Download original attachment
(Word document)
This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request
'Fortnightly bin collections'.
(Word document)
APPENDIX 1
tender evaluation model for the procurement of WASTe collection,recycling and street cleansing services Prepared for Wirral Borough council by gordon mackie associates ltd |
REPORT RELEASE SHEET
Produced for:
Environment and Street Scene
Wirral Borough Council
Produced by:
Gordon Mackie Associates Ltd
Brookfield
Woodend Lane
Hyde
Cheshire
SK14 1DT
Main Contributors:
Gordon Mackie and Sinéad Tunney
Issued by:
…………………………………………
Gordon Mackie |
Reviewed by:
………………………………………………
Duncan Lummis |
Contents
Executive Summary
Introduction
The tender documents issued to tenderers in December 2005 outlined the tender evaluation process that will be utilised in evaluating the submitted tenders. This document describes in more detail the process that will be followed.
Evaluation
The evaluation process will consist of a number of elements and steps:
Stage I - Initial:
Initial appraisal following the opening.
Stage II - Evaluation Model:
Cost evaluation;
Ability to perform;
Environmental issues;
Compliance with Council policies and strategies;
Quality issues;
Service delivery;
Technical solution;
Technical and environmental competence.
Initial Appraisal
This will consist of:
Ensuring all documentation which is to be submitted has been submitted;
There are no errors or discrepancies that would affect the tender figure.
If there are omissions from the submitted tenders, each will be appraised separately of its importance and the potential impact.
The evaluation process based upon the evaluation model will be followed using a weighted model. Outline questions to inform the quality evaluation, sub-headings, weightings, etc. are described later.
Financial Evaluation
This comprises 50% of the overall weighting as described within Section 2.3 and 2.4. The tendered price included within the model will be based on rates submitted by the Contractor. Different options, dependent upon the level of service required will also dictate the tendered price.
Sensitivity analysis will be carried out on the submitted rates to take into account:
Marginal variations;
Day works.
There may be other issues that need to be taken into account in financial evaluation. At the moment these are unquantifiable.
Quality Evaluation
This comprises 50% of the overall weighting and comprises an evaluation of the method statements submitted by each tenderer. The method statements, in line with the criteria listed within the OJEU advert as detailed below, are to be scored in line with the guidelines detailed in Section 1.3.
Ability to perform;
Environmental issues;
Compliance with Council policies and strategies;
Quality issues;
Service delivery;
Technical and environmental competence;
Technical solution.
Ability to Perform
This is weighted at 5.81% and covers the following sub-headings:
Key risks associated with the Contract;
Alternative proposals for working methods or the incorporation of technological innovation;
Experience and track record;
National and local level management structure;
Partnering proposals.
Environmental Issues
This is weighted at 2.58% and covers the following sub-headings:
Encouraging participation in recycling and developing waste minimisation and education initiatives;
Environmental policy.
Compliance with Council Policies and Strategies
This is weighted at 6.45% and covers the following sub-headings:
Arrangements for transferring staff;
Complaints procedure, CRM and customer care;
Health and safety issues;
Implementation of policy and strategy;
Personnel matters.
Quality Issues
This is weighted at 5.48% and covers the following sub-headings:
Performance management system;
Joined up working;
Consultation framework;
Benchmarking and Best Value;
Quality assurance.
Service Delivery
This is a significant part of the evaluation process carrying 25.16% of the weighted model, and will consist of sub-headings:
Rapid response team;
Cleansing service operations;
Cleansing services;
Shopping areas;
Cleansing of Entries;
Car parks;
Leaves;
Depot facilities;
Service mobilisation;
Waste and recycling operations;
Waste and recycling resources;
Waste disposal facilities;
Hazardous wastes;
Litter bins;
Fly tipping and dead animals;
Graffiti and fly posting;
Traffic Islands;
Special events;
Promenade cleansing;
Sand and tidal debris;
Gritting zone 1;
Street washing;
Vehicles, equipment and resources;
Shopping trolleys;
Drug related waste and hazardous waste.
Technical Solution
This is weighted at 2.58% and covers the following sub-headings:
Increasing recycling performance;
Information technology facilities and communications.
Technical and Environmental Competence
This is weighted at 1.94% and covers the following sub-headings:
Maximising resale value of recovered materials;
Working methods resulting from legislative changes.
Scoring
Each member of the tender evaluation team will be given a copy of the evaluation sheets together with the tender submissions. Each member should award a score of 0 to 5, in accordance with the scoring criteria detailed below, for each of the main and sub-headings on the evaluation sheet for each method statement for each tenderer.
0 |
- |
No method statement provided or the response is not relevant to the method statement requested, does not address criterion at all. |
1 |
- |
The response is substantially deficient, not meeting the required contract standards in a number of key areas or to a high degree. |
2 |
- |
The response is deficient, not meeting all the Council's requirements in key areas. |
3 |
- |
The response is acceptable, meeting the Council's requirements in all key areas. |
4 |
- |
The response is good, meeting the Council's requirements in all material respects. |
5 |
- |
The response is excellent, meeting the Council's requirements in all material respects and also providing additional benefits to the Council. |
Each method statement for each tenderer should also be awarded an overall score of 0 to 5. The evaluation calculation will comprise a series of Excel spreadsheets to include the weighting factors and the means of calculating the weighted scores for each member of the tender evaluation team.
Tender Evaluation Model
Introduction
Within this section factors have been identified which can be used in the evaluation of tenders on a like-for-like basis. A tender evaluation model has been developed which enables tenders to be assessed on price and quality as identified in the evaluation criteria stated within the OJEU advert. The model will enable the quality of tenders to be assessed against variations in factors that are within the tenderer's control.
If some form of joint venture is proposed, development of the financial component of tender evaluation model will be considerably more complex, since it must consider possible financial benefits to the Council.
Evaluating Tenders
The tender evaluation team should undertake the tender evaluation. This will consist of Officers nominated by the Chief Executive who will call on additional specialist input from the Council's Director of Finance and others, in addition to any other specialist consultants as required.
The Council may use any evaluation criteria they choose, provided that:
They are relevant;
No reference is made to non-commercial matters;
There is no discrimination on grounds of nationality;
The Council is not acting anti-competitively.
Consequently, there are few limitations on the quality criteria that may be established for the assessment of the tenderer's method statements.
The OJEU advert listed examples of the criteria that has been set, without any obligation to use these. Others may be substituted or added although this must be strictly relevant to the contract being awarded. The criteria which are the most relevant for the contracts being awarded, and which are included within the ITT, are listed below:
Cost Evaluation (tendered price, sensitivity to cost increases etc.);
Ability to Perform;
Environmental issues;
Compliance with Council policies and strategies;
Quality issues;
Service delivery;
Technical solution;
Technical and environmental competence.
Technical References
The tender evaluation team should assess the tender references. Technical references are important to review the tenderers experience and track record. Table 2.1 below details the tenderers technical references.
Table 2.1 Tenderers Technical References |
|||||
Tenderer |
Satisfactory Reference 1 |
Satisfactory Reference 2 |
Satisfactory Reference 3 |
Satisfactory Reference 4 |
Satisfactory Reference 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The evaluator should grade the reference as satisfactory or unsatisfactory.
Table 2.1 provides details of the satisfaction of the references supplied by the tenderer.
The Council should consider a more thorough investigation into the weaker references through site visits and demonstrations.
Establishing Tender Evaluation Criteria and Weighting
Each of the price and quality elements listed below, in addition to the quality weightings specify the level of importance placed upon the performance of the contract by the Council and will be used in determining the bid that is “most economically advantageous”.
Tenderers have been advised that the weighting system to be applied to the tender is as follows:
Price 50%
Quality 50%
The score for “quality” will be determined by assigning the following weightings to the criteria shown below.
