Tutorial

---

Operating Entities: CAs and EOs

eProcurement.System toolkit based on OCDS 1.1 and, according to standard, it is required (and enough) to describe any Legal Entity using standardized ‘Organization’ object. Such data-set permits to operate and create data by such organization. But since toolkit as such covers more wide range of process and needs more data to be collected for a range of different purposes (starting from pre-selection and, for example, prediction of conflicts of interest on the early stages up to issuing of valid electronic contract and its execution) it should be clarified that more data-fields for specific Legal Entity (either CA or EO) should be extracted on different stages of operating or once - centralized on registration stage.

Extended ‘Organization’ model

For the needs of a more detailed identification of the organization, as well as the disclosure of data of such an organization for the purpose of global disclosure of information about the contract process or its parts, additional classification data, public registries data and so on shall be recorded. In particular, in the electronic procurement system in the Republic of Moldova for the preparation of an electronic contract, a whole set of such data for the selected supplier has to be provided along with standard data-set collected according to ‘Organization’ object.

For Economic Operator

Initial profile (registration of bid)

Attribute				OCDS attribute	Default
A	Entity Role			roles	supplier, auto-generated
B	Entity Short Name			name
C	Entity National identifier			Identifier according to IDNO register
C	1	Register code		identifier.scheme	MD-IDNO
C	2	Identifier		identifier.id
C	3	Legal Name		identifier.legalName
D	Entity Legal Address
D	1	Country
D	1	1	Classifier code	address.addressDetails.country.scheme	iso-alpha2
D	1	2	Identifier	address.addressDetails.country.id
D	1	3	Description	address.addressDetails.country.description
D	2	Locality
D	2	1	Classifier code	address.addressDetails.locality.scheme	CUATM
D	2	2	Identifier	address.addressDetails.locality.id
D	2	3	Description	address.addressDetails.locality.description
D	3	Region
D	3	1	Classifier code	address.addressDetails.region.scheme	MD-CUATM
D	3	2	Identifier	address.addressDetails.region.id
D	3	3	Description	address.addressDetails.region.description
D	4	Postal Code		address.postalCode
D	5	Street Address		address.streetAddress

Complete profile (contract preparation)

Attribute						OCDS attribute	Default
E	Type of supplier					details.typeOfSupplier
F	Classification of scale					details.scale
H	Main economic activities					details.mainEconomicActivities[]
I	Legal form of organization
I	1	Classifier code				details.legalForm.scheme	MD-CFOJ
I	2	Identifier				details.legalForm.id
I	3	Description				details.legalForm.description
J	State registration details
J	1	Date of registration				details.permits.validityPeriod.startDate
J	2	State registry no				details.permits.id
J	3	Register code				details.permits.scheme	MD-SRLE
K	Related Entities
k	1	Parent Entities
K	1	1	Register code
K	1	2	Identifier
k	1	3	Description
K	2	Branches
K	2	1	Register code
K	2	2	Identifier
K	2	3	Description
K	3	Consortiums, Unions, etc
K	3	1	Register code
K	3	2	Identifier
K	3	3	Description
L	Related Personnels
L	1	Authority
L	1	1	Title			persone.title
L	1	2	Full Name			persone.name
L	1	3	Business function
L	1	3	1	Function
L	1	3	1	1	code	persone.businessFunction.type	authority
L	1	3	1	2	description	persone.businessFunction.jobTitle
L	1	3	2	Period of validity		persone.businessFunction.period
L	1	3	3	Proxy legal basis
L	1	3	3	1	id	persone.businessFunction.document.id
L	1	3	3	2	url	persone.businessFunction.document.uri
L	1	3	3	3	name	persone.businessFunction.document.title
L	1	4	Identification number
L	1	4	1	Register code		persone.identifier.scheme	MD-IDNP
L	1	4	2	Identifier		persone.identifier.id
L	1	4	3	Description		persone.identifier.description
L	2	Authorized Representative
L	2	1	Full name			contactPoint.name
L	2	2	E-mail			contactPoint.email
L	2	3	Telephone			contactPoint.telephone
M	Permits and licenses
M	1	Register code				details.permits.scheme	MD-SRL
M	2	Identifier				details.permits.id
M	3	Description				details.permits.description
M	4	Details
M	4	1	Issued by			details.permits.permitDetails.issuedBy
M	4	2	Period of validity			details.permits.permitDetails.validityPeriod
M	4	3	Issued thought			details.permits.permitDetails.economicActivityReference
N	VAT status of organization
N	1	Register code				additionalIdentifiers.scheme	MD-VAT
N	2	Identifier				additionalIdentifiers.id
O	Bank Reference
O	1	Bank Name				details.bankAccount.bankName
O	2	Bank code
O	2	1	Register Code			details.bankAccount.identifier.scheme	MD-BNM
O	2	2	Identifier			details.bankAccount.identifier.id
O	3	Details (branch num, etc)				details.bankAccount.description
O	4	Bank address
O	4	1	Country
O	4	1	1	Classifier code		details.bankAccount.address.addressDetails.country.scheme	iso-alpha2
O	4	1	2	Identifier		details.bankAccount.address.addressDetails.country.id
O	4	1	3	Description		details.bankAccount.address.addressDetails.country.description
O	4	2	Locality
O	4	2	1	Classifier code		details.bankAccount.address.addressDetails.locality.scheme	MD-CUATM
O	4	2	2	Identifier		details.bankAccount.address.addressDetails.locality.id
O	4	2	3	Description		details.bankAccount.address.addressDetails.locality.description
O	4	3	Region
O	4	3	1	Classifier code		details.bankAccount.address.addressDetails.region.scheme	MD-CUATM
O	4	3	2	Identifier		details.bankAccount.address.addressDetails.region.id
O	4	3	3	Description		details.bankAccount.address.addressDetails.region.description
O	4	4	Postal Code			details.bankAccount.address.postalCode
O	4	5	Street Address			details.bankAccount.address.streetAddress
O	5	Settlement account
O	5	1	Classifier code			accountIdentification.scheme	MD-IBAN
O	5	2	identifier			accountIdentification.id

---

For Contracting Authority

Initial profile (registration of the contract notice)

Attribute				OCDS attribute	Default
A	Entity Role
B	Entity Short Name
C	Entity National identifier
C	1	Register code
C	2	Identifier
C	3	Legal Name
D	Entity Legal Address
D	1	Country
D	1	1	Classifier code
D	1	2	Identifier
D	1	3	Description
D	2	Locality
D	2	1	Classifier code
D	2	2	Identifier
D	2	3	Description
D	3	Region
D	3	1	Classifier code
D	3	2	Identifier
D	3	3	Description
D	4	Postal Code
D	5	Street Address
E	Classification of type of organization
F	Main General Activity
G	Main Sectoral Activity
H	Classification according to GPA
I	1	GPA Annex
I	1	1	Classifier code
I	1	2	Identifier
I	1	3	Description
J	2	GPA Sub-annex
J	2	1	Classifier code
J	2	2	Identifier
J	2	3	Description

---

Complete profile (contract preparation)

Attribute						OCDS attribute	Default
K	Legal form of organization
K	1	Classifier code
K	2	Identifier
K	3	Description
L	State registration details
L	1	Date of registration in registry
L	2	State registry no
L	3	Branch (subsidiary) unit code
L	4	Authorization number
M	Related Entities
M	1	Parent Entities
M	1	1	Register code
M	1	2	Identifier
M	1	3	Description
M	2	Branches
M	2	1	Register code
M	2	2	Identifier
M	2	3	Description
M	3	Consortiums, Unions, etc
M	3	1	Register code
M	3	2	Identifier
M	3	3	Description
N	Related Personnels
N	1	Contracting Authority
N	1	1	Title
N	1	2	Full Name
N	1	3	Business function / role
N	1	3	1	Function
N	1	3	1	1	Classifier code
N	1	3	1	2	Identifier
N	1	3	1	3	Description	Job title
N	1	3	2	Period of validity
N	1	3	3	Proxy legal basis
N	1	4	Identification number of person
N	1	4	1	Register code
N	1	4	2	Identifier
N	1	4	3	Description
N	2	Procurement Officer
N	2	1	Full name
N	2	2	E-mail
N	2	3	Telephone
O	VAT status of organization
O	1	VAT code if applicable
P	Bank Reference of organization
P	1	Bank Name
P	2	Bank code
P	2	1	Register Code
P	2	2	Identifier
P	2	3	Reference description
P	2	4	Bank address
P	2	4	1	Country
P	2	4	1	1	Classifier code
P	2	4	1	2	Identifier
P	2	4	1	3	Description
P	2	4	2	Locality
P	2	4	2	1	Classifier code
P	2	4	2	2	Identifier
P	2	4	2	3	Description
P	2	4	2	4	Region
P	2	4	2	5	Classifier code
P	2	4	2	6	Identifier
P	2	4	2	7	Description
P	2	4	3	Postal Code
P	2	4	4	Street Address
P	3	Settlement account

---

ESPD in MTender

1. The below MTender ESPD self-declaration form replaces the requirement for the candidates and

the tenderers to provide up-front evidence or certificates by allowing EOs to self-declare that they:

do not fall within a ground for exclusion from procurement procedure (min qualification requirements);

meet the relevant contract-specific qualification requirements;fulfil the objective selection criteria and rules set up by the CA in order to reduce the number of candidates in procurement procedure by preselecting best candidates among all candidates qualified in accordance to qualification requirements as prescribed in the contract notice.

2. A set of standardised minimum qualification requirements aligned to the relevant sections of the MTender ESPD form shall be used to define minimum qualification requirements in the contract notices.

3. The MTender ESPD form consist of the following sections:

Part I

Information concerning the procurement procedure and the contracting authority – Registration Form of the contracting entity.

Part II

Information concerning the economic operator – Registration Form of the economic operator

1. Information about the economic operator.
2. Information about representatives of the economic operator
3. Information about reliance on the capacities of other entities, including members of consortium, subcontractors or other third parties
4. Information concerning subcontractors on whose capacity the economic operator does not rely

Part III

Minimum qualification requirements (eligibility and exclusion grounds):

1. Grounds relating to criminal convictions.
2. Grounds relating to the payment of taxes or social security contributions.
3. Blacklisting.
4. Grounds relating to insolvency, conflicts of interests or professional misconduct.

