Administration of the Digital Television Switchover Household ...
Table 3.3 Stage 3 tender assessments in each region Tenders assessed for Stage 3 Tenders progressed ANAO Audit Report No.55 2011–12 Administration of the Digital Television Switchover Household Assistance Scheme 78 Mildura/Sunraysia Pilot Source: DBCDE HAS Tender Evaluation Reports. Regional South Australia and Broken Hill Regional Victoria Regional Queensland 5 6 2 3 2 3 2 3 3.43 For the Mildura/Sunraysia pilot, the tender with the lowest technical merit rating was excluded at this stage, as it was considered non‐competitive based on value for money. The fourth and fifth‐ranked tenders were the least expensive, but the evaluation committee considered that the discounted price could not compensate for the lower technical merit score, particularly given the target audience. Two tenderers were ranked highest in terms of technical merit and value for money. 3.44 For Regional South Australia and Broken Hill, all tenders were considered competitive, however the evaluation committee only ranked the top three tenderers. The two tenderers ranked highest for technical merit and value for money were the preferred tenderers. For Regional Victoria, only two tenderers were assessed under Stage 3. The evaluation committee noted in its report that as, DBCDE had previously worked with the two highest ranked tenderers, the risks associated with non‐compliance with the services agreement were considered to be low. 3.45 For Regional Queensland, an external consulting firm was engaged to undertake the financial viability assessments. This was the first time that DBCDE had engaged external financial advice to assess value for money. Three tenderers were assessed at this stage, with the two highest ranked tenderers assessed as overall preferred tenderers. The third‐ranked tenderer did not progress because of concerns regarding its ability to source both relevant equipment and additional and qualified staff. In addition, the pricing was significantly higher than the other tenderers. 3.46 The evaluation committee also completed a price sensitivity analysis to consider the impact of higher, or lower, take‐up on the expected costs. The analysis revealed that the overall price relativities between the two highest ranked preferred tenderers remained roughly consistent.
Tender Selection and Deed Negotiation 3.47 At the conclusion of Stage 3, the evaluation committee ranked tenderers in order of preference. For each procurement process, the two highest ranked preferred tenderers were recommended to the delegate as suitable to provide HAS services. All Stage 3 value for money assessments were conducted in accordance with the Tender Evaluation and Probity Plans. Stage 4—Negotiation and debriefing 3.48 As part of this stage, the evaluation committee was responsible for preparing the Tender Evaluation Report in accordance with the Tender Evaluation and Probity Plan and recommending preferred tenderers to the delegate. Separate Tender Evaluation Reports were prepared for each procurement at the conclusion of the evaluation process. Tender Evaluation Reports 3.49 Each Tender Evaluation Report prepared by the evaluation committee was provided to the delegate along with a briefing. Through the Tender Evaluation Reports, the committee sought approval from the delegate to award the tenders and to enter into negotiations with the preferred tenderers. The Tender Evaluation Reports provided: � an overview of the evaluation process and the evaluation methodology, criteria and weightings used to assess tenders; � information on tenders received; � detailed assessments of tenders from Stage 1 to Stage 4 of the evaluation process; � issues to raise in deed negotiations; and � an overall recommendation of the preferred tenderer(s). 3.50 Accompanying the final Tender Evaluation Reports were: the Tender Evaluation and Probity Plans; any external expert advice received, such as the OH&S information received by the legal and probity advisor for Regional Queensland; independent financial viability assessments; and the department’s price sensitivity analysis. The evaluation committee members also considered the costs and benefits of contracting with one or multiple service contractors and outlined its preferred approach. Recommended tenderers 3.51 In relation to the Mildura/Sunraysia pilot, Regional South Australia and Broken Hill and Regional Victoria, the evaluation committee recommended a ANAO Audit Report No.55 2011–12 Administration of the Digital Television Switchover Household Assistance Scheme 79
The Auditor-General Audit Report No
Canberra ACT 28 June 2012 Dear Mr P
Contents Abbreviations ............
Abbreviations ACCAN Australian Comm
Glossary Antenna Installer Endorsem
Summary and Recommendations ANAO Au
Summary Introduction 1. Digital tel
Summary (including antenna, cabling
Summary $0.543 million) to complete
Summary 19. HAS, with announced fun
Summary level of aged pension, disa
Summary flexibility to tailor the p
Summary contract management functio
Appendix 3: Department of Human Ser
Appendix 5: HAS-specific key perfor
Index A after‐care and warranty,
Series Titles ANAO Audit Report No.
ANAO Audit Report No.17 2011-12 Aud
ANAO Audit Report No.33 2011-12 Man
ANAO Audit Report No.50 2011-12 Pro