Table 1 |
|||
|
Category |
Method Statement |
(%) |
Price |
Financial Analysis |
N/A |
50.0% |
Quality |
Ability, ie, previous performance of the tenderer including the adoption of key performance indicators and the means by which the contract will be managed at a local level |
1, 2, 4, 5, 6 |
5.81% |
|
Environmental, including consultation and communication with local communities and the monitoring and development of services |
18, 26 |
2.58% |
|
Policy, including potential alternative and innovative ways in which the service can be delivered plus integration with other services and attention to the Clean Neighbourhoods Act |
10, 12, 13, 15, 16 |
6.45% |
|
Quality, including an assessment of the perceived quality service to be provided by the tenderer. |
3, 7, 11, 17, 19 |
5.48% |
|
Service, including an assessment of the way in which the tenderer is intending to provide the service |
8, 9, 20, 21, 23, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46 |
25.16% |
|
Technical, including proposals for partnering with the Council and other key partners involved in service delivery |
14, 22 |
2.58% |
|
Technical/Environmental, including an assessment of the following:
|
24, 27 |
1.94% |
Total |
|
100.00 |
|
Quality requirements will be assessed by evaluation of the method statements contained within the tenderer's submission. The Council reserve the right to seek written responses where clarification of specific issues is required.
Tender Evaluation Procedure (Financial)
The tender prices submitted will be converted to points using the procedure outlined below. The prices submitted will be scored and weighted by the evaluation team. There will be 500 points available in the price evaluation.
There are detailed rules concerning the evaluation of the financial aspects of tenders, which is continuously updated to keep pace with changes in the law and developing best practice. The Council's Director of Finance should be aware of these procedures and will be able to advise the Council accordingly.
Generally, tenders which are deemed too low to be deemed credible and those too high to be affordable to the Councils' budgets may be discarded. The formula for calculating the number of points is as follows:
Points = |
Half available points + |
(mean price - tendered price) |
|
|
(mean price/half available points) |
For example:
Tenderer |
A |
B |
C |
D |
Mean |
Price |
£1.00 |
£2.00 |
£3.00 |
£4.00 |
£2.50 |
Points |
400 |
300 |
200 |
100 |
250 |
Within the price evaluation, due account should be taken of the following key issues:
The tonnage of material that each Council expects to have to dispose of at landfill. This will depend on recycling proposals and enhancements by tenderers;
Landfill tax and its anticipated increases over the period of the contract;
Additional works and change to the service over the life of the contract;
The tonnage of material recovered for recycling and the possibility that this will be eligible for recycling credits initially, although this revenue stream is likely to be reviewed within the life of the contract.
Tender Evaluation Procedure (Quality)
The purpose of the tender evaluation exercise is to identify the tender that offers best value for money to the Council. Value for money is a function of quality and price and the assessment of quality is the main subject of this section.
Not all tenderers will necessarily have met the minimum selection criteria. Those that have will be required to demonstrate that they are the best company for the job. However, it should be borne in mind that there are circumstances in which even the general fitness of a tenderer may need to be reconsidered at the tender evaluation stage. This may involve for example, new information that has come to light since the selection took place (e.g. more recent accounts have been filed, or quality assurance has been developed or accredited).
Quality will be assessed primarily on the basis of the proposals made by tenderers concerning their approach to carrying out the work, i.e. the method statements.
Weightings of criteria and the overall weighting between quality and price should be disclosed to tenderers. This provides a clear indication of the importance that is placed on quality in evaluating tenders, which might undermine the attention to attract high quality bids.
After the selection of tenderers and contract award decisions, unsuccessful contractors have the right to ask for information on the outcome of the tender evaluation procedure and reasons for the decision. It is prudent, therefore to keep methodical and accurate records.
Evaluation of Method Statements
It should always be stated within the ITT that the Council may revisit any of the key issues raised as part of the process in selecting tenderers, and that this information could be form part of the tender evaluation process.
There are a number of ways in which the information derived from method statements can be clarified and tested, including:
References;
Site visits;
Presentations;
Interviews;
Demonstrations or evaluation.
References and Site Visits
It is more conventional to use these techniques at the tenderer selection stage. However, as stated above, there may be circumstances where information obtained in this way must be used within the tender evaluation process. Late references or substantial recent reports of particularly poor performance are examples.
Interviews
Interviews should always be considered. There is often no substitute for a face-to-face meeting. Within the procurement process it is particularly important to interview:
The key personnel who will be assigned to the contract;
Appropriate senior managers of the company.
Interviews can be useful to test:
That the tenderer has understood the requirements of the tender;
That the Council has understood what the tenderer is proposing.
An assessment panel should carry out the interview. Interviews should be properly structured and systematic, not free form. The panel members should agree questions in advance. In so far as is practicable, the same questions should be put to each tenderer (follow-up questions should however be permitted, in line with best practice in recruitment and selection procedure). Inevitably certain questions will be specific to a particular tender (i.e. where the tenderer's intention has not been stated clearly). The Council are free to require answers to questions based on any research they have carried out and do not need to inform tenderers about the content of questions in advance of the interview.
The interview is not a forum for post-tender negotiation (except on rare occasions when a decision to this effect has explicitly been taken) and this must be made clear at the outset to all tenderers and to all members of the assessment panel.
Tenderers should not be invited to alter their prices or proposals in their method statements in any way, or indeed to supplement them except to the extent that this is judged by the assessment panel to be strictly necessary in order to clarify the original intention. It is advisable to make provision for method statements to be amended by agreement prior to the commencement of the contract and during the performance of the contract.
The interview should be minuted (or otherwise recorded) and the record retained and made available on request.
Disadvantages of Presentations
Tenderers often volunteer to make presentations, which should be distinguished from the formal interview, described above. Presentations may be of some limited value in bringing out issues that the Council have not considered, but more often than not are little more than marketing exercises.
For this reason, the Council could arrange for a brief presentation by the tenderer (perhaps no more than fifteen minutes) followed immediately by a structured interview. A record should be made of presentations. All tenderers should be given the opportunity to make presentations if they are judged to be part of the tender evaluation process. However, if presentations are not required as a matter of course, it should be made clear to tenderers that to offer them will not gain an automatic advantage. It should also be made clear that no changes to the basis of the bid offered in supporting documents (financial, work methods, etc.,) can be made during a presentation.
Demonstrations and Evaluations
Tenderers should be invited to demonstrate that the equipment proposed for use within the tender is capable of performing the functions required of it. The Council may want to make use of the equipment on a trial basis so that they can evaluate its performance.
Tender Evaluation Model
The proposed tender evaluation model is included within Sections 4 and 5 of this report.
Each tender submitted will be marked out of a possible 1000 points. There will be a maximum of 500 points available in the quality evaluation, 500 points available in the price evaluation and the tender evaluation team will award these points. Each aspect of the tender will be marked using the following guidelines:
Benchmarks have an important role to play in tender evaluation. Whenever possible, the contractor's proposals should be assessed against benchmarks established in advance for each criterion;
An initial assessment against important or essential criteria could be carried out and might be made on a pass/fail basis where failures would rule out a tender or at least raise serious questions as to whether it should be considered further.
Assessments should be recorded on an assessment sheet, the practice being essentially the same as at the tenderer selection stage. It is important to bear in mind that the information recorded will provide the basis on which a recommendation is made to committee and the assessment sheets need to be designed with this in mind.
A formal model for tender evaluation has been developed, and designed to provide a structured and systematic approach to the comparison of tenders and generally combines the following:
A rating or scoring system;
The weighting of criteria.
The model uses a system marking each tender on a scale of 0-5, as shown below:
0 |
- |
No method statement provided or the response is not relevant to the method statement requested, does not address criterion at all. |
1 |
- |
The response is substantially deficient, not meeting the required contract standards in a number of key areas or to a high degree. |
2 |
- |
The response is deficient, not meeting all the Council's requirements in key areas. |
3 |
- |
The response is acceptable, meeting the Council's requirements in all key areas. |
4 |
- |
The response is good, meeting the Council's requirements in all material respects. |
5 |
- |
The response is excellent, meeting the Council's requirements in all material respects and also providing additional benefits to the Council. |
The relative importance of criteria can be taken into account by means of a weighting system where the importance of criteria is indicated by assigning a weighting, conventionally expressed as a percentage of the combined weight of all criteria (i.e. out of 100%).
It should be noted that these weightings are only suggestions and is clearly a matter of judgement for the Council to take account of local circumstances of which we are unaware.
The overall score for each tender is found by totalling the weighted scores attained to it.
An important feature of the model is that the results can be presented in a tabular form, which can greatly assist decision-making, especially where a large number of tenders have been received.
The overall weighted quality score obtained by each tender can also be expressed as a percentage of the possible total score.
It is possible to set a threshold for the quality score at the outset, whereby tenders which do not achieve, say 65-75%, of the total possible quality score are ruled out.
The tender evaluation team will add together the scores of each tenderer for price and for quality. The tenderer scoring the highest aggregate score will be regarded as the “leading tenderer”.
Notification of Awards
The Council should be prepared to inform bidders in appropriate written detail about the reasons for rejection of a tender. It is for the Council to decide on the level of detail involved, particularly with the introduction of the regulatory “cooling off” 10 day period, between the decision of Council and award of Contract where tenderers have the right of challenge prior to award.
Checklist
A comprehensive and integrated approach to the safeguarding of quality in the tendering process will include steps to:
Review, and where appropriate revise, service objectives and standards;
Revise contract documents according to those objectives and standards;
Establish tender evaluation criteria compatible with EU requirements in advance of inviting tenders;
Invite tenderers to submit method statements containing their proposals for carrying out the work;
Evaluate tenderer's method statements against the pre-established criteria.
basic criteria
Evaluation Criteria
The award of contract will be based on the Most Economically Advantageous (MEA) tender received. Wirral Borough Council has decided that the split between financial matters and the evaluation of the submitted method statements will be 50%/50% respectively.
Evaluation Team
The following teams of people shall evaluate the tenders:
Evaluation |
Criteria |
Wirral Officers |
Wirral Officers |
Wirral Officers |
Wirral Officers |
Wirral Officers |
Consultant |
Compliance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quality |
Ability to Perform |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental Issues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compliance with Council Policies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quality Issues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service Delivery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Technical Solution |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Technical and Environmental Competence |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluation Methodology
Each tenderer has been asked to submit a pricing schedule and method statements with their tender submission and these will form the basis upon which the price and quality will be evaluated. The table below details the evaluation criteria against which each of the method statements will be evaluated:
MS |
Summary |
Evaluation Criteria |
2 |
Key risks associated with the Contract |
Ability |
4 |
Alternative proposals for alternative working methods or the incorporation of technological innovation. |
Ability |
5 |
Partnering proposals |
Ability |
1 |
Experience and track record |
Ability |
6 |
National and local level management structure |
Ability |
18 |
Environmental policy |
Environmental |
26 |
Encouraging participation in recycling and developing waste minimisation and education initiatives |
Environmental |
10 |
Arrangements for transferring staff |
Policy |
13 |
Implementation of policy and strategy |
Policy |
15 |
Personnel matters |
Policy |
12 |
Complaints Procedure |
Policy |
16 |
Health and safety issues |
Policy |
3 |
Performance Management System |
Quality |
7 |
Joined up working |
Quality |
11 |
Consultation framework |
Quality |
17 |
Quality assurance |
Quality |
19 |
Benchmarking/ best value |
Quality |
41 |
Rapid response team |
Service |
8 |
Depot facilities |
Service |
9 |
Service Mobilisation |
Service |
20 |
Waste and Recycling Operations |
Service |
21 |
Waste & Recycling Resources |
Service |
23 |
Waste disposal facilities |
Service |
25 |
Hazardous wastes |
Service |
28 |
Cleansing service Operations |
Service |
30 |
Cleansing Services |
Service |
31 |
Shopping areas |
Service |
32 |
Cleansing of Entries |
Service |
33 |
Litter Bins |
Service |
34 |
Car Parks |
Service |
35 |
Leaves |
Service |
36 |
Drug Related Waste and Hazardous Waste |
Service |
37 |
Fly Tipping, dead animals |
Service |
38 |
Graffiti, fly posters |
Service |
39 |
Traffic Island |
Service |
40 |
Special events |
Service |
42 |
Promenade cleansing |
Service |
43 |
Sand and Tidal debris |
Service |
44 |
Gritting Zone 1 |
Service |
45 |
Street washing |
Service |
46 |
Shopping trolleys |
Service |
29 |
Vehicles, equipment and resources |
Service |
14 |
Information technology and communications |
Technical |
22 |
Increase recycling performance |
Technical |
24 |
Maximising resale value of recovered materials |
Technical/Environmental |
27 |
Working methods resulting from legislative changes |
Technical/Environmental |
1st Stage - Compliance Evaluation
The first stage in the evaluation process involves assessing each tender against a number of compliance criteria to ensure that the tender is compliant with the Council's minimum requirements. This first stage evaluation is a threshold by which tenders will either pass and proceed through to the second stage evaluation, or will fail and be disqualified.
|
YES |
NO |
COMMENTS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Note if any schedules are missing, or items have not been completed) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Within the ITT the Council has stated that qualified tender submissions may be rejected (Clause 1.10.6), i.e. “the submission of a qualified tender or failure to complete any part of the documents may lead to the tender being rejected”. The evaluation of whether a tenderer has submitted a qualified tender will be analysed during the qualitative evaluation process.
Method Statement Evaluation
Scoring of Evaluation Criteria
Each method statement will be evaluated by the scoring method detailed below. To assist in scoring the tenderer's method statements a series of questions have been formulated which will assist the evaluator to assess the response against the Council's requirements and contract standards.
Quality |
Description of Response |
0 |
No method statement provided or the response is not relevant to the method statement requested. |
1 |
The response is substantially deficient, not meeting the required contract standards in a number of key areas or to a high degree. |
2 |
The response is deficient, not meeting all the Council's requirements in key areas. |
3 |
The response is acceptable, meeting the Council's requirements in all key areas. |
4 |
The response is good, meeting the Council's requirements in all material respects. |
5 |
The response is excellent, meeting the Council's requirements in all material respects and also providing additional benefits to the Council. |
Evaluation Criteria: Ability (5.81%)
Method Statement 1
The tenderer should set out their experience and track record of managing Waste, Recycling and Street Cleansing Services with reference to other similar contracts completed or in progress. The tenderer's skills and experience within the industry and how this could be used to support the Service should be specified.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Have full details of previous contracts and the company background and experience been provided? |
|
2. |
Have suitable references been provided to support the tenderer's claims? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer provided clear details of the management structure and organisation? |
|
4. |
Is the structure suitable and adequate to ensure that the best possible service will be provided? |
|
5. |
Does the structure address staff development and retention issues? |
|
6. |
Have key personnel posts been structured with suitable qualifications and experience requirements? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 1 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 2
The tenderer should provide details of key risks associated with the Contract and state how these risks will be managed. The tenderer should also identify alternative proposals for risk sharing, indicating the benefits and added value for money.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided a summary of the key risks for each element of the contract? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer quantified the risks in any way? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer detailed the allocation or apportionment of risks to stakeholders? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer prepared a full risk assessment statement for each element of the contract? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated a full understanding of the risks associated with all elements of the contract? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer provided alternative proposals on how risks could be shared or apportioned? |
|
7. |
Has the tenderer provided an analysis of the benefits and issues associated with each alternative proposal? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 2 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 4
The tenderer should provide details of alternative and innovative proposals that would provide benefit to both the Council and the Contractor. Such proposals might relate to alternative working methods or the incorporation of technological innovation.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Are the proposals realistically achievable? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer provided details of appropriate and practical plans to improve service delivery by the incorporation of technological innovation and change? |
|
3. |
Are the proposals innovative and inventive? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer identified who will be involved in identifying and implementing the improvements? |
|
5. |
Do the plans include full financial assessments? |
|
6. |
Is the technology to be used currently available? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 4 (0-5) |
|
|
Has the tenderer identified which areas might need innovation or a variation from the traditional approach? Does this go beyond retail and nightime economy locations?
How committed are tenders to using innovation to solve demand and service issues in `difficult' locations? Is there any evidence of this commitment?
Does the tender refer to partnerships with residents and area based organisations as a form of innovation?
Are there any new technologies or approaches identified which might have an application in areas of high demand?
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 5
The tenderer should provide details of proposals for Partnering for the purpose of achieving benefit for the Contract and for the mutual benefit of both the Council and the Contractor. The tenderer shall identify the key Partners involved in delivering the Service and detail how these Partnering arrangements will be developed.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided proposals for the operation of the Contract on a Partnering agreement? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated previous experience of successfully working with other local authorities within a partnering agreement? |
|
3. |
Have sample partnering agreements been provided? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated an awareness of the importance of partnering? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer provided a risk analysis of the partnering proposal, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer provided proposals for the administration of any potential partnership? |
|
7. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated a clear understanding of the key issues within the proposals? |
|
8. |
Has the tenderer provided proposals for the means by which disputes will be resolved between parties? |
|
9. |
Are the tenderer's proposals comprehensive, realistic and achievable? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 5 (0-5) |
|
|
Does the tender show a commitment to resident engagement and involvement at a local level? To what extent?
Does the tenderer provide evidence or examples of its partnering experience/commitment and does it express a view on the potential benefits of partnering in terms of contract performance in specific areas?
Do tenders identify all relevant partners at local and borough level (other contractors, Wirral MBC depts, community, Together NMP?)
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 6
The tenderer should explain how the Contract would be managed at a national and local level. It should show the proposed Contract management structure, organisation chart and proposed qualifications of key personnel.
No. |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided clear details of the management structure and organisation at national and local level? |
|
2. |
Is the structure suitable and adequate to ensure that the best possible service will be provided? |
|
3. |
Have key personnel posts been structured with suitable qualifications and experience requirements? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 6 (0-5) |
|
|
What local management arrangements are proposed in neighbourhoods of high demand?
Do these arrangements show a commitment to partnering with neighbourhood organisations and residents?
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Evaluation Criteria: Environmental (2.58%)
Method Statement 18
The tenderer should provide details of how the Contractor will implement an environmental policy for the duration of the Contract. This shall include details of how the Services being offered by the Contractor will cater for and adhere to the proximity principle, best practicable environmental option (BPEO) and how the environmental impact of traffic movement can be reduced or mitigated.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided a copy of the company's environmental policy? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer detailed how they will implement an environmental policy within the Services as part of a sustainable development plan for the duration of the Contract? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer established an awareness of sustainable development that could be applied to the Service? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated a thorough knowledge of the proximity principle and BPEO? |
|
5. |
Do the tenderer`s proposals indicate compliance with proximity principle and BPEO? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated an awareness of regional self-sufficiency and how this might be applied to the services incorporated within the contract? |
|
7. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated innovation in proposals for reduction of traffic impact? |
|
8. |
Do the proposals include the use of environmental beneficial vehicles and fuels? |
|
9. |
Do the proposals include plans for an increase in numbers of sites or changes in locations to reduce traffic movement? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 18 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 26
The tenderer should provide details of how they will encourage participation in recycling and develop Waste minimisation and education initiatives to promote minimisation, recycling and Composting. Tenderers should specify how much they have allowed per annum within their tendered rates for any proposed communication activity. The submission should demonstrate the tenderer's experience in such activities.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer submitted details of how they will encourage participation in recycling and develop waste minimisation and education initiatives promoting recycling and composting? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated a clear understanding of the importance of increasing participation in recycling? |
|
3. |
Do the proposals integrate with the Council's existing education initiatives and those for increasing participation? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer included example leaflets to demonstrate tenderers previous work and experience in such promotion and education initiatives? |
|
5. |
Are the proposals realistically achievable? |
|
6. |
Are the proposals innovative and inventive? |
|
7. |
Has the tenderer provided details of annual cost of each initiative and campaign throughout the contract period? |
|
8. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated experience of previous work in connection with increasing participation and education initiatives? |
|
9. |
Has the tenderer outlined how external funding can be integrated into the contract? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 26 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Evaluation Criteria: Policy (6.45%)
Method Statement 10
The tenderer should provide details of the arrangements for transferring staff to include:
How the tenderer's Conditions of Service will exceed those available through the requirements of TUPE:
Pension arrangements for transferring staff;
How the tenderer will ensure a smooth transition of staff, from current Service providers, under TUPE transfer arrangements (i.e. staff consultation and information);
If the tenderer's proposals identify that changes in the Service give rise to a reduction in the numbers of Employees, the tenderer should state their approach for dealing with such a situation (e.g. re-deployment within the company).
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Do the tenderer's Conditions of Service exceed those available through the requirements of TUPE? |
|
2. |
Are the pension arrangements for transferring staff acceptable to the Council? |
|
3. |
Will the tenderer's proposals ensure a smooth transition of staff, from both current Service providers, under TUPE transfer arrangements (i.e. staff consultation and information)? |
|
4. |
Do the tenderer's proposals give rise to a reduction in the numbers of Employees? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer stated their approach for dealing with a reduction in the numbers of employees? |
|
6. |
Is the tenderer's approach to dealing with a reduction in the number of employees acceptable to the Council? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 10 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 12
The tenderer should provide details of how the Contractor will implement and manage a complaints procedure for the Services in accordance with the Council's complaint procedure. Tenderers should detail how the procedure will integrate with the customer care and rectification policies normally operated by the Contractor.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated an awareness and understanding of the Council's customer care policies? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer met the requirements of the specification? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer allocated sufficient resources to meet the demands of the service? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer provided details of a proposed complaints procedure? |
|
5. |
Will users and other staff, including Council staff, easily understand the complaints procedure? |
|
6. |
Does the procedure align with existing customer care and monitoring care systems and provide information sufficient to maintain those systems? |
|
7. |
Does the procedure allow prompt assessment and monitoring which will lead to continuous improvement and the rapid resolution of problems? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 12 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 13
The tenderer should provide details of how the Contractor will implement Council policy and strategy so that it gives direction to the operation of the Service, programme development and organisational improvements.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Partner will implement policy and strategy? |
|
2. |
Will the tenderer's proposals give direction to the operation of the service, programme development and organisational improvements? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer included details of the resources allocated to allow achievement of the policy and strategy? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer detailed how policy and strategy, performance measures/indicators, targets and improvement plans will be communicated with all staff and Partner organisations in a meaningful way so that ownership is developed? |
|
5. |
Are the tenderer's proposals meaningful, realistic and achievable? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 13 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 15
The tenderer should provide details of how the Contractor will deal with personnel matters including recruitment, induction, staff training, evaluation, record keeping and competence assessments and details of the training provider and their qualifications. In addition, details of the application of equal opportunities policies and race relations issues, particularly relating to communication and language training issues and policies for drug and alcohol abuse should be provided. Within the submission tenderers shall include a copy of their Equal Opportunities Policy statement.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer supplied a full staff induction, training and development plan? |
|
2. |
Does the plan provide or encourage crosscutting training or non-vocational training? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer provided a full personnel policy statement? |
|
4. |
Does the tenderer provide advice and/or leaflets on personnel matters for staff? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated a thorough knowledge of equal opportunities and race relations' issues? |
|
6. |
Do the tenderer's recruitment methods and policies encourage recruitment from all sections of the community? |
|
7. |
Has the tenderer provided a full equal opportunities policy statement? |
|
8. |
Does the tenderer have up to date documentation and systems to address equal opportunities matters? |
|
9. |
Has the tenderer provided details of staff benefits? |
|
10. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the type of pension scheme which will be offered as part of TUPE? |
|
11. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the mechanism to be used for pay negotiations within the Contract? |
|
12. |
Has the tenderer provided details of health surveillance and screening procedures to be employed? |
|
13. |
Has the tenderer provided details of their policies relating to drug and alcohol abuse issues? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 15 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 16
The tenderer should provide details of how the Contractor will deal with the health and safety issues. This shall include the submission of a copy of their Health and Safety Policy Statement comprising statement, organisational structure, safe working arrangements (including risk assessments and safe methods of work for all tasks - this must include all classes of person at risk including Employees and members of the public). Information should be provided on who provides health and safety assistance and their qualifications as required by the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations and details of who is the senior person responsible for directing/authorising Health and Safety activities and resources.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided a copy of the company's health and safety policy document? |
|
2. |
Does the document indicate full compliance with health and safety legislation and requirements? |
|
3. |
Does the tenderer employ specialist health and safety staff? |
|
4. |
Are staff and supervisors given regular training and up-dates on health and safety issues? |
|
5. |
Does the tenderer's health and safety policy document include details of how day-to-day and on-site health and safety issues will be dealt with? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer provided details of previous experience on health and safety issues? |
|
7. |
Has the tenderer provided copies of documents or training/information literature to support claims of previous experience? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 16 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Evaluation Criteria: Quality (5.48%)
Method Statement 3
The tenderer should submit proposals for a Performance Management system. Proposals should include details of:
Which Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), including Best Value & Local Performance Indicators, would be used to monitor performance each day, Week, Month, quarter and year.
The KPI targets that would be used as a tool to facilitate continuous Service improvement;
How the achievement of annual KPI targets could be used to determine an annual performance incentive bonus.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided clear details of the Performance Management system? |
|
2. |
Is the system suitable and adequate to ensure that the best possible monitoring performance will be provided? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated how the achievement of annual KPI targets could be used to determine an annual performance incentive bonus? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 3 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 7
The tenderer should provide details of how the Contractor proposes to integrate and programme works to provide joined up working between all Services (including consideration of the Clean Neighbourhoods Act and BVPI 199) to ensure that all Services required in a given area are carried out concurrently, where appropriate. The tenderer must clearly demonstrate:
How the need for different levels of input at different Locations will be addressed;
How they will work in partnership with local resident and community organisations, including Together Pathfinder, in order to bring about improvements the levels of service being delivered.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of joined up working between all Services? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer provided details on how they will work in partnership with local resident and community organisations, including Together Pathfinder, in order to bring about improvements the levels of service being delivered? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 7 (0 -5) |
|
|
Does the tender show a willingness to work with Together NMP and in what way? Is there any understanding or suggestion as to how neighbourhood management may be applied to street cleaning and its related services?
Is there a recognition of the need for a joining up of those services which go to make up the street environment, as well as a commitment to progress this?
Does the tenderer have any experience of acting as coordinator for the joining up of related services?
Does the tenderer indicate a desire for a leadership role in joining up services?
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 11
The tenderer should provide proposals on how they could assist the Council in the development and management of a communication and consultation framework. The Council wishes to adopt an integrated approach to Service delivery to take account of the views and aspirations of elected members, staff, local community, voluntary and other interested groups and Partners. The tenderer should detail how they will work with the Council to develop a framework and enable these groups to be included in the monitoring and development of the Services taking account of social, economic, demographic and other community factors.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided proposals on how they could assist the Council in the development and management of a consultation framework? |
|
2. |
Are the tenderer's proposals sensible, realistic and achievable? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer explained how they would involve elected members, staff, local community, voluntary and other interested groups and Partners in the consultation framework? |
|
4. |
Do the tenderer's proposals take account of social, economic, demographic and other community factors? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 11 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 17
The tenderer should provide details of how quality assurance will be incorporated within the performance of the Services and provide details of the quality management system it proposes to use during the period of the Contract.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided a list of personnel with COTCs and relevant experience? |
|
2. |
Does the list demonstrate that adequate staff with suitable experience and qualifications is available? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer provided copies of relevant certification of qualifications? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated a thorough knowledge of quality assurance systems and their benefits? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer provided evidence of using QA systems and/or evidence of current accreditation? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer supplied documentary evidence to validate any claim of accreditation? |
|
7. |
Has accreditation been gained recently? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 17 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 19
The tenderer should provide details of the means by which continuous improvement and the concept of Best Value will be incorporated within Service Delivery in addition to the format and potential content of annual performance reviews of the Service. This shall include details of how Contract performance will be monitored against Best Value Performance Indicators.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated a thorough knowledge of the Best Value process and principles? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how continuous improvement and the concept of Best Value will be incorporated into service delivery? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer provided sufficient resources to achieve continuous improvement in the service throughout the contract? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the format and potential content of annual performance reviews? |
|
5. |
Does the method statement demonstrate that the format and potential content of annual performance reviews is suitable? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how contract performance will be monitored against Best Value Performance Indicators? |
|
7. |
Do targets and outputs proposed allow continuous improvement and benchmarking? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 19 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Evaluation Criteria: Service (25.16%)
Method Statement 8
The tenderer should provide details for the provision of a depot(s) from which the Services will be provided to include information on capital expenditure, depreciation, residual values (if appropriate) and contract expiry arrangements.
No. |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the depot facilities that will be used? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer provided information on capital expenditure, depreciation or residual values (if appropriate)? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer provided information regarding contract expiry arrangements? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer provided details of any contingency plans that would be employed in the event that the depot was to become unavailable? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 8 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 9
The tenderer should provide details of the arrangements for the Service mobilisation, including:
A plan for the period of time required between the award of the Contract and the commencement of the Services;
A detailed phased implementation programme for the introduction of new Services on or before the 22nd October 2007 in accordance with the Specification.
No. |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided a detailed method statement for the transition period? |
|
2. |
Do the proposals include a plan identifying the key issues and timescales for the Service mobilisation so as to ensure a smooth transition? |
|
3. |
Does the method statement include advertising the changeover and consultation with stakeholders? |
|
4 |
Has the tenderer demonstrated an awareness of the potential problems of the transition and how such problems will be alleviated? |
|
5 |
Has the tenderer allowed for the provision of extra resources to deal with any changes in frequencies or collection days as a result of the transition? |
|
6. |
Have suitable timetables for the transition period and the commencement of normal working been prepared? |
|
7. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated that they have fully considered the operational issues associated with the transition of service provision? |
|
8. |
Does the method statement demonstrate that the methodology of the planning and undertaking of the transition is suitable? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 9 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 20
The tenderer should provide details of the operating methods and systems to be applied for the Waste & Recycling Service to include:
Number of rounds with crew sizes;
Arrangements for Service continuation in the event of vehicle breakdowns;
Allowances for holidays and sickness should be indicated including the means by which cover for absence will be arranged;
Weekend, bank holiday and other public holiday working arrangements;
Proposals for dealing with emergencies and the provision of assistance in a major incident;
How the tenderer will deal with inaccessible properties to ensure that all Waste Receptacles are emptied on the day specified as the collection day.
No. |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer supplied clear details of the rounds, staffing and proposed service commencement times to be used in the provision of each element of the services? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer allocated sufficient resource to meet the requirements of the service? |
|
3. |
Are commencement times planned to ensure that there is minimum disruption for service users and residents and do they take account of seasonal or local considerations? |
|
4. |
Do plans for future improvements impact on resources and has adequate provision been made for increases or decreases in resources and the implementation of changes? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer detailed the arrangements for Service continuation in the event of vehicle breakdowns and has adequate provision been made? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer detailed how holidays and sickness cover will be provided and has adequate provision been made? |
|
7. |
Are the tenderer's proposals for bank holiday working, emergencies and weekend working sufficiently detailed and has adequate provision been made? |
|
8. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how inaccessible properties will be dealt with and has provision been made for the impact they could have on waste collection and recycling operations? |
|
9. |
Has the tenderer provided sufficient details of the operating methods and systems to be applied? |
|
10. |
Are the operating methods and systems proposed suitable and adequate to meet the needs of the service? |
|
11. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated an awareness and understanding of the requirements of the service? |
|
12. |
Has the tenderer met the requirements of the specification and does the method statement demonstrate that the methodology is suitable? |
|
13. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how inaccessible properties will be dealt with and has provision been made for the impact they could have on waste collection and recycling operations? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 20 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 21
The tenderer should provide outline details of resources required for the Waste & Recycling Service including:
Number and types of vehicles (including procurement, maintenance, fuelling and cleaning);
Equipment;
Staffing details.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided full details of the vehicles types and equipment to be used throughout the Contract Period? |
|
2. |
Do the proposals include full details of implementation plans and timescales? |
|
3 |
Has the tenderer provided full details of the capital equipment that will be introduced during the contract period? |
|
4. |
Do the proposals offer Best Value to the Council? |
|
5. |
Does the tenderer have an appropriate maintenance arrangement for vehicles? |
|
6. |
Does the tenderer intend to use environmentally friendly fuels? |
|
7. |
Are the required vehicles suitable for the purpose they are intended in terms of operating capabilities and quality? |
|
8. |
Has adequate provision been made to allow for downtime and maintenance? |
|
9. |
Has the tenderer supplied clear details of the staffing measures to be used in the provision of each element of the services |
|
10. |
Has the tenderer provided clear details of the training that all staff involved in refuse and recycling collections will receive together with examples of supporting literature? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 21 (0 -5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 23
The tenderer should provide details of how they will manage any changes arising from alterations to the nominated Waste disposal points. This shall include details of any savings in the Contract value that may arise as a result of these changes.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how they will manage any changes arising from alterations to the nominated waste disposal points? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer provided details of any savings or additional costs that may arise as a result of any changes to the nominated waste disposal points? |
|
3. |
Are the tenderer's proposals realistic and do they provide best value to the Council? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 23 (0 -5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 25
The tenderer should provide details of how they will manage the collection, treatment and disposal of hazardous Wastes e.g. fridges & freezers
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided proposals for the reception, handling and of hazardous Waste items which may be received? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the transportation and disposal arrangements for this waste? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer proposed adequate health and safety arrangements for dealing with this waste? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated a through working knowledge of current legislation and its impact on the service? |
|
5. |
Are the tenderer's staff and supervisors sufficiently trained and experienced in dealing with hazardous waste? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 25 (0 -5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 28
The tenderer should provide details of the overall Street Cleansing Service including the methods and systems of work. Details should include:
Arrangements for Service continuation in the event of vehicle breakdowns;
Allowances for holidays and sickness should be indicated including the means by which cover for absence will be arranged;
Bank holiday and other public holiday working arrangements;
Proposals for dealing with emergencies and Weekend working.
The tenderer should not preclude the use of evening shifts in the provision of the Service and must demonstrate how the Contractor proposes to ensure the visibility of the Service to the public, particularly in high-profile areas such as the main shopping areas in Birkenhead and Liscard.
The tenderer should provide details of the overall Cleansing Service including the proposed Service commencement times. The tenderer should provide an outline of the operating methods and systems to be applied for each part of the Services, including arrangements and allowances for dealing with breakdowns, emergencies and weekend/bank holiday working. In addition to details of how the tenderer will deal with parked cars and dog fouling from the highway.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the overall Street Cleaning Services including the proposed Services commencement times? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated an awareness and understanding of the issues surrounding the requirements of the service? |
|
3. |
Do commencement times take account of seasonal or local considerations? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer allocated sufficient resource to meet the requirements of the service? |
|
5. |
Do plans for future improvements impact on resources and has adequate provision been made for increases or decreases in resources and the implementation of changes? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer provided an outline of the operating methods and systems to be applied for each part of the Services? |
|
7. |
Are the operating methods and systems proposed suitable and adequate to meet the needs of the service? |
|
8. |
Has the tenderer detailed the arrangements for Service continuation in the event of vehicle breakdowns and has adequate provision been made? |
|
9. |
Has the tenderer detailed how holidays and sickness cover will be provided and has adequate provision been made? |
|
10. |
Are the tenderer's proposals for bank holiday working, emergencies and weekend working sufficiently detailed and has adequate provision been made? |
|
11. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how inaccessible properties will be dealt with and has provision been made for the impact they could have on waste collection and recycling operations? |
|
12. |
Has the tenderer provided details of they will deal with dog fouling at an appropriate level of service? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 28 (0 -5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 29
The tenderer should provide outline details of resources required for the Street Cleansing Service including:
Number and types of vehicles (including procurement, maintenance, fuelling and cleaning);
Equipment;
Staffing details.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided full details of the vehicles types and equipment to be used throughout the Contract Period? |
|
2. |
Does the tenderer have an appropriate maintenance and replacement strategy for vehicles and equipment? |
|
3. |
Does the tenderer intend to use environmentally friendly vehicles and fuels? |
|
4. |
Is the tenderer prepared to invest in suitable vehicles to facilitate service provision? |
|
5. |
Does the replacement strategy take account of possible contract extensions? |
|
6. |
Are the vehicles suitable for the purpose they are intended in terms of operating capabilities and quality? |
|
7. |
Are adequate vehicles provided to allow for downtime and maintenance? |
|
8. |
Has the tender separately identified the number and type of large sweepers required for the Service. |
|
9. |
Has the tenderer supplied clear details of the staffing measures to be used in the provision of each element of the services? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 29 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 30
The tenderer should provide details of how operations will be organised in order to provide the Street Cleansing Service to Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 3 and Zone 4 areas as defined within clause 7.4, including the Cleansing methods, frequency of Cleansing, days and times during which the standard is to be maintained, details of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be used.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how operations will be organised in order to provide Street Cleansing Services Zone 1, 2, 3 and 4 areas? |
|
2. |
Are the operating methods and systems proposed suitable and adequate to meet the needs of the service? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the cleaning methods, frequency of cleaning, days and times during which the standard is to be maintained? |
|
4. |
Are the cleaning methods and frequency appropriate to maintain the required standard during the specified days and times? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be employed? |
|
6. |
Are the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and level of supervision appropriate for this type of service? |
|
7. |
Has the tenderer satisfactorily stated how responses will be managed concerning additional work resulting from the application of the Code of Practice for Refuse and Litter? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 30 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 31
The tenderer should provide details of how the Contractor shall cleanse shopping areas to include methodology and frequencies of Cleansing. Details should also be included of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be used.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how operations will be organised in order to cleanse shopping areas? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the cleaning methods, frequency of cleaning, days and times? |
|
3. |
Are the cleaning methods and frequency of cleaning appropriate to maintain the required standard during the specified days and times? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be employed? |
|
5. |
Are the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and level of supervision appropriate for this type of service? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 31 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 32
The tenderer should provide details of how the Contractor shall Cleanse Entries to include methodology and frequencies of Cleansing. Details should also be included of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be used.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with the Entry cleansing requirements within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Is the proposed level of service adequate and appropriate? |
|
3. |
Have sufficient resources been allocated to provide the required level of service? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the cleaning methods, frequency of cleaning, days and times? |
|
5. |
Is the proposed type of equipment suitable for the task? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 32 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 33
The tenderer should provide details of the Service to empty and Cleanse Litter bins to include methodology, proposed frequency of emptying at typical Locations. Details should also be included of the supervision, staff resources, Plant, machinery and equipment to be used.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the Services to empty litter bins to include emptying methods, frequency and the days and times during which the standard is to be maintained? |
|
2. |
Are the emptying methods and frequency of appropriate to maintain the required standard during the specified days and times? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be employed? |
|
4. |
Are the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and level of supervision appropriate for this type of service? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 33 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 34
The tenderer should provide details of how the Contractor shall cleanse car parks within the area. Details should also be included of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be used.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with the car park cleaning requirements within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Is the proposed level of service adequate and appropriate? |
|
3. |
Have sufficient resources been allocated to provide the required level of service? |
|
4. |
Is the proposed type of equipment suitable for the task |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 34 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 35
The tenderer should provide details how the Contractor shall manage and carry out the removal of leaves, blossom and fruit fall at all affected Locations to include Cleansing methods, frequency of Cleansing and the details of how the standard is to be maintained. Details should be included of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be used. The tenderer should also include details of any dedicated resources, or additional resources to be employed during times of heavy falls.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the Services for the removal of leaves and blossom and fruit fall at all affected locations? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated awareness of the extent of leaf, blossom and fruit fall and the seasonal variations inherent in this work? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer provided details of staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be employed? |
|
4. |
Are the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and level of supervision appropriate for this type of service? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated innovation and inventiveness in their approach to removal of leaf and blossom fall? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer allowed sufficient resources for this work to avoid the workload impacting on regular cleaning? |
|
7. |
Has the tenderer considered environmentally friendly methods of disposal for leaves, blossom and fruit fall? |
|
8. |
Has the tenderer provided details of any dedicated resources, or additional resources to be employed during times of heavy falls? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 35 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 36
The tenderer should provide details of the Services for the removal of drug related Waste and hazardous Waste at all affected Locations to include cleaning methods, staff resources and expertise, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be employed. Within the submission tenderers shall detail how they will deal with flytipped Waste including procedures for the recognition, identification, collection and disposal of hazardous material, particularly asbestos and the procedures for recording / logging exposure of operatives/public.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with the removal of drug related and hazardous waste requirements within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated a thorough knowledge of the problems associated with the collection or removal, and disposal of drug related waste and hazardous materials? |
|
3. |
Are the tenderer's staff and supervisors trained and experienced in handling waste as detailed above? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer allowed sufficient resources for the proper handling and collection of such waste? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer allowed sufficient resources for the transport of such waste to proper disposal facilities? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer provided details on how they will deal with flytipping waste including procedures for the recognisant, identification, collection and disposal of hazardous material? |
|
7. |
Has the tenderer provided details of procedures for recording/logging drug related waste and hazardous waste? |
|
8. |
Has the tenderer identified the integration of the COSHH regulations within the Service? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 36 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 37
The tenderer should provide details of proposals for the removal of Waste from fly tipping, dead animals, etc at all affected Locations to include Cleansing methods, frequency of Cleansing, details of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be used.
The tenderer should provide details of proposals for the removal of Waste from fly tipping, dead animals, etc at all affected locations to include Cleansing methods and details of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment (including specialist equipment) and supervision to be used. Within the submission tenderers shall detail how they will deal with flytipped Waste in excess of one cubic metre. This should include procedures for the training and authorisation of employees, recognition, identification, collection and disposal of hazardous material, particularly asbestos and the procedures for recording exposure of Employees and members of the public. A risk assessment should be provided for the management of asbestos waste handing and disposal.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated an awareness of the level of fly tipping and the types and quantities of waste tipped? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer provided sufficient rapid response resources to deal with fly tipping, etc. without affecting regular cleaning operations? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer provided for equipment for fly tipping or spillages of a toxic or hazardous nature? |
|
4. |
Are the tenderer's staff and supervisors sufficiently trained and experienced in dealing with fly tipping or spillages of a toxic or hazardous nature? |
|
5. |
Does the tenderer's procedures include for the training and authorisation of employees, recognition, identification, collection and disposal of hazardous material, particularly asbestos, including recording exposure of Employees and members of the public? |
|
6. |
Do any of the tenderer's staff and supervisors have COSHH training or experience? |
|
7. |
Has the tenderer provided for equipment to deal with large-scale incidents of fly tipping of, for example, rubble or tyres? |
|
8. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated sufficient consideration of the disposal of various types of waste and dead animals? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 37 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 38
The tenderer should provide details of the Services for the removal of graffiti and fly posters at all affected Locations to include cleaning methods, staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be employed.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with the removal of graffiti and fly poster requirements within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Is the proposed level of service adequate and appropriate? |
|
3. |
Have sufficient resources been allocated to provide the required level of service? |
|
4. |
Is the proposed type of equipment suitable for the task? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer identified the integration of the COSHH regulations within the Service? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 38 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 39
The tenderer should provide details of the Services for traffic island cleaning to include cleaning methods, staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be employed.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with the traffic island cleansing requirements within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Is the proposed level of service adequate and appropriate? |
|
3. |
Have sufficient resources been allocated to provide the required level of service? |
|
4. |
Is the proposed type of equipment suitable for the task? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 39 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 40
The tenderer should provide details of the Services for special events to include details of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision that would be employed.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with special event cleansing requirements within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Is the proposed level of service adequate and appropriate? |
|
3. |
Have sufficient resources been allocated to provide the required level of service? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer indicated what steps will be taken to identify when special events will take place? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 40 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 41
The tenderer should provide details of the Services for emergencies and the proposed rapid response team, to ensure that all items listed in the Contract can be responded to within the time periods as stated, to include details of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision that would be employed.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with the emergency and rapid response cleansing requirements within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how they will ensure that a response can be made within the stated time period? |
|
3. |
Is the proposed level of service adequate and appropriate? |
|
4. |
Have sufficient resources been allocated to provide the required level of service? |
|
5. |
Does the tenderer detail those persons contacted to be available to respond In the event of an emergency? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 41 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 42
The tenderer should provide details of the Service for Cleansing of promenade Locations, both during summer (1st April to 30th September) and winter (1st October to 31st March) periods, to include methodology and frequency of Cleansing. Details should also be included of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be used. The tenderer should also include details of any special arrangements for Bank Holiday Weekends and during school holidays.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with the promenade cleansing requirements within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Is the proposed level of service adequate and appropriate? |
|
3. |
Have sufficient resources been allocated to provide the required level of service? |
|
4. |
Is the proposed type of equipment suitable for the task? |
|
5. |
Does the tenderer provide suitable arrangements for Bank Holiday Weekends and during school holidays? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated awareness of the extent and seasonal variations inherent in this work? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 42 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 43
The tenderer should provide details of the Service for the management of sand and tidal debris, to include details of the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be used.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with the management of sand and tidal debris requirements within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Is the proposed level of service adequate and appropriate? |
|
3. |
Have sufficient resources been allocated to provide the required level of service? |
|
4. |
Is the proposed type of equipment suitable for the task? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated awareness of the extent for the management of sand and tidal debris? |
|
6. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated innovation and inventiveness in their approach to removal of sand and tidal debris? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 43 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 44
The tenderer should provide details of the proposed Service for the gritting of zone 1 Town Centre areas as detailed in Appendix 9.9.1 to include application methods, staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be employed.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with the gritting of zone 1 town centre requirements within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Are the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and level of supervision appropriate for this type of service? |
|
3. |
Is the proposed level of service adequate and appropriate? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 44 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 45
The tenderer should provide details of the proposed Service for Street washing areas as detailed in Appendix 9.9.1 to include methodology, staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be used.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with the street washing requirements within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Are the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and level of supervision appropriate for this type of service? |
|
3. |
Is the proposed level of service adequate and appropriate? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 45 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 46
The tenderer should provide details of the proposed Service for the management of abandoned shopping trolleys, to include methodology, staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and supervision to be used.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of how the Services will deal with the abandonment of shopping trolleys within the Borough? |
|
2. |
Are the staff resources, vehicle types, equipment and level of supervision appropriate for this type of service? |
|
3. |
Is the proposed level of service adequate and appropriate? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 46 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Evaluation Criteria: Technical (2.58%)
Method Statement 14
The tenderer should demonstrate how they will use Information and Communications Technology (ICT) to deliver a high quality service throughout the Contract period. Tenderers should explain how their proposed system will integrate with the Council's own systems.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided clear details of the information communication technology systems to be used as part of the service delivery? |
|
2. |
Will proposed equipment link with existing or proposed Council owned systems and has the reliability of the proposed systems been established? |
|
3. |
Will the tenderer's proposals enable customers to provide feedback via simple, user-friendly systems? |
|
4. |
Will the proposed Information and Communications Technology (ICT) enable effective and efficient communication between the Council and the Contractor? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer provided examples of similar systems that they currently operate successfully elsewhere? |
|
6. |
Are the tenderer's proposals sufficiently detailed, realistic and achievable? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 14 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 22
The tenderer should detail how they will cost effectively increase recycling performance over the period of the Contract, including proposals for the means by which they could seek or assist the Council in seeking external sources of funding.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided recycling plans and proposals for achieving and exceeding the Council's recycling performance requirements? |
|
2. |
Do the plans include full details of implementation and timescales? |
|
3. |
Do the proposals result in any reduction in service immediately after commencement date? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer provided proposals for the reuse and recycling of Bulky Household Waste? |
|
5. |
Are the proposals realistically achievable? |
|
6. |
Are the proposals innovative and inventive? |
|
7. |
Do the proposals increase recycling performance cost effectively? |
|
8. |
Has the tenderer provided proposals that explore all available options? |
|
9. |
Has the tenderer outlined how external funding can be integrated into the contract? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 22 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Evaluation Criteria: Technical/Environmental (1.94%)
Method Statement 24
The tenderer should demonstrate how they would work with the Council to achieve the highest possible resale value from recovered material to include promotional activity, the collection system, staff training and quality control.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the manner in which recyclables will be handled/collected? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer submitted details of vehicles that will support the recycling operation? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated a working knowledge of the collection of recyclables? |
|
4. |
Has the tenderer provided details of the planned promotional activity together with examples of the communication methods that will be employed? |
|
5. |
Has the tenderer provided clear details of the training that all staff involved in recycling collections will receive together with examples of supporting literature? |
|
6. |
Do the tenderer's proposals demonstrate how they will work with the Council? |
|
7. |
Will the proposed methods achieve the highest possible resale value from the recovered material? |
|
8. |
Are there any other methods, systems or techniques that the tenderer should have included within their proposal? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 24 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Method Statement 27
The tenderer should provide details of how working methods might be adapted in order to conform to the requirements of any legislative changes that may come into force during the Contract Period. It should be made clear that such requirements will be the subject of future negotiation and should not be included within the tender submission price.
No |
Question |
Score |
1. |
Has the tenderer demonstrated a through working knowledge of current legislation and its impact on the service? |
|
2. |
Has the tenderer shown that he understands the impact of current legislation on service provision? |
|
3. |
Has the tenderer shown adequate cognisance of planned and proposed legislation and the effect it will have on service provision? |
|
Overall Score for Method Statement 27 (0-5) |
|
|
No. |
Points of Clarification |
|
|
Final Scores
MS |
Method Statement Summary |
Evaluation |
Average |
Weight |
Weighted |
Actual |
2 |
Key risks associated with the Contract |
Ability |
|
|
|
|
4 |
Alternative proposals for alternative working methods or the incorporation of technological innovation. |
Ability |
|
|
|
|
5 |
Partnering proposals |
Ability |
|
|
|
|
1 |
Experience and track record |
Ability |
|
|
|
|
6 |
National and local level management structure |
Ability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
Environmental policy |
Environmental |
|
|
|
|
26 |
Encouraging participation in recycling and developing waste minimisation and education initiatives |
Environmental |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
Arrangements for transferring staff |
Policy |
|
|
|
|
13 |
Implementation of policy and strategy |
Policy |
|
|
|
|
15 |
Personnel matters |
Policy |
|
|
|
|
12 |
Complaints Procedure |
Policy |
|
|
|
|
16 |
Health and safety issues |
Policy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
Performance Management System |
Quality |
|
|
|
|
7 |
Joined up working |
Quality |
|
|
|
|
11 |
Consultation framework |
Quality |
|
|
|
|
17 |
Quality assurance |
Quality |
|
|
|
|
19 |
Benchmarking/ best value |
Quality |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
Rapid response team |
Service |
|
|
|
|
8 |
Depot facilities |
Service |
|
|
|
|
9 |
Service Mobilisation |
Service |
|
|
|
|
20 |
Waste and Recycling Operations |
Service |
|
|
|
|
21 |
Waste & Recycling Resources |
Service |
|
|
|
|
23 |
Waste disposal facilities |
Service |
|
|
|
|
25 |
Hazardous wastes |
Service |
|
|
|
|
28 |
Cleansing service Operations |
Service |
|
|
|
|
30 |
Cleansing Services |
Service |
|
|
|
|
31 |
Shopping areas |
Service |
|
|
|
|
32 |
Cleansing of Entries |
Service |
|
|
|
|
33 |
Litter Bins |
Service |
|
|
|
|
34 |
Car Parks |
Service |
|
|
|
|
35 |
Leaves |
Service |
|
|
|
|
36 |
Drug Related Waste and Hazardous Waste |
Service |
|
|
|
|
37 |
Fly Tipping, dead animals |
Service |
|
|
|
|
38 |
Graffiti, fly posters |
Service |
|
|
|
|
39 |
Traffic Island |
Service |
|
|
|
|
40 |
Special events |
Service |
|
|
|
|
42 |
Promenade cleansing |
Service |
|
|
|
|
43 |
Sand and Tidal debris |
Service |
|
|
|
|
44 |
Gritting Zone 1 |
Service |
|
|
|
|
45 |
Street washing |
Service |
|
|
|
|
46 |
Shopping trolleys |
Service |
|
|
|
|
29 |
Vehicles, equipment and resources |
Service |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
Information technology and communications |
Technical |
|
|
|
|
22 |
Increase recycling performance |
Technical |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
Maximising resale value of recovered materials |
Technical/Environmental |
|
|
|
|
27 |
Working methods resulting from legislative changes |
Technical/Environmental |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|||
Note:
Actual Relative Score D = Weighted Score (C) * |
Points Available (500) |
|
Total of Weightings (Y)* Maximum Score (5) |
Page 9 |
|||
|
|
|
|
Wirral Borough Council Tender Evaluation Model |
|
February 2006
|
|
www.gordonmackie.net |
Gordon Mackie Associates Ltd |
Page 10 |
|||
|
|
|
|
Wirral Borough Council Tender Evaluation Model |
|
February 2006
|
|
www.gordonmackie.net |
Gordon Mackie Associates Ltd |
Page 12 |
|||
|
|
|
|
Wirral Borough Council Tender Evaluation Model |
|
February 2006
|
|
www.gordonmackie.net |
Gordon Mackie Associates Ltd |
Page 17 |
|||
|
|
|
|
Wirral Borough Council Tender Evaluation Model |
|
February 2006
|
|
www.gordonmackie.net |
Gordon Mackie Associates Ltd |
Page 18 |
|||
|
|
|
|
Wirral Borough Council Tender Evaluation Model |
|
February 2006
|
|
www.gordonmackie.net |
Gordon Mackie Associates Ltd |
Page 74 |
|||
|
|
|
|
Wirral Borough Council Tender Evaluation Model |
|
February 2006
|
|
www.gordonmackie.net |
Gordon Mackie Associates Ltd |