Part IV

Contract-specific qualification requirements (selection criteria). Prescribed by CA in the contract notice, may be answered in the Tender Form

1. Suitability
2. Economic and financial standing
3. Technical and professional ability
4. Quality assurance schemes and environmental management standards
5. Global indication for all selection criteria

Part V

Reduction of the number of qualified candidates – Pre-selection (restricted tender and other procurement methods with scoring of qualified candidates). Prescribed by CA in the contract notice, may be answered in the Tender Form

Part VI

Legal Statements

---

Documents of ‘bid’: what “envelopes” means

Electronic bids shall be submitted to the MTender with a content and form as prescribed in the Contract Notice and in the Tender Documents, following standard forms and online submission procedure as prescribed in the terms of use of the MTender. The Economic Operator may be required to submit the Electronic bid packaged into one or several, together or subsequently, submitted specific electronic documents (the MTender ESPD Declaration for: minimum qualification requirements (ESPD I-III), contract-specific qualification requirements (ESPD IV), and selectrion criteria (ESPD V), Tender Form, Technical offer and Financial offer). In particular, the MTender ESPD Declaration may be required to be submitted as a separate Electronic document, if automated verification is possible. If required by the Client in the Contract Notice, electronic catalogues shall be submitted comprising together the Technical and Financial offer.

Envelopes

a. Submission Documents

• Tender Form
• If applicable, Tender Security
• If applicable, Manufacturer’s Authorisation
• If applicable, Professional Insurer
• If applicable, Bank Guarantee for Advance Payment

b. Commercial offer (technical)

• Letter of Acceptance of Technical Specifications
• List of proposed subcontractors (NOT in the ESPD)
• Letter of Acceptance of Contract Terms and Conditions
• If applicable, Contract Performance Security
• If applicable, Preliminary Programme of Works, Services or Delivery of Goods
• If applicable, Site Organisation and Method Statement for Works

c. Commercial offer (financial)

• Price Schedules
• Bill of Quantities
• If applicable, Electronic catalogue

d. Eligibility documents

• Eligibility Information Sheet – ESPD I-III
• If applicable, Consortium Information Sheet – ESPD I-III for each member of consortium
• If applicable, Third Parties Information Sheet – ESPD I-III for each third party

e. Qualification documents

• Economic Operator Qualification Forms - ESPD IV-VI
• Financial Situation
• Financial Resources
• Average Annual Turnover
• Average Annual Contract Specific Turnover
• General Experience
• Contract Specific Experience
• Equipment
• Personnel
• Managerial Personnel

Disclosure rules

1. Upon expiry of submission deadlines, the MTender shall generate automatically an electronic document with a record of opening of Electronic bids in the electronic tendering procedure (1.Submission Documents and 4.Eligibility Documents), disclosure Tender Forms in accordance to Article 62 of the Law and release Electronic bids for examination by the Tender Committee, except for cases of unsuccessful electronic tendering procedures, where no bids or no minimum number of bids required by the Law were submitted
2. An electronic tendering procedures with award criteria of lowest price, lowest cost or price and quality ratio where award of contract has been made with electronic auction, the Electronic documents of the Electronic bid other than disclosed during the bid opening session (2.Commercial offer_Technical, 3.Commercial offer_Financial, 5. Qualification documents) shall be initially disclosed only for the Economic Operator who submitted the winning bid in the electronic reverse auction
3. Upon completion of the electronic auction, the MTender shall disclosure online the Electronic documents of the Electronic bid of the Economic Operator who submitted the winning bid in the electronic auction. In the event that this Economic Operator is not determined to be qualified to perform the Contract (failed on 5. Qualification documents) or the Technical Offer is determined to be substantially non-responsive to the Tender Documents  and the Electronic bid has been rejected by the decision of the Tender Committee (failed on 2.Commercial offer_Technical), the MTender shall disclosure for the evaluation the second ranked bid from the auction, and so forth
4. In electronic tendering procedures with award criteria of lowest price and lowest cost without electronic auction to award the Contract, the MTender shall initially disclosure the Electronic documents (2.Commercial offer_Technical, 3.Commercial offer_Financial, 5.Qualification documents) of the Electronic bid of the Economic Operator with the lowest price or the lowest cost provided for in the Tender Form. In the event that the Economic Operator that has submitted the lowest price or the lowest cost is not determined to be qualified to perform the Contract (failed on 5. Qualification documents) or the Technical Offer is determined to be substantially non-responsive to the Tender Documents (2.Commercial offer_Technical, 3.Commercial offer_Financial) and has been rejected by the final decision of the Tender Committee, subject to the right of complaint of the Economic Operator, the MTender shall unlock for the evaluation the second ranked bid and so forth
5. In electronic tendering procedures with award criteria of price and quality ratio and without the electronic reverse auction to award the Contract, upon expiry of the submission deadlines the MTender shall initially disclosure for examination the MTender ESPD Declarations of the Economic Operators who submitted bids (5.Qualification documents), which should be, whenever possible, supported by automated services of the MTender. In the event that any ESPD declaration is identified as containing mandatory grounds for the exclusion of the Economic Operator, the Economic Operator shall be disqualified, unless clarifications are furnished in due course in accordance to procedure provided in the Tender Documents. When decision of the Client on qualification and disqualification is recorded and notified on the system, the MTender shall simultaneously disclosure the Electronic documents of all Electronic bids submitted by qualified Economic Operators for evaluation of Technical and Financial Offers (2.Commercial offer_Technical, 3.Commercial offer_Financial)

---

Evaluation Committee

The process of evaluation of tenders is generally carried out by a suitably competent evaluation panel. A chairperson is usually appointed to lead, coordinate, give guidance and control the process of evaluation of tenders. The chairperson is responsible, inter alia, for ensuring that the process of evaluation of tenders is carried out in accordance with the general law and Treaty principles as well as local requirements. A secretary to the evaluation panel, generally with non-voting powers, is often appointed for the purposes of providing support to the chairperson, carrying out the administrative tasks linked to the evaluation process, and keeping the minutes of each meeting.

The way in which the members of the evaluation panel operate - for example whether they assess the tenders independently or jointly - depends on local legislation or local practice.

In principle, the evaluation panel normally has only the mandate to identify the best tender and to make a recommendation as to the award of the contract to the contracting authority.

In order to declare an evaluation panel member, PE while preparing a Contract Notice can add specific information about each person to be included into evaluation panel.

Declaration of absence of conflict of interests

"Member States shall ensure that contracting authorities take appropriate measures to effectively prevent, identify and remedy conflicts of interest arising in the conduct of procurement procedures so as to avoid any distortion of competition and to ensure equal treatment of all economic operators. The concept of conflicts of interest shall at least cover any situation where staff members of the contracting authority or of a procurement service provider acting on behalf of the contracting authority who are involved in the conduct of the procurement procedure or may influence the outcome of that procedure have, directly or indirectly, a financial, economic or other personal interest which might be perceived to compromise their impartiality and independence in the context of the procurement procedure."

EU24/2014 Article 24. Conflicts of interest

Types of conflict

• "Conflict of interest" means any situation where an individual has an interest that may compromise or be reasonably perceived to compromise the individual’s capacity to act independently and in the public interest when providing advice to the Commission in relation to the subject of the work performed by the expert group or sub-group in question.
• "Immediate family member" means the individual’s spouse, children and parents.
• "Spouse" includes a partner with whom the individual has a registered non marital regime.
• "Children" means the child(ren) the individual and the spouse have in common, the own child(ren) of the individual and the own child(ren) of the spouse.
• "Legal entity" means any commercial business, industry association, consultancy, research institution or other enterprise whose funding is significantly derived from commercial sources. It also includes independent own commercial businesses, law offices, consultancies or similar.
• "Body" means a governmental, international or non-profit organisation.
• "Meeting" includes a series or cycle of meetings.

References

• Standard declaration of interests (DOI) form for individuals applying to be appointed as members of Scientific Committees' Working Groups in a personal capacity
• Template declaration of absence of conflict of interest and confidentiality (6.5)
• Identifying conflicts of interests in public procurement procedures for structural actions
• Conflicts of Interest under EU procurement law

Scoring function - structured criteria of evaluation

To achieve MEAT, the buyer can use a scoring function by defining a set of criteria, its available options and values of such options to determine the total available weight of all components of bid and background of evaluation.

The scoring function enables the buyer to articulate its preferences regarding the various attributes which are made public to all tenderers within Contract Notice published.  And the Tenderers use this scoring function to value specific configurations and thus can understand how changes to the various attributes will affect the overall desirability of the bid.

Scoring function is a combination of the applied requirements together with conversions (group of coefficients related to each predefined or allowed valueof each requirement) for the Procurement Process under Contract Notice plus redefined formula which will be applied (automatically or manually) to calculate normalized price.

Creating a tender, Procuring Entity determines key fields of the yet-to-be announced procurement, uploads tender documentation, with the requirements to the subject of procurement indicated as that which determines winner evaluation criteria. Within such criteria in case of using of scoring function Procuring Entity defines:

• set of criteria
• set of values available for each defined criterion
• set of coefficients for available values, applicable once specific value is selected
• mathematical formula to be used in the electronic auction to determine automatic re-rankings on the basis of the new prices and/or new values submitted

Criteria

Set of criteria may include different types of requirements, used in different ways and for different reasons. Moreover, some used criteria may be prescribed by the legal basis “by default” (exclusion grounds of ESPD or particular chapters of selection grounds from ESPD, like General yearly turnover).

Types of criteria

Under each Contracting Process Procuring Entity may define and apply various types of criteria for the scoring function. These different types are the following:

Exclusion grounds

A group of these criteria are eligibility criteria put forward by the Procuring Entity to the candidates - all of them are published in the Contract Notice and relate to the whole procedure.

   Full list of applicable exclusion ground described by ESPD part III

Selection criteria and minimum requirements

The group of these criteria is also eligibility criteria, but it is optional for the Procuring Organization to apply for the tender. The criteria allow determining the quantitative and qualitative criteria for candidates for participation in the procedure.

   Full list of applicable exclusion ground described by ESPD part IV

Allowances

The group of these criteria is the award criteria and should be taken into account by the Procuring Organization in cases determined by the relevant law, which also defines a set of such criteria and their values. Examples include the following criteria:

• The proposal of the candidate-resident of the country of jurisdiction receives a reduction factor
• The proposal of a candidate-resident of the country of jurisdiction if such candidate is an organization in the category of SMEs receives a reduction factor of price.

Non-price criteria

The group of these criteria is the award criteria and can be applied by the PEn in the case of the Most Economic Advantages Tender strategy. MEAT is recognized as winning according to the following criteria:

• in case of contracts for public procurement of goods - the price, delivery time, payment terms, profitability, quality, aesthetic, functional and technical characteristics, capabilities and cost of technical assistance and maintenance;
• in the case of contracts for public procurement of works - the proposed quality, the cost per unit of product of the bidder by the end of the work, the total price, the experience of the bidder, etc. The share of the price in the total evaluation of the offers should not be less than 80 per cent;
• in the case of contracts for public procurement of services - the proposed quality, the cost per unit of the offeror’s products, the total price, the experience of the bidder, etc. The price share in the total evaluation of the offers should not be less than 40 per cent.

So depending on the category of procurement, the PE can determine a set of non-price criteria (quantitative and qualitative) which will be taken into account along with the price part of the offer and affect the absolute economic value of the entire tender proposal of the participant, increasing his chances to win the tender, do not lower the price (suggesting the most favorable economic conditions).

Criterion values

Each of the described requirements may or may not be associated with a set of available values. For example, Exclusion Grounds available as ‘true/false’ flags and no other options. And Selection or Non-price criteria usually contains not only default or minimum requirements but also other values, available for the tenderers’ choice.

Where this is the case, Procuring Entity obliged to specify in advance:

1. values and the coefficients which will be the subject of electronic auction, provided that such values are quantifiable and can be expressed in figures or percentages
2. limits on the values which may be submitted, as they result from the specifications relating to the subject of the contract  
3. mathematical formula to be used to determine automatic rankings of bids received

Conversions

For those requirements associated with a set of available values, each value from a predefined set (or available according to described pattern) has to be associated with related weighting coefficient. This coefficient is a numeric value which will be applied under math formula of the scoring function of evaluation used under this contracting process to calculate an absolute economic value of each offer received.

Formulation of the offer according to defined scoring function: structured bid

Having a set of requirements defined by Procuring Entity and a number of values available, tenderers by preparing their offers, include the values for each requirement, reflecting the substance of the offer and fulfilling general corporate profiles’ data requested by Procuring Entity or required by the Legal Framework of particular jurisdiction. While submitting their proposal tenderers also fill the non-price parameters — values for specific verifiable tenderer attributes of the offer.

During the following evaluation all these specified values will become the subject of competition, provided that such features are quantifiable and can be expressed in figures or percentages.

Each submitted offer includes:

• organization profile according to the extended ‘organization’ model
• absolute value of the amount of price offer
• decomposed set of unit prices (if requested by Procuring Entity)
• set of documents of the offer, specified with relevant types of documents for their future splitting into the different "envelopes"
• set of requirement responses according to criteria specified by Procuring Entity within Contract Notice:

• commitment on exclusion grounds
• commitment on selection criteria (including absolute values if applicable)
• commitment on minimum technical requirements (including absolute values if applicable)
• set of values for non-price criteria (if applicable)
• set of values for subject specification (if applicable)

Ranking for evaluation

As it's shown in the table below, automated ranking can be undertaken using a set of criteria and the relevant conversions applied by PE for each available value of each applied requirement and published in a Contract Notice on one hand. And the requirement responses submitted by each EO against published criteria on another hand. These two data-sets allows to calculate normalized value for each bid based on the same approach.

	price only	cost only	quality only	rated criteria
scoring function applied	ranking based on absolute value of the amount of price offer	ranking based on absolute value of the amount of price offer considering set of values for quantifiable criteria by Procuring Entity (non-price criteria)	ranking based on values for quantifiable and qualifiable criteria by Procuring Entity (technical requirements, non-price criteria, criteria on a subject specification)	ranking based on absolute value of the amount of price considering set of values for quantifiable and qualifiable criteria by Procuring Entity (technical requirements, non-price criteria, criteria on a subject specification)
scoring function not applied	-	-	-	-

Normalized price

Where normalized price to be calculated - the following formula to be applied for each offer in order to identify most suitable by normalized price:

Pn = P * C1 * C2 * ... Cn 

where:

• Pn - value of normalized price
• P - basic price taken from bid received for specific lotor equal to '1' in case of ‘cost only’ and ‘quality only’ award criteria
• C1 ... Cn - values of the coefficients to be applied (related with a values of requirements, available for EO and indicated in requirement responses inside each particular bid)

Ranking approach

Depending on award criteria and availability of scoring function initial automated ranking can or can not be done:

price only

Where awardCriteria: priceOnly - only bid.value to be compared in order to identify most suitable offer - cheapest goes first

cost only

Where awardCriteria: costOnly - assumption is that all the tenderers have the same bid.value equal to lot.value. It means that the normalized price needs to be calculated for each bid received based on lot.value as a basis. Cheapest goes first

quality Only

Where awardCriteria: qualityOnly - assumption is that the price doesn't matter and the only valuable part of the bid is a quality - meaning set of values of criteria, selected by EO while submitting a bib. It means that the normalized price needs to be calculated for each bid received based on '1' as a basis. Cheapest goes first

rated criteria

Where awardCriteria: ratedCriteria - assumption is that both price and valuable part of the bid are matters. It means that the normalized price needs to be calculated for each bid received based on 'bid.value' as a basis. Cheapest goes first

Background functionality

Main Procurement category identifying

In order to determine whether the subject matter of the procurement are goods, services or works you need to check the first two digits from the CPV code. As described above the CPV consists of nine digits. The first two digits identify the divisions (XX000000-Y). The identification of procurement whether it is goods, services or works is based on the first two digits of the CPV (which identify the division).

• If the CPV’s first two digits are from 03-44, 48 it means that the subject of procurement are supplies.
• If the CPV’s first two digits is 45 it means that the subject of procurement are works.
• If the CPV’s first two digits are from 50-98 it means that the subject of procurement are services.

Initial budget validation

To be provided

Automated eligibility check

To be provided

---

Brief processes overview

Budgeting

Budgeting phase is a stage where CA should assess and define the scope of his needs as well as disclose and describe existing fundings for each defined need. With this description CA will allow system to validate all future contracting processes from assessed needs and available funding perspective as well as control and disclose the progress of execution of this or that expenditure item, analyzing planned and announced procedures, conducted and executed or/and terminated contracts and made transactions.

Definition of needs

All needs could be divided into separate expenditure items - groups of needs united under common classification and procuring period for each specific buyer. For example: buyer needs to procure 25 different kinds of furniture (on this stage - doesn't matter which exactly) during the next year - all these needs are expenditure item «Furniture» under CPV-code 391. Thus, from a technical point of view such groups, expenditure items, are aggregated data-sets, based on common CPV-code and budget period (most often - year)

Each defined expenditure item, on an annual financial plans’ level, has available fundings. Thus, the next step of budgeting is a description of such available fundings. The ‘amount’ available under this expenditure item for this period is the sum of all sources of funding and its amounts, identified for this expenditure item.

Budget allocation

Either CA is funded via Treasury or has own funds, all these funds could be described with a unified model: funding source itself is a set of meta-data and quantitative values describe its volume, period of availability, source of fundings, rules of spending, responsible entities and so on as well as permitted target area - the classification of subject for which this specific budget can be spent.  

This classification of subject together with period of availability of fundings could be used as a reference for parent expenditure item - their common indicative attributes that allow CA to «connect» set of funding sources under single expenditure item for some predefined period (budget period of EI that should cover all periods of availability of all joined FSs).

Differentiation of funding from source perspective

To be provided

Initial budget validation

To be provided

---

Planning

Once the EI and its FSs defined and described, CA is able to plan and schedule needed procurements - contracting processes for this subject classification - CPV group. Particular EI should be indicated as a ground (meta-parent) of future contracting process.

Depending on CAs procurement strategy, Periodic Notice (PN) or Prior Information Notice (PIN) could be prepared and published. Within this notice (PN or PIN) allocated by CA himself budget must be specified as a set of identified from the list of available under used EI funding sources together with allocated amounts - separate for each selected FS^[e]. The sum of all specified amounts of all indicated funding sources is a maximum available budget of future contract that will be conducted under this contracting process.

Provisional evaluation panel

Provisional set of Procuring Entity evaluation panel could be announced on the planning level. This set can be changed later on a Contract Notice preparation level.

One-stage competitive procedure (Micro, RPQ, Open)

Depending on the type of procedure, method of procurement, geography and the legal basis, the attribute composition of the model can be adjusted, but its general logic remains unchanged for all types of procedures.

The contracting process based on competitive procedure is commonly carried out in the following sequence:

Business Process Diagram (go to https://goo.gl/bdUhh6)

Announce a tender

Creating a tender, CA determines key fields of the yet-to-be announced procurement, uploads tender documentation, with the requirements to the procurement object indicated as that which determines winner evaluation criteria.

Scoring function implementation

To achieve MEAT, Procuring Entity can use a scoring function by defining together with a regular common information a set of criteria, its available options and coefficients of such options to determine the total available weight of all components of bid and background of evaluation.

Criteria

Set of criteria may include different types of requirements, used in different ways and for different reasons. Moreover, some used criteria may be prescribed by the legal basis “by default” (exclusion grounds of ESPD or particular chapters of selection grounds from ESPD, like General yearly turnover).

   Read more about criteria under scoring function

Conversions

Where scoring function to be applied, a set of verifiable conversions needed for future ranking and evaluation.

   Read more about conversions for scoring function

Evaluation panel

Set of Procuring Entity evaluation panel could be announced or updated (if some changes or replacements took place since PN for this contracting process was published and evaluation panel was expressed there).

   Read more about PEs' evaluation committee

---

Clarification period

Clarification period is separately distinguished in the procurement procedure during which participants can ask questions regarding the procurement requirements, demand issue resolution, and submit a claims, while CA can provide answers to questions and introduce changes into the procurement conditions (according to the rules and limitations below). The duration of the clarification period and offer submission is determined by CA but in any case can not be less than those prescribed by Law.

Suspending of procedure

Any accepted enquiries which have no relevant clarification provided by CA before ‘enquiryPeriod.endDate’ suspend the start of next phase of contracting process - submission period.

Unsuspending of procedure

After the publication of the CAs’ clarifications, procedure is unsuspended automatically with prolongation of ‘enquiryPeriod’ according to the rules, prescribed by Law.

Future steps

In addition to existing opportunity to ask questions about the procurement procedure, any user in the system (except Procuring entity) can contact Procuring entity and make a Violation elimination claim about the tender conditions. The Procuring entity has prescribed period to review the claim and make a decision on it. During this period the Procuring entity must publish a response to the claim and (in the case of complaint satisfaction) amend the appropriate procurement conditions or awarding procedure results.

Complaint submission

Complaints on conditions received during clarification period transfer to the official Review body. After the complaint submission, a representative of the Review Body checks whether all requirements are fulfilled and carried out. If so, complaint is accepted for review. Otherwise, it is rejected.

Complaint withdrawal

At any time before the publication of the Review body’s decision, the complainant can withdraw his complaint.

Standstill period

The duration of the applicable standstill period following a challenge or complaint of tenders’ conditions or actions taken by the Procuring Entity that are allegedly not in compliance with the provisions of the Law.

Reviewing

To indicate the results of review of accepted complaint, representative of Review Body must specify the results via changing of status of reviewed complaint together with contribution of additional needed information.

• If the complaint was dismissed by Review body, standstill period of such complaint ends
• If the complaint was satisfied by Review body, the Procuring entity carries out the decision under its own responsibility, there are no additional automatic control means. Carried out decision marked with ‘satisfied’ state by CA himself indicates that prescribed judgments of Review Body are satisfied and complaint is complete.

---

Amendments or additional information

The Public Sector Directive in its introduction regulates the circumstances where modifications to a contract notice while it is being carried out are possible without a requirement to start a new tender process.

Future steps

Permitted or non-significant modifications of contract notice during their term – then new procurement procedure is not required.

Prohibited or substantial modifications of contract notice during their term – new procurement procedure required.

How to handle contract modifications        

---

Submission of the offers

Once the clarification period is over the CA can no longer introduce changes into the Contract Notice. Economic Operators submit offers that are confidential.

Requirement responses for automated ranking and evaluation

Having a set of requirements defined by Procuring Entity and a number of values available, tenderers by preparing their offers, include a values for each requirement, reflecting the substance of the offer and fulfilling general corporate profiles’ data requested by Procuring Entity or required by the Legal Framework of particular jurisdiction. While submitting their proposal tenderers also fill the non-price parameters — values for specific verifiable tenderer attributes of the offer.

   Read more about structured bids

Modifications

An Economic Operator may modify its electronic bid by submitting online within submission deadlines a new information regarding previously submitted offer in accordance to the electronic submission procedures.

Withdrawal

An Economic Operator may withdraw his electronic bid by submitting online within submission deadlines a request for cancellation of previously submitted offer.

Substitution

An Economic Operator may substitute his electronic bid by submitting online within submission deadlines a request for cancellation of previously submitted offer and the new electronic bid in accordance to the electronic submission procedures.

---

Reverse Auction

Single unique link for each scheduled electronic auction will be available in Public Point. Depending on access-mode (with or without token) this link might work as:

• individual link of the participant, who accesses his personal page via this link and participates in the auction.
• public link to the auction which can be published anywhere for viewers, who use this link to observe.

Preparation of the auction

Date and time of the auction are determined by the BPE automatically, once the Contract Notice is published. Platforms have to inform their users about the upcoming auction beginning date. If no participant is registered (or only one bid received) after the end of the tender period, the system automatically changes the process status to ‘unsuccessful’.

   Note that electronic auctions (if included) are held for each lot separately

If more than one participant is registered, the system activates the e-Auction module. Those participants who registered their offers for this particular procurement can participate in the auction. All the other users, including the CA of this process, can observe how the auction develops. Once the Auction is established, the NEPPs are granted access to the auction web-page for participant access provision to the auction.

Then the auction-phase ends

Once all established under single submission stage electronic auctions end partially disclosure of all the Information on tenderers and their bids occur. Such partially disclosed information includes all the data except financial offer digitalization (financial envelope). This granularity will be disclosed only for single qualified offer during the evaluation process.

   Information disclosure on tenderers occurs once the last auction in this process is completed

---

Evaluation and identification of the procurement winner

Once the submission period is over and participants can no longer submit or update their bids, the system will disclose all submitted bids.

In case if after submission period end there is nothing to disclose (no bids were submitted) or all submitted bids failed, the system will automatically change this specific lot of this contracting process to status “unsuccessful”.

Where enough number of bids received during the tendering period, the system will generate a set of qualification envelopes (awards) and launch the awarding period for this contracting process.

Eligibility check

Automated check

System will automatically verify eligibility (based on data available via external bus) of each tenderer whose bid was disclosed according to rules of dispatch under the current procurement method.

   Read more about automated eligibility check

Manual check

Where automated check is not available, Procuring entity shall provide an eligibility check manually. Depending on award criteria applied, the system will disclose either eligibility documents only or full package of documents submitted by EOs within their bids.

   Read more about envelopes disclosure rules

System will allow PE to check eligibility of the candidates against initially announced criteria in any order.

The financial part of bids of those candidates who passed eligibility check will go to the technical evaluation. All the others who failed eligibility check are excluded from evaluation.

Initial ranking for evaluation

Depending on award criteria applied system will rank eligible bids and suggest them in order of admissibility: from the most to the least acceptable by applicable criteria. This automated ranking is undertaken using a set of criteria and the relevant conversions applied by PE for each available value of each applied requirement and published in a Contract Notice on one hand. And the requirement responses submitted by each EO against published criteria on another hand.

   Read more about initial ranking according to the scoring function

Technical evaluation

CA sequentially reviews bids that are eligible starting with declaration of non conflict of interest beginning with first ranked by the system.

Declaration of non-conflict of interests

Due to requirements of declaration of non conflict of interest by evaluation panel members against each tenderer for each bid to be evaluated, the system will generate relevant requests for each evaluation panel member declared by Procuring Entity within Contact Notice.

Each initial or new (in case of replacement) member of the evaluation panel shall submit relevant responses in order to  confirm an absence of conflict of interest for each tenderer (legal entity) in each bid received for evaluation by panel.

Since this is a declaration following Open Government Principles, this action does not block the evaluation process. It means that technically Procuring Entity can pass this stage and start the evaluation without declarations by evaluation panel members. But this PEs decision will be reflected in the system and published for public access.

Technical consideration

Evaluation panel considers technical compliance according to the award criteria methodology applied and a scoring function (where included). If the most acceptable bid is in compliance with the CA’s technical requirements, PE determines this offer as a qualified and goes to the next step - financial evaluation. If it is not, PE confirms his decision to disqualify the participant and declines such an offer. Then the system suggests to qualify the next offer from the acceptance perspective.

Financial consideration

Evaluation panel considers financial compliance according to the award criteria methodology applied and a scoring function (where included). If a qualified offer is in compliance with the CA’s financial requirements, PE determines this offer as a winner. If it is not in compliance, CA confirms his decision to disqualify the offer on this (evaluation) stage, and declines such an offer. Then the system suggests to qualify the next offer from the acceptance perspective.

If all the offers were declined by PE either on qualification step or on evaluation and upon the completion of complaining process (review period) this specific lot of this contracting process automatically changes to ‘unsuccessful’.

Evaluation Protocol

Once a winner is selected for each lot, CA submits the evaluation protocol which, in its turn, indicates the end of the awarding process. As a result of submission of evaluation protocol, the system will automatically generate a set of Contract Award Notices for each awarded lot, change evaluation stage to ‘awarded’ and launch the complaining process - review period.

Tender/lot cancellation

According to Public procurement standard forms guidance 2017-06-23 (version 1.1) Corrigendum is no longer used to inform about cancelled* (i.e. incomplete or unsuccessful) procedures. This is done by using the contract award notice, where non-award can be indicated, per lot, in section V.1.

If contracting bodies wish to inform the market about their plan to cancel a procedure beforehand then they can advertise this at EU level using a сorrigendum notice. In this case, they should add a text announcing the intent to cancel ("The contracting authority or entity intends to repeal this notice.") in the "Other additional information field" (VII.2) and explain the reasons. After the standstill period has elapsed, they should announce the formal cancelation through the contract award notice as usual (with possibly repeating the reasons for the cancellation in the "Additional information field" (VI.3)).

   CA can cancel either procedure or separate lot anytime before its completion

---

Review period

Review period is a time-slot during which the decision of the procuring entity to award a contract or cancel competition under separate lot or all the contracting process can be challenged. All the tenderers whose offers were reviewed by PE are able to claim on such made decisions. This review period is the same for all the  tenderers.

Future steps

If any complaints were received and accepted for review during the review period, the system automatically establishes standstill period for each received complaint separately.

Complaint submission

Complaints on made decisions received during the review period transfer to the official Review body. After the complaint submission, a representative of the Review Body checks whether all requirements are fulfilled and carried out. If so, complaint is accepted for review. Otherwise, it is rejected.

Complaint withdrawal

At any time before the publication of the Review body’s decision, the complainant can withdraw his complaint.

Suspending of procedure

Such accepted complaints block the opportunity to run contracting step (publish a contract with the winner) and suspend all evaluation stage via establishing of special time-slot: system automatically establishes standstill period for each complaint received and accepted for review.

Standstill period

The duration of the applicable standstill period following a challenge or complaint of decisions or actions taken by the Procuring Entity that are allegedly not in compliance with the provisions of the Law.

Reviewing

To indicate the results of review of accepted complaint, representative of Review Body must specify the results via changing of status of reviewed complaint together with contribution of additional needed information.

• If the complaint was dismissed by Review body, standstill period of such complaint ends
• If the complaint was satisfied by Review body, the Procuring entity carries out the decision under its own responsibility, there are no additional automatic control means. Carried out decision marked with ‘satisfied’ state by CA himself indicates that prescribed judgments of Review Body are satisfied and complaint is complete.

Unsuspending of procedure

After the publication of the Review body’s decision with the status “dismissed” procedure is unsuspended automatically. Satisfied complaints should be changed by CA to ‘complete’ state.

---

Concluding an agreement

As soon as either review period or all established standstill periods expired, CA will prepare and publish the concluded agreement for signing and verification.

Preparation

Once review period ends, the system automatically generates a set of drafts of future awarded contracts (AC) - separate draft for each determined winner. CA updates these drafts with actual needed data (required according to local rules) and, once all such updates are done, CA indicates this contract is fully prepared for signing. System automatically generates PDF of needed contract based on received data and standardized template. Such pdf-document will be put to the ‘documents’ section of specific contract and all this contract will be switched to  ‘ready for signing’ state. Thereafter, signing and validation process starts

Signing

Validation

Activation

At this point, the awarding process is completed, and no further actions are required. The evaluation phase goes to ‘complete’ state and all the contracting process goes to ‘execution’.

Future steps:

Implementation

Transactions

---

Direct Award

CA is able to maintain the registration of information regarding single source procedures carried out of the eProcurement system and the execution of the process inside the system as well. Having entered the information regarding the procedure, CA enters information on the winner and the agreement.

The procurement process is carried out in the following sequence:

Business Process Diagram (go to https://goo.gl/kLQ58b)

Publication of a decision on intent to conclude an agreement

CA publishes the concluded agreement and enters information regarding the EO immediately. This information is published as a report on the concluded agreement. It is not possible to submit a complaint at this point.

Entering information on EO on the basis of the concluded agreement

CA enters information on EO on the basis of the concluded agreement. Editing is possible only until the report activation made by CA. Additionally CA notes compliance with qualification criteria for a certain EO on the agreement. Once the EO is determined, no further actions are performed by the CA.

Concluding an agreement

Once the EO information is entered, CA can publish the concluded agreement. Conclusion of agreement, report on the introduced changes into the agreement, and execution of agreement are executed in the following way:

1. Changes of the agreement’s status to active or terminated, should be certified with EDS as a matter of course.
2. Entering information on the agreement is optional. Upon affixation of EDS, CA can finish the procedure (complete).

Procedure completion

Once the agreement was uploaded and EDS added, the procedure automatically changes to ‘complete’ status.

---

Contract execution

Amendments and extensions

Contracting parties that are not subject to the public procurement rules enjoy the freedom to modify contracts. As long as they are able to reach an agreement, the contract may be amended as they see fit. Contracting authorities subject to the public procurement rules are in a different position. When a public contract needs to be modified, the starting assumption is that the modification will trigger the requirement for a new competitive public tender process.

It is not generally permitted for a contracting authority and an economic operator to agree to change an existing contract. The terms of the concluded contract should reflect the commitments made in the offer that was selected as the most economically advantageous. Ideally, if contracts are well founded, they should be performed without modifications. Where an existing contract is altered by an agreement, there is a risk that other economic operators lose an opportunity to compete for what is effectively a new opportunity. The agreement to change the contract will be a breach of the principles of transparency and equal treatment. The procurement rules seek to prevent this type of behaviour, which can distort the market.        

In practice, however, the limited modification of an existing public contract can be necessary. Contracting authorities and economic operators might be faced with legitimate situations that require changes in the contract. Practical examples include situations where price indexes have changed, genuine unforeseeable circumstances have occurred, or technical difficulties have arisen during the operation or maintenance phase of a contract.

The Public Sector Directive explicitly regulates the circumstances where modifications to a contract or framework agreement while it is being carried out are possible without a requirement to start a new tender process.

Permitted or non-substantial modifications of contract notice during their term – then new procurement procedure is not required                                        

Under the Directive, modifications of the contract (or framework agreement) are permitted without having to conduct a new procurement procedure, but within very strict boundaries and only in specified situations. In general, contracts may be modified when the modifications are not substantial. What constitutes a substantial modification is explained below. In Article 72, the Directive sets out six permitted, or non-substantial, modifications of a contract during its term.

1. 1. Modifications expressly provided for in the initial procurement documents

Modification is permitted where it is expressly provided for in review clauses set out in the initial procurement documents. Review clauses can provide a certain degree of flexibility in the terms of the contract. Modifications to the contract cannot be permitted simply because they were mentioned in the procurement documents in advance.                

• Review clauses in procurement documents must be clear, precise and unequivocal
• Review clauses must not alter the overall nature of the contract                
• The monetary value of modifications made under this provision is irrelevant
• Review clauses must specify the scope and nature of possible modifications or options as well as the conditions under which they may be used

2. 2. Additional works, services or supplies

The above provision applies when the circumstances requiring a modification were foreseeable, but the contracting authority failed to foresee them or failed to provide for them for other reasons.

• Cumulative conditions apply to these modifications for additional works, services or supplies
• Any increase in costs should not exceed 50% of the value of the original contract
• A transparency requirement applies to this type of modification

3. 3. Modifications due to unforeseen circumstances

When an unforeseeable event occurs that requires a modification of the contract that would be disproportionate in terms of the continuation of the contract concerned and the costs associated with a procedure to award a new contract, the existing contract can be modified without a new procurement procedure.

• Circumstances that a diligent contracting authority could not foresee could justify a modification of contract
• The modification must not alter the overall nature of the contract
• A transparency requirement applies to modifications made under this provision
• The modification does not involve a price increase of more than 50% of the value of the original contract

4. Replacement of a contractual partner        

As a general rule, the replacement of a contractual partner constitutes a substantial modification of the contract. In line with the principles of equal treatment and transparency, another economic operator should not replace the successful tenderer without the contract being reopened to competition. However, the Directive treats the change of contractor as a non-substantial modification in three specific situations.

5. Low value (non-substantial) modifications
6. Other non-substantial modification

Procurement procedures without call for competition partially conducted out of the system

Introduction

The public procurement process in Moldova includes not only competitive procedures such as open procedures, but it is also possible to conduct negotiated procedures or to conclude a direct contract. Economic Operators (EOs) do not use the MTender system (the System) for non-competitive procedures or direct contracts and this document describes how to manage the recording of details of these offline procurement procedures in the System.

In these cases, the Contracting Authority (CA):

• publishes either a prior notice (PN) or an invitation for EOs to submit an (initial) offer;
• collects offers outside the System (during negotiations or through any other method of engaging EOs);
• reports on offers received by completing tender forms in the System;
• evaluates the offers received offline;
• reports through the System on selected EO(s).

This is a procedural use-case and no individual transactions are defined. Reference is made to other use-cases, in which the transactions and the transaction information requirements are listed and defined.

Scope

At the system level, it is necessary to implement several procedures based on the limited procurement method. These are:

Use-case 1 - Negotiated procedure without publication with a single or several EOs;

The CA has decided to establish a limited procedure and invites one or a number of EOs to participate in negotiations, sending them invitation(s):

• The CA makes the tender documentation available to the invited EO(s);
• The EO decides whether to participate or not in the negotiation:
• No communication from the EO is required if the decision is not to participate;
• If the decision is to participate, the EO sends an initial offer to the CA.
• The CA conducts negotiations with the EO(s) and, if an agreement is reached by all parties, the CA starts the preparation of the contract by publishing the contract award decision in a Contract Award Notice (CAN(s)). If agreement is not reached, the CA terminates the procedure due to the unsuccessful (negative) outcome.

Use-case 2 - Limited procedure with all the interested EOs invited to express their interest:

• The CA makes the tender documents available to all:
• The EO decides whether to participate or not in the negotiation:
• No communication from the EO is required if the EO decides not to participate in the negotiation;
• If the EO decides to participate, it is necessary to send an initial offer to the CA;
• The CA conducts negotiations with the EO(s) and, if an agreement is achieved by all parties, the CA starts the preparation of the contract by publishing the award decision in a CAN(s). If agreement is not reached, the CA terminates the procedure due to the unsuccessful (negative) outcome.

Use-case 3 - Reporting of a direct award using a contract award notice

The CA has concluded a contract offline and intends to report it in the System:

• The CA concludes a direct contract outside of the System with a selected EO;
• The EO decides whether to participate or not in the negotiation:
• The CA prepares a contract conclusion report by publishing the initial scope and conditions of the concluded contract, as well as the information regarding the selected EO together with the justification of the choice.

Business processes

The following diagrams show the sequence of the business processes implemented under the three use-cases described above and defines the sequence of interactions.

Common flow of a limited procedure

This Business Process Model Notation (BPMN) covers the common flow of the procurement procedure based on a limited procurement method:

Preparation of invitations

This BPMN covers the preparation and publication of information about the selected EOs to be invited to future negotiations:

Indication of an EO selected for direct award

This BPMN covers the preparation and publication of information about the EO selected for a direct award procedure:

Publication of a list of EOs whose initial offers have been selected for negotiations

The BPMN covers the preparation and publication of information about EOs whose initial offers were selected for future negotiations:

Filling in a form about tendering result

This BPMN covers the publication of the initial offers received from either all interested or invited EOs. The same BPMN covers the publication of the final offer for a contract in the case of direct award. The CA is responsible for the process here, and has the task of manually filling in a tendering report form in the System according to the tender documents published within the CN / invitation:

Negotiations

This BPMN covers the details of negotiations on the initial offers received from either all the interested or invited EOs, as well as the results of negotiations for each offer received:

Completion of negotiations / reporting

The BPMN reflects the results of negotiations and the final offers agreed by all the parties involved, as well as the notification by a CA that a contract has been awarded to a particular EO:

Technical design

In order to implement each use case in accordance with its’ BPMN in the System, the technical aspects described in this section should be taken into consideration.

Preparation of an initiation for prior publication

Since the general flow of a procurement process based on a limited procurement method remains the same as for competitive procedures, the preparations for initial publication are the same.

At the same time, during the initiation of a procurement process, several crucial parameters shall be determined as follows:

Command model attribute	negotiated procedure without publication with single or several EOs	negotiated with publication with single or several EOs
tender.procurementMethod	limited	limited
tender.procurementMethodDetails	da	np

As mentioned above, these types of procedures are not time-driven and do not contain explicit periods for clarification or the submission of proposals via the System. In other words, the publication of a contract notice in these procedures is static and, in some cases, voluntary e.g. negotiated procedure without publication.

4.1.1 State-chart diagram

The lifecycle of the procedures based on a limited procedure method consists of the following states:

From	To	Trigger
-	awaiting	Procedure is initiated and offers are expected
awaiting	lackofOffers
awaiting	cancelled
awaiting	awarding
awaiting	awarded
awaiting	cancelled
awarded	contractPreparation
contractPreparation	execution
execution	complete

Dealing with EOs

A contracting process based on limited procurement methods doesn't involve any active online participation of either invited or selected EOs. This difference from the competitive procedure brings a technical difference at the implementation level, since for these procedures there will be no bids received from EOs (invited or selected) via the System, as all the information regarding communication between the CA and the EOs is offline and isolated in an award object in the System.

This means that the CA must issue an “award” envelope (or a number of these) in order to:

• invite (simultaneously or sequentially) a certain list of candidates for further negotiation;
• communicate that an EO has been selected for a future direct contract;
• publish (simultaneously or sequentially) the list of EOs whose commercial offers have been selected for negotiations.

Inclusion of the invitations into a prior publication

In the case of a negotiated procedure without prior publication (assuming that all candidates are already briefed and ready for negotiations), the CA needs to include the invitations of selected EOs for future negotiations. To do that, after the prior publication of conditions for future negotiations has been published (see section 4.1), the CA shall add a list of awards for each such EO (BPMN 3.2) to be invited.

Publication of a list of EOs whose initial offers were selected for negotiations

In the case of a negotiated procedure with prior publication (assuming that the CA allows any interested EO to submit their expression of interest and an initial offer for future negotiations), the CA needs to include a list of initial offers selected for future negotiations. To do that, after the prior publication of conditions for future negotiations have been published (see section 4.1), the CA shall add a list of "awards” for each such EO (BPMN 3.4) according to one of the following strategies:

• simultaneously, in case the CA wants to publish an entire list of selected EOs for future negotiations and conduct such negotiations separately with each of the selected EOs ‘one by one’;
• sequentially, in case the CA wants to add selected EOs one-by-one, conduct negotiations and, in case of a negative result, reject the EO, add following one and continue the process until a winner is selected.

Indication of an EO selected for direct award

In the case of a direct award (assuming that a contract has already concluded), the CA needs to add information about the contracted EO together with the conditions and the value of the concluded contract in the System. In order to do that, after the prior publication of conditions for a future contract (see section 4.1), the CA shall add an award for the contracted EO (BPMN 3.3).

Completing a form on negotiations result / awarded contract

In the case of a negotiated procedure, with or without prior publication, the CA shall complete a form in the System reflecting the substance of the offers either invited or selected for negotiations, for each previously issued “award”. The data added to the System is the following:

• List of responses (where applicable) by EOs against the requirements set by the CA;
• any documents related to negotiations;
• date when negotiations took place;
• an internalID for these negotiations (if applicable);
• results of negotiations: whether decision to award a contract is positive or negative.

Indication of negotiations result / direct award

The CA can indicate the decision for each offer received (including any negotiations) by updating a relevant award in the System with the following attributes:

• any textual description;
• any documents related to negotiations;
• date when negotiations took place;
• an internalID for these negotiations (if applicable);
• results of the negotiations: whether a decision to award a contract is positive or negative.

Completion of negotiations

The negotiations process ends with the submission of a protocol that reflects the entire results of the negotiations (BPMN 3.7). Once negotiations are completed and each negotiated offer is indicated with a state, the CA submits the negotiations protocol which, in its turn, indicates the publication of the decision. Such protocols have to be submitted for each lot awarded separately.

Initiation of a contract

See MTender tutorial

Cancellation of a procedure or lot

See MTender tutorial

Command models

The following command-models are to be used in order to operate with data-objects under offline procedures based on a limited procurement method.

createCNonPN.limited.offline

In order to describe and produce a CN for a procedure based on a limited procurement method, the following structure should be used:

Attribute	Description
tender.title	Title for this part of CP
tender.description	Description for this part of CP
tender.awardCriteria	Specify the award criteria for the procurement
awardCriteriaDetails	Specify the award criteria details for the procurement
tender.lots	A tender process is divided into lots
tender.items	The goods and services to be purchased
tender.submissionMethod	The goods and services to be purchased
tender.submissionMethodRationale	A value that identifies the rationale where electronic submission method is not to be allowed
submissionMethodDetails	Any detailed or further information on the submission method.
tender.documents	All documents and attachments related to the tender, including any notices.

createAward

See below the command model for the creation of a new award, based on the ocds-definition of award object:

Attribute	Description
suppliers	The party, or parties, responsible for this award.
value	The total value of the award
description	Description of an award
relatedLot	Identifier of a lot related to this award

updateAward

In order to submit a decision via publication of updates of a generated award notice, the following standard data-model should be used:

Attribute	Description
statusDetails	The party, or parties, responsible for this award.
documents	The total value of the award
description	Description of an award
internalID	Identifier of a lot related to this award

Tutorial

This step-by-step tutorial in this section explains how to use both the (Central Database Unit) CDUs’ command and query APIs in order to fulfil all the aforementioned requirements and perform all the functionality covered by the use-cases.

Pre-conditions

The contracting process for the limited procedures begins the same way as for any other procurement method: from the line in the annual procurement plan (PIN or simplified PN) based on the need described and the sources of financing declared for this need.

Getting started

The following tutorial shows step-by-step a sequence of all actions and requests a contributor (NEPP) needs to conduct throughout the entire process covered by the use-cases.

Create a CN

To prepare a CN for a procurement procedure based on a limited method previously created (cpPhase.PN) in order to be updated with all the data according to a relevant command model.

Get X-OPERATION-ID

According to the MTender tutorial, for the identification of an operation before starting and, in particular, for the preparation of a CN, a unique operations’ identifier, X-OPERATION-ID shall be requested:

Registration of documentation

According to the MTender tutorial, the CA can register documents:

Send a request for the creation of a CN

To introduce a new CN for a procurement procedure based on the limited method createCNonPN.limited command, a model should be used for the preparation of POST-request for BPE with the following parameters:

Within this command, the information needed for future automated evaluation can be expressed:

• • Evaluation panel

A set of CA evaluation panel could be announced. In future steps, this information could be used for the establishment of the automated evaluation flow.

• • Award criteria

The set of criteria may include different types of requirements, used in different ways and for different reasons.

• • Conversions

Where a scoring function is to be applied, a set of verifiable conversions might be needed for future ranking and evaluation of bids.

Feed Point Response

As a result of the command execution, a separate ocds-record is formed in the system describing the Contract Notice created. The system will inform the contributor with the following message:

Upload documentation

Having both the documents registered and the cpPhase.CN.limited created, the CA can upload documents according to the MTender tutorial. Document uploading is an iterative process.

Request full result

Once all previous actions are finalised, the newly created CN is now available in a Public Point:

Introduce an award

Get X-OPERATION-ID

Having a prior publication of conditions for future negotiations published, the CA needs to add a list of awards for each EO invited. These invitations should be published together with the conditions within one single publication.

Publication of a list of EOs whose initial offers were selected for negotiations

In the case of a negotiated procedure with prior publication, the CA publishes a CN in order to collect expressions of interest from all the interested parties (EOs). Once initial offers are received by the CA (offline), the CA shall select the most suitable and publish them by adding a list of awards for each EO selected.

Indication of an EO selected for direct award

In the case of reporting on a direct award, the CA needs to indicate the EO selected to be awarded the direct contract by adding a relevant award.

Get X-OPERATION-ID

Add an award

In order to introduce a new award object, the standard createAward command-model should be used for the preparation of a POST-request for BPE with the following parameters:

do/award/cpid/ocid?lotID

Where

• ○ cpid - OCID of parent Contracting Process (cProcess)
• ○ ocid - OCID of a process phase (cpPhase)
• ○ lotID - identifier of specific lot where award to be created

Feed Point Response

As a result of the command execution, an award object in status:pending is created in the system describing the invitation of a specific EO to the procurement procedure. The system will inform the contributor with the following message:

Request full result

Once an award is added, an invitation is now available in a Public Point as an attribute of a CN and it becomes available for the CA for further negotiations.

All other invitations can be added here in the same way at any time, depending on the methodology applied by the CA and the specifications of the procedure (with or without lots, with or without negotiations, etc.).

An award section is included to the initial query-model of the cpPhase. It will consequently include all the awards introduced with the initial status:pending according to a common flow by the MTender tutorial.

The creation of the very first award:pending, moves the procedure into the awarding state (according to the state-chart of cpPhase detailed above). Thus, awardPeriod is launched.

All entities sent with the introduction of each award as EOs will be included in initial parties of the cpProcess with the role `supplier`.

Comleting a form on tender result

In order to reflect either the results of negotiations or the intention to award a direct contract, the CA needs to switch each introduced award into one of the relevant statusDetails. If the negotiations are completed successfully and an agreement is achieved by the parties, the CA determines this award with award.statusDetails:active. Otherwise, the CA confirms his decision to reject the EO’s offer by sending an award:statusDetails:unsuccessful, and move on to the following selected EO (either previously introduced as a separate award or with the introduction of a new award object).

Get X-OPERATION-ID

Registration of documentation

The CA can register documents for this award update.

Request an award update

To update an award object, the standard updateAward command-model should be used for the preparation of a POST-request for BPE with the following parameters:

do/award/cpid/ocid/awardID

Where:

• ○ cpid - OCID of parent Contracting Process (cProcess)
• ○ ocid - OCID of a process phase (cpPhase)
• ○ awardID - identifier of specific award to be updated

Feed Point Response

As a result of the command execution, the relevant award is switched to another state, indicated by the CA in the request. The system will inform the contributor with the following message:

Upload documentation

The CA can now upload new documents of the CN:

Request full result

Once all previous actions are finalised, the newly updated award is available in a Public Point as a part of a relevant cpPhase:

Completion of negotiations

Once negotiations are completed and each negotiated offer is updated with a relevant state, the CA submits the negotiations protocol which indicates the publication of the decision.

Get X-OPERATION-ID

Submission of a protocol

In order to submit a negotiations protocol, a POST request with an indication of the following parameters has to be sent to BPE. Such evaluation protocol has to be submitted for each evaluated lot separately (in case of a multi-lot procedure):

do/protocol/cpid/ocid/lotID

Where:

• ○ cpid - OCID of parent Contracting Process (cProcess)
• ○ ocid - OCID of a process phase (cpPhase)
• ○ lotID - identifier of specific lot to be protocoled

Feed Point Response

As a result of the decision under each separate lot, a CAN associated with a particular lot will be automatically generated and published as an object inside the "contracts" section. Depending on the decision of the CA, different values of the statusDetails attribute will be set for the generated CANs:

• for a CAN under a lot where an EO was determined: statusDetails:active
• for a CAN under a lot where no EO was selected (this is, all bids were rejected): statusDetails:unsuccessful

The system will inform the contributor with the following message:

Awarding and completion of a procedure

The final actions by the CA in order to initiate the contract preparation and, consequently, the completion of a procedure, are described in the MTender tutorial.

Multi-criteria Online Real Time Automated evaluation

Introduction

This document provides the necessary information regarding the prequalification, qualification and evaluation phases of the procurement process.

The approach for prequalification and its related criteria (exclusion grounds and selection criteria) is based on the European Single Procurement Document (ESPD) and its data-exchange model based on the Core Criterion and Core Evidence Vocabulary (CCCEV) concept. This design allows for the future use of the ESPD service as a separate remote tool since the data models and definitions are the same.

The key aspects covered by this profile are:

• A Contracting Authority (CA) can use this profile to request the ESPD from Economic Operators (EOs) within the context of a procurement procedure.
• the profile can be used by the system services to request and/or reflect additional inputs, statements, agreed metrics, etc.

Beyond the scope of this profile are qualifications provided through a Virtual Company Dossier or through other qualification profiles containing the necessary evidence documents, as well as tendering.

Pre-conditions

• A procurement process is underway, which began from the line in the annual procurement plan based on a described need and the sources of financing declared for such a need;
• the CA is preparing all the necessary documentation prior to the tendering.

Background

Before the introduction of the ESPD in the EU Public Procurement Directive 2014/24/EC , EOs were required to submit a number of documents in order to provide up-front evidence or certificates (e.g. proof of payment of taxes, judicial records, etc.) when taking part in a procurement process.

Article 59 of the EU Public Procurement Directive 2014/24/EC introduces the ESPD, which is a self-declaration document intended to provide preliminary evidence in public procurement procedures. The ESPD replaces certificates issued by public authorities or third parties involved in a procedure, and its’ main objective is to reduce the administrative burden by removing the need to produce a substantial number of certificates and documentation related to exclusion and selection criteria, and simplify the participation in public procurement procedures for both CAs and EOs. Only the winner of the tender will be required to provide the actual documents and evidences in order to be able to begin the execution of the contract. The ESPD covers:

• The request document, which is used by the CA to set out the exclusion and selection criteria, as well as particular requirements, that the EO will need to fulfil in the context of a specific tender;
• The response document, which is used by the EO to answer the questions and provide references to evidences in response to the criteria and requirements expressed by the CA in the request document.

When the EO is not a sole contractor (e.g. when it is part of a group such as a consortium, or when relying on subcontractors), all EOs involved in the tender are required to provide an ESPD, although the information to be provided in the response document will depend on the role of each EO.

The ESPD benefits from the CCCEV, which harmonises criteria and evidence and helps to make decisions based on them.

ESPD

The ESPD self-declaration form replaces the requirement for the candidates and the tenderers to provide up-front evidence or certificates by allowing EOs to self-declare that they:

• Do not fall within a ground for exclusion;
• Meet the contract-specific qualification requirements and fulfil the objective selection criteria set by the CA.

The ESPD form is divided into the following sections:

• Part I: Information concerning the procurement procedure and the contracting authority or contracting entity, which contains:
• Information about publication
• Identification of the procurer
• Information about the procurement procedure
• Part II: Information concerning the EO, which contains:
• A. Information about the EO
• B. Information about representatives of the EO
• C. Information about reliance on the capacities of other entities (including members of a group such as a consortium or joint venture, subcontractors or other third parties)
• D. Information concerning subcontractors on whose capacity the EO does not rely (this is, when the EO intends to subcontract any share of the contract to third parties but does not rely on the capacities of these third parties in order to meet the selection criteria)

Part II applies only to the response document that the EO needs to fulfil.

• Part IV: Selection criteria, which contains:
• A. Suitability
• B. Economic and financial standing
• C. Technical and professional ability
• D. Quality assurance schemes and environmental management standards
• E. Global indication for all selection criteria (instead of options A-D)

Part IV allows CAs to set contract-specific pre-qualification requirements.

• Part V: Reduction of the number of qualified candidates.

Part V applies only for the response document that the EO needs to fulfil (except when the EO is an entity, the lead entity does not rely on in order to meet the selection criteria). Furthermore, the EO should only provide information when it is necessary in order to limit the number of candidates that will be invited to tender or to conduct a dialogue, as stated by the CA in the request document.

• Part VI: Concluding statements, which contain the legal statements of the document. In the response document provided by the EO, it shall also contain the date, place and signature.

CCCEV

The CCCEV is designed to support the exchange of information between organisations, defining eligibility criteria for the provision of public services and entities providing the necessary evidences to meet the criteria (e.g. citizens, businesses and other public agencies). It concerns, for example, the legislative criteria for EOs participating in public procurement, or the evidence that EOs have to provide to prove compliance with the criteria.

By using the CCCEV, public organisations have the potential to implement new capabilities in their information systems to:

• Allow the use of criteria from common repositories, standardising the criteria used in different sectors and domains;
• enable the automatic response to criteria, lowering the language barrier for cross-border processes and exchanges;
• enable automatic assessment through the analysis of criteria and evidence provided;
• promote the standardisation of criteria and evidence among attestation and certificate providers, and across different Member States;
• increase the transparency of the assessment and therefore the selection processes, reducing complaints and subjective assessment.

The CCCEV contains two basic and complementary core concepts:

• Criterion: Used as the basis for making a judgement or decision, e.g. a requirement set in a public tender or a condition that has to be fulfilled for a public service to be executed;
• Evidence: Proves that something else exists or is true. In particular, evidence is used to prove that a specific criterion is met by someone or something.

The ESPD uses a number of concepts and classes defined within the CCCEV model, such as:

• Criterion: Represents a rule or principle used to judge, evaluate or assess either an item or bidder. A criterion is satisfied when one or more of its requirement groups are satisfied;
• Requirement Group: A collection of one or more individual requirements. A requirement group is satisfied when all of its requirements are satisfied;
• Requirement: Atomic requirement which can be expressed as either an expected value or a range of accepted values.

For example, the ESPD uses the aforementioned concepts:

The CCCEV model can be used to express both AND conditions, where a group of requirements must be met to satisfy a criterion, and OR conditions, where there are alternative requirements that can satisfy a criterion.

Business requirements

According to BIS 41 - European Single Procurement Document (Trdm070 ESPD request transaction BRs), the following business requirements are to be fulfilled within this Profile:

Contracting Authority

ID	Requirement
tbr70-004	The CA must be able to indicate which criteria for exclusion and which qualitative selection specific types the EOs need to declare.
tbr70-005	Where a call for tender is divided into lots, the CA must be able to indicate for each individual lot, what selection criteria are to be fulfilled.
tbr70-006	The qualification document should contain contact information of the CA: Postal address, telephone number, fax number, e-mail address, contact person(s).

Call for tenders

ID	Requirement
tbr70-007	The ESPD must contain a reference to the call for tenders, i.e. the procurement project ID, which defines the requirements (i.e. criteria) for which this document is created and submitted by the EO. It must be possible to maintain this information in order to keep track of the connection between the request (call for tenders, ESPD template) and response (the ESPD).

Procurement lots

ID

Requirement

tbr70-08

The ESPD request may contain information about the procurement lots defined in a call for tender and indicate for each individual lot, what selection criteria are to be fulfilled. The CA shall also set the minimum yearly turnover that EOs are required to have if they tender for more than one lot. In this case, the CA shall provide a reference to the group of lots of the call for tender, to which the minimum turnover applies

List of criteria

ID	Requirement
tbr70-009	The ESPD template must contain information about the criteria that set the exclusion grounds.
tbr70-010	The ESPD template must contain information about the criteria that set the selection grounds.

ID	Requirement
tbr70-009	The ESPD template must contain information about the criteria that set the exclusion grounds.
tbr70-010	The ESPD template must contain information about the criteria that set the selection grounds.

Technical design

In order to implement this profile in the MTender system, the technical aspects described in this section are to be taken into consideration.

At the system level, it is necessary to implement a mechanism to include several types of criteria in tender documentation. These sets of criteria may include different types of requirements, which can be used in different ways and for different reasons. Moreover, some criteria may be prescribed on a legal basis “by default” (e.g. exclusion grounds of ESPD, particular parts of selection grounds from ESPD such as general yearly turnover).

For each specific tendering process, the CA shall be able to set the criteria that will be used for the qualification of bidders, covering different types of qualification criteria:

• Exclusion grounds. A group of these criteria include eligibility criteria put forward by the CA to the candidates. All of them are published in the Contract Notice (CN) and relate to the whole procedure.

Full list of applicable exclusion ground described by ESPD Part III

• Selection criteria. These criteria include eligibility criteria, and the CA must indicate which selection criteria will apply to each specific tendering process.

Full list of applicable selection criteria described by ESPD part IV

• Allowances. These criteria are the award criteria and should be taken into account by the CA in cases determined by relevant law, which also defines a set of such criteria and their values. Examples include the following criteria:
• The proposal of the candidate-resident of the country of jurisdiction receives a reduction factor;
• the proposal of a candidate-resident of the country of jurisdiction, if such candidate is an SMEs, receives a reduction factor of price.

Qualification criteria

Preparation of an ESPD and inclusion into a Notice

When preparing a CN within a procurement process, a separate criteria array is to be added into the tender building block in order to describe:

• Exclusion grounds;
• selection criteria and its minimum requirements;
• general and specific essential conditions of the future contract.

The Profile defines a flexible structure to express data about criteria. Based on this ocds_requirements_extension , it defines the component criterion, which is relevant in the ESPD-EDM V2.1.0 in order to implement the necessary objects for exclusion and selection criteria.

eOCDS-espd-add-ons_extension adds a number of additional attributes which are important and even required on a transactional level, but not covered by neither the aforementioned OCDS extension nor CCCEV on which ESPD data-model is based.

The eOCDS_evidences_extension adds a concept of evidence for both ESPD requests and responses.

Building blocks

Criteria

criterion represents the rule or principle used to judge, evaluate or assess something.

It is highly recommended that criteria are classified according to a Criteria Types Codelist in order to maintain an interoperable environment. The local taxonomy could also be applied as an additional classification.

Each criterion is supposed to be related to an object (tenderer, lot, item) and have a source from which a response is expected against all the requirements prescribed by this criterion. There are specific relatesTo and responseSource code-lists designed to cover this prescription.

Additionally, CAs are able to introduce requirements that are particular to the national legislation or the specific procurement procedure. The profile supports a relevant legislation attribute used to point at the legislation related to the criterion.

Requirement groups

requirementGroup is a set of requirements that must be fulfilled together in order to validate a criterion.

The requirement group is used to wrap the set of requirements that validate a criterion. All requirements belonging to a requirement group shall be validated for the requirement group to be considered valid.

When there is more than one Requirement group for a Criterion, at least one of them has to be positively validated for the Criterion to be considered fulfilled.

Requirements

A criterion can be expressed as a set of requirements where every requirement must be valid. A requirement is an atomic requirement when not it does not contain conjunctions and each part of it is expressed as a separate requirement. Some criteria can be expressed through several atomic requirements.

A requirement can specify the expected value that the response has to contain, or a range of threshold values within which the response has to fit in. The requirement may apply also to a certain period of time.

A list of candidate eligibleEvidences can be provided, which the responder can use in order to prove the fulfilment of the requirement.

Since a requirement can be changed or excluded in certain moments of the process according to a decision of the Review Body or the CA itself, the data-model of a requirement is extended with a number of additional attributes, responsible for the status of such a requirement and its crucial dates:

Command add-on

In order to describe and include a set of qualification criteria into a CN, the following structure has to be used as an add-on of a common createCNonPN command model:

Code	Attribute	Description
CMACN-032	tender.criteria[*]	ESPD Request
CMACN-033	tender.criteria[*].id	A language-independent token
CMACN-034	tender.criteria[*].title	A short and descriptive name for a criterion
CMACN-035	tender.criteria[*].description	An extended description of the criterion
CMACN-036	tender.criteria[*].source	Source of response to the requirements specified in the criterion Codelist: responseSource
CMACN-037	tender.criteria[*].classification.scheme	Name of taxonomy
CMACN-038	tender.criteria[*].classification.id	Identifier of this criterion according to taxonomy
CMACN-039	tender.criteria[*].additionalClassifications[*].scheme
CMACN-040	tender.criteria[*].additionalClassifications[*].id
CMACN-040	tender.criteria[*].relatesTo	The schema element that the criterion judges, evaluates or assesses Codelist: relatesTo
CMACN-041	tender.criteria[*].relatedItem	Id of the item which the criterion relates to
CMACN-043	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].id	The unique identifier for this requirement group
CMACN-044	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].description	A description of this requirement group
CMACN-046	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. id	The unique identifier for this requirement
CMACN-047	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. title	A short and descriptive name for a requirement
CMACN-048	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. description	An extended description of the requirement
CMACN-049	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. dataType	The data type in which the requirement response must be provided Codelist: dataType
CMACN-050	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. expectedValue	Used to state the requirement when the response must be particular value
CMACN-051	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. minValue	Used to state the lower bound of the requirement when the response must be within a certain range
CMACN-052	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. maxValue	Used to state the upper bound of the requirement when the response must be within a certain range
CMACN-053	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. period	Used to specify a particular period the requirement applies to
CMACN-054	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. period.startDate
CMACN-055	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. period.endDate
CMACN-056	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. period.durationInMonth
CMACN-057	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. period.duration
CMACN-061	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. classification.scheme	Name of taxonomy
CMACN-062	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. classification.id	Identifier of this requirement according to taxonomy
CMACN-063	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*]	A list of the evidences acceptable for this requirement
CMACN-064	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].id	Unique identifier of an eligible evidence template
CMACN-065	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].title	A title of an evidence template
CMACN-066	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].description	A short description of an evidence template
CMACN-067	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].type	Type of this evidence template Codelist: evidenceType
CMACN-068	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].relatedDocument	Where evidence supposed to be based on a template
CMACN-069	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].relatedDocument.id	Unique identifier of a template from tender.documents
CMACN-070	tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].relatedDocument.name	Name of the template

Validation rules

Code	Rule
CMACN-033	At least 1 entry MUST be included
CMACN-036	MUST be from related codelist
CMACN-037	MUST be found in MDM
CMACN-038	MUST be in declared scheme
CMACN-040	MUST be from related codelist
CMACN-041	MUST be found in scheme of this command model
CMACN-043	At least 1 entry MUST be included
CMACN-046	At least 1 entry MUST be included
CMACN-049	MUST be from related codelist
CMACN-050	MUST be in align with a dataType
CMACN-051	MUST be in align with a dataType
CMACN-052	MUST be in align with a dataType;
CMACN-052	MUST be higher than minValue (if applied)
CMACN-055	MUST be later than startDate (if applied)
CMACN-061	MUST to be found in MDM
CMACN-062	MUST to be in declared scheme
CMACN-067	MUST be from related codelist
CMACN-069	MUST be in tender.documents[*]

Example

See below an example of the requirements specified for both an item and a tenderer:

Query add-on

In order to reflect a set of qualification criteria in a CN, the following structure has to be used as an add-on of a common query model:

Attribute	Description
tender.criteria	Criteria applied in this procurement process
tender.criteria[*].id	A language-independent token
tender.criteria[*].title	A short and descriptive name for a criterion
tender.criteria[*].description	An extended description of the criterion
tender.criteria[*].source	Source of response to the requirements specified in the criterion
tender.criteria[*].classification.scheme	Name of taxonomy
tender.criteria[*].classification.id	Identifier of this criterion according to taxonomy
tender.criteria[*].classification.description	Human-readable description according to a taxonomy applied
tender.criteria[*].additionalClassifications[*].scheme	Name of additional taxonomy
tender.criteria[*].additionalClassifications[*].id	Identifier of this criterion according to additional taxonomy
tender.criteria[*].additionalClassifications[*].description	Human-readable description according to additional taxonomy applied
tender.criteria[*].relatesTo	The schema element that the criterion judges, evaluates or assesses
tender.criteria[*].relatedItem	ID of the item which the criterion relates to
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].id	The unique identifier for this group
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].description	A description of this requirement group
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. id	The unique identifier for this requirement
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. title	A short and descriptive name for a requirement
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. description	An extended description of the requirement
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. dataType	The data type in which the requirement response must be provided
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. expectedValue	Used to state the requirement when the response must be particular value
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. minValue	Used to state the lower bound of the requirement when the response must be within a certain range
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. maxValue	Used to state the upper bound of the requirement when the response must be within a certain range
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. period.startDate	Details of a period the requirement applies to
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. period.endDate	Details of a period the requirement applies to
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. period.durationInMonth	Details of a period the requirement applies to
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. period.duration	Details of a period the requirement applies to
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. status	Current state of a requirement
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. datePublished	Date when this requirement was initially published
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. dateModified	Date when this requirement was modified
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. classification.scheme	Name of taxonomy
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. classification.id	Identifier of this requirement according to taxonomy
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*]	A list of the evidences acceptable for this requirement
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].id	Identifier of an eligible evidence template
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].title	A title of an evidence template
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].description	A short description of an evidence template
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].type	Type of this evidence template
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].relatedDocument	Where evidence supposed to be based on a template
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].relatedDocument.id	Unique identifier of a template from tender.documents
tender.criteria[*].requirementGroups[*].requirements[*]. eligibleEvidences[*].relatedDocument.name	Name of the template

Scoring function

To achieve the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT), the buyer can use a scoring function by defining a set of evaluation criteria, as well as the options available and its possible values in order to determine the total weight of all components of the bid and the necessary background for the evaluation.

The scoring function enables the buyer to articulate its preferences regarding the various attributes which are made public to all tenderers within the published CN. Tenderers use this scoring function in order to calculate the value for specific configurations and, thus, they can understand how changing the different attributes of their tenders will affect the overall desirability of the bid.

The scoring function combines the evaluation criteria together with the weight assigned by the CA to each criterion, taking into account the predefined formulas in place that will be used (automatically or manually) in order to calculate the score of the bids. Therefore, the CA needs to provide:

• set of non-price criteria;
• set of values available for each defined non-price criterion;
• set of coefficients for available values applicable, once a specific value is selected;
• mathematical formula to be used in the electronic auction to determine automatic re-rankings on the basis of the new prices and/or new values submitted.

Expression of the non-price criteria

Non-price criteria are part of the award criteria and can be used by the CA in order to identify the MEAT within a procurement procedure. The MEAT will be recognized as the winning bid according to the following criteria:

• In the case of procurement of goods: the price, delivery time, payment terms, profitability, quality, aesthetic, functional and technical characteristics, capabilities and cost of technical assistance and maintenance;
• in the case of procurement of works: the proposed quality, the cost per unit of product by the end of the work, the total price, the experience of the bidder, etc. The share of the price in the total evaluation of the offers should not be less than 80 per cent;
• in the case of procurement of services: the proposed quality, the cost per unit, the total price, the experience of the bidder, etc. The price share in the total evaluation of the offers should not be less than 40 per cent.

Therefore, depending on the category of the procurement procedure, the CA can determine a set of non-price criteria (quantitative and qualitative) which will be taken into account along with the price as part of the offer and will be used in the evaluation of the bids.

Adding the criterion values

Each of the described requirements may or may not be associated with a set of available values. For example, Exclusion Grounds will only have the options ‘true/false’ available, while Selection or Non-price criteria usually allow for not only default or minimum requirements but also other values, available for the tenderers to choose.

Where this is the case, the CA shall specify in advance:

• Values and the coefficients within an electronic auction, provided that such values are quantifiable and can be expressed in figures or percentages;
• limits on the values which may be submitted, as they result from the specifications relating to the subject of the contract;
• mathematical formula to be used to determine automatic rankings of bids received.

Command add-on

In order to describe and include a set of non-price criteria and requirements with the values into a CN, the same structure as the one described in section 3.1.1.2 has to be used as an add-on of a common createCNonPN command model.

Conversions

For those requirements associated with a set of available values, each value from a predefined set (or available according to a described pattern) has to be associated with a related weighting coefficient. This coefficient is a numeric value which will be applied under the mathematical formula of the scoring function of evaluation used under this procurement process in order to calculate the score of each offer received, with the final goal of awarding the contract to the MEAT.

Conversions is a tool that allows:

• To describe used conversions and its applicable coefficients either as a list of precise values or as a mathematical formula for the calculation of the value of a particular coefficient in this particular procurement procedure (depending on the value received within requirementResponse related to a specific requirement);
• to relate each conversion used (together with coefficients) with used criteria or targets (where applicable);
• to include applicable options to criteria or observations for targets.

Command add-on

In order to describe and include a set of non-price criteria into a CN, the following structure has to be used as an add-on of a common createCNonPN command model:

Code	Attribute	Description
CMACN-071	tender.conversions[*]	List of the conversions applicable within this procedure
CMACN-072	tender.conversions[*].id	An identifier of specific conversion
CMACN-073	tender.conversions[*].relatesTo	An element of schema of this process on which this conversion is related
CMACN-074	tender.conversions[*].relatedItem	Identifier of element on which this conversion is related
CMACN-075	tender.conversions[*].description	Short description of this conversion
CMACN-076	tender.conversions[*].rationale	Rationale of this conversion
CMACN-077	tender.conversions[*].coefficients[*].id	Identifier of specific coefficient applicable by this conversion
CMACN-078	tender.conversions[*].coefficients[*].value	Value of a requirementResopnse for which this coefficient is applicable
CMACN-079	tender.conversions[*].coefficients[*].coefficient	Numerical value of this coefficient
CMACN-080	tender.conversions[*].coefficients[*].minValue	Min value of a requirementResopnse for which this coefficient is applicable
CMACN-081	tender.conversions[*].coefficients[*].maxValue	Max value of a requirementResopnse for which this coefficient is applicable
CMACN-082	tender.conversions[*].coefficients[*].period.startDate	Start of a period during which this coefficient is applicable
CMACN-083	tender.conversions[*].coefficients[*].period.endDate	End of a period during which this coefficient is applicable
CMACN-085	tender.conversions[*].coefficients[*].period.duration	Duration of a period during which this coefficient is applicable

Example

Simple criteria that require only true/false answer can be used by the CA. For example, if the EO submitting a tender is a domestic bidder, the EO can get a ratio that increases the advantage of its price by 20%:

Using ocds_requirements_extension, we can describe this criterion as such. But using conversions we can also describe applicable coefficients:

In this case, when the EO responds that there is a domestic bidder, using a cross-reference through the requirement_id we can extract an applicable coefficient of - 0.8.

Formulation of the offer according to a defined scoring function: structured bid

Having a set of requirements defined by the CA and a number of values available, when tenderers prepare their offers they include the values for each requirement, reflecting the contents of the offer and fulfilling the general corporate profiles’ data requested. Tenderers also complete the non-price parameters corresponding to values for specific verifiable tenderer attributes of the offer.

Afterwards, when the evaluation of bids is conducted, all these specified values will become the subject of competition, provided that such features are quantifiable and can be expressed in figures or percentages.

Each submitted offer includes:

• Organization profile according to the extended ‘organization’ model;
• absolute value of the amount of price offer;
• decomposed set of unit prices (if requested by the CA);
• set of documents of the offer, specified with relevant types of documents for their future splitting into the different "envelopes";
• set of requirement responