strong>fer (max 90/80).N P = Score for Preferencing (max 10/20).W C = W 3 X [1 + (S - Sm)]S mW 3 = the number <strong>of</strong> tender evaluation points available for quality andfinancial <strong>of</strong>fer and equals 90/80,S = the sum <strong>of</strong> percentage scores for quality and financial <strong>of</strong>fer <strong>of</strong> thesubmission under consideration.S m = the sum <strong>of</strong> percentage scores for quality and financial <strong>of</strong>fer <strong>of</strong> thesubmission scoring the highest number <strong>of</strong> points.


Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersDefinitions and formulae for Private SectorNev = Total evaluated scoreNm = Score for PriceNq = Score for QualityNp = Score for PreferencingW1 = Weight assigned to priceW2 = Weight assigned to qualityNm = W1 x Pm/PNq = W2 x S/MsNev = Nm + Nq +Npwhere Pm is lowest qualified tender pricereceived and P is tender price underconsideration (2 decimal places)where Ms is maximum possible quality scoreand where S is quality score for tender underconsiderationTenders ranked from highest to lowest Nevwith tender awarded to tenderer with highest Nev


Tables for Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersRecommended Tables for Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersTable 7-1 Nature <strong>of</strong> Projects (5 types are defined)1. Feasibility Studies and Investigations (require specialised skills; deliverable areport)2. Innovative Projects (require innovation, creativity, expertise and skills;specialist advice needed is <strong>of</strong>ten identified in the project)3. Complex Projects (require high level <strong>of</strong> technical skills and resources; mayrequire skills other than normal engineering)4. Straightforward Projects (comprise straight forward tasks with standardtechnologies; may need strong capacity and resources if project is large)5. Repeat Projects (Straightforward tasks with routine/periodic activities, egmaintenance to maintain Client‟s assetsThe Descriptions <strong>of</strong> each type show that the tenderer‟s experience andcapability are key, particularly in types 1 to 4


Tables for Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersTable 7-2 Quality Criteria and Points Scale for small projects1. Quality plus Financial Offer/Preference ratio 80:20 (i.e.. 20 points forBBBEE)2. Maximum points shown for 5 Project Types from Table 7-1 for BBBEE,Quality and Financial Offer, Financial Offer and Quality3. Higher points used for Quality in more complex projects and lower pointsfor Financial Offer4. 9 Quality Criteria listed, from Adequacy <strong>of</strong> work plan to Demonstrablemanagerial ability5. Quality maximum points from (2) allocated to 9 Quality criteria; allocationto 5 <strong>of</strong> the 9 Quality Criteria should suffice


Tables for Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersTable 7-3 Quality Criteria and Points Scale for large projects1. Quality plus Financial Offer/Preference ratio 90:10 (i.e.. 10 points forBBBEE)2. Maximum points shown for 5 Project Types from Table 7-1 for BBBEE,Quality and Financial Offer, Financial Offer and Quality3. Higher points used for Quality in more complex projects and lower pointsfor Financial Offer4. 9 Quality Criteria listed, from Adequacy <strong>of</strong> work plan to Demonstrablemanagerial ability5. Quality maximum points from (2) allocated to 9 Quality criteria; allocationto 5 <strong>of</strong> the 9 Quality Criteria should suffice6. Operation similar to Table 7-2


Tables for Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersTable 7-5 -“Qualification and Competence <strong>of</strong> Key Staff”1. To be completed by Client when issuing tenders2. Shows 6 x typical staff posts – Project Leader, Design Engineer,Materials Engineer, Contracts Engineer, Resident Engineer andAssistant Resident Engineer3. Shows 5 x Project types (Table 7-1) for each post4. Lists 6 x attributes for each post (qualification, experience thereafter ,registration, experience thereafter, involvement on comparableprojects (past 10 years), project values (past 6 years)5. Client able to list preferred and minimum attributes, Tenderer fills inthe Offer column6. Although Titles <strong>of</strong> Job posts state “Engineer”, Client may choose touse Registered <strong>Engineering</strong> Technologist or Registered <strong>Engineering</strong>Technician, depending on nature <strong>of</strong> project


Tables for Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersTable 7-6 Assessment example1. Shows a worked example for a complex project in the 90:10 pointssystem range with 5 <strong>of</strong> 9 x Quality Criteria addressed2. Weight assigned to each Quality Criterion addressed. Total =maximum points for Quality3. Rating indicators from Table 7-4 applied to each Quality Criterion by 3reviewers to give Reviewers‟ scores and average scores4. Weights applied to average scores to give points for Quality, withTotal = Points for Quality for tender under consideration5. Table shows 2 x sets <strong>of</strong> points for Quality results :‣ 1 st set : 2 outliers,‣ 2 nd set : no outliers,after a repeat review by the reviewers


Tables for Evaluation <strong>of</strong> TendersCESA recommended changes to CIDB Tables(in using Tables 7-1 to 7-6)• Table 7-4 Ratings, very good/good/satisfactory/poor; CIDB uses100/90/70/40. CESA recommend 100/70/50/0 because:‣Descriptors for Poor (0) confirm unsatisfactory, i.e. unacceptable‣Good/Satisfactory mean nearly the same; decrease Good to 70 tocompare with Very Good (100) ; decrease Satisfactory 70 to 50.• Actual application <strong>of</strong> weightings, Quality / Financial Offer depends onrelative value <strong>of</strong> the two criteria, e.g. Quality scoring 80 to 85 andFinancial scoring 50 to 100%, Financial scoring can outweigh Qualityscoring


Q&AComfort BreakSession 6PERFORMANCE


Lets talk about Performance


SESSION 66.1 Performance Monitoring – <strong>Consulting</strong><strong>Services</strong>


Performance MonitoringThis Section:1. Introduction2. Performance Quality Assurance3. Quality outcomes – BIMS4. Evaluation <strong>of</strong> CE‟s Performance process5. Principles <strong>of</strong> Performance Monitoring6. Consultant performance evaluation scorecard7. Points to Note


Performance MonitoringIntroduction (cont‟d) Performance Evaluation <strong>of</strong> CE‟s is crucial in upholding & advancingthe standards <strong>of</strong> service from Consultants Benefits <strong>of</strong> performance evaluation. The client will know the level <strong>of</strong> service being delivered ordelivered The client will get an indication as to whether his choice forconsultant was correct Ensures integrity <strong>of</strong> the QCBS process Assist in the pre-selection and bid evaluation raise the standard <strong>of</strong> consulting engineering industry


Performance MonitoringIntroduction(cont‟d) Other uses (by Client, CIDB, ECSA, NT, CESA, etc) Disciplinary action – warning Suspension <strong>of</strong> firm(s) registration Cancellation <strong>of</strong> registration Black listing the firm Black listing the pr<strong>of</strong>essional


Performance MonitoringPerformance Quality Assurance CE have a Quality Management System ISO 9001 : 2008 QMS or <strong>of</strong>similar levels ( a condition <strong>of</strong> CESA membership)That incorporates: Customer-focused leadership and organization Employee involvement A process and factual approach to decision making Continuous improvement Mutually beneficial supplier (sub-consultant) relationships ISO requires firms to conduct Client Satisfaction surveys, analyse toshow trends and confirm improvement.


Performance MonitoringPerformance Quality AssuranceOutcomes: Use Quality Principles in SelectionQualitySelectionFewerVariationOrdersQualityPlanningQualityProjectsLowerConstructionCostsSave TaxPayersMoneyQualitydesignsQualitydesignsLowerMaintenanceCostLower LifeCycle Costs‣ Quality in selection is in the owner's and public‟s best interest


Performance MonitoringQuality Outcomes AssuranceIntegrity Corruption undermines the achievement <strong>of</strong> a quality outcome, andthe practice <strong>of</strong> business integrity is crucial to fighting corruption. Business Integrity Management System(BIMS) is an extension <strong>of</strong>quality management systems. CE have adopted the principles <strong>of</strong> a BIMS, Part <strong>of</strong> CESA membersCode <strong>of</strong> conduct


Performance MonitoringEvaluation <strong>of</strong> CE‟s Performance process NT assigns PM to CFO – suggest done with Project Manager or TownEngineer The process must commence from the time <strong>of</strong> appointment and mustcontinue until final completion <strong>of</strong> the project. Points to note: during the initial briefing <strong>of</strong> the consultant‣ The client must set a standard for performance and discuss theevaluation process, as well as describing the method <strong>of</strong> reportingrequired. Client should provide feedback, so that the consultant could improveif necessary


Performance MonitoringPrinciples <strong>of</strong> Performance Monitoring Criteria must relevant Criteria clearly defined to allow consistent application Confidential, conducted in rigorous and objective manner Conducted according to the Pillars <strong>of</strong> procurement and CIDB‟s Code<strong>of</strong> Conduct• Fair, Transparent, Competitive, Cost Effective and equitable• Must not maliciously injure/ attempt to injure the reputation <strong>of</strong> 3 rdparty


PERFORMANCE MONITORINGGuide for Scoring– <strong>Engineering</strong> Consultant's Performance


PERFORMANCE MONITORINGCustomer Satisfaction Scorecard


Performance MonitoringProposed Performance Evaluation Scorecard


PERFORMANCE MONITORINGPoints to Note Attributes – choosing engineering consultants1. Technical competence2. Managerial ability3. Experience on similar projects4. Dedicated personnel available for the project‟s duration5. PROVEN PERFORMANCE6. Local and/or local knowledge7. Pr<strong>of</strong>essional independence & integrity Conclusion - Turn to page 48


Q&AClosingremarksThankyou


This technical briefing has been presented in theinterests <strong>of</strong> a more efficient constructionindustry, enhanced through the use <strong>of</strong> moreeffective and uniform procurementCESA would like to thank –<strong>Consulting</strong> Engineers and their Clients for attending,and we wish you a safe onward journey

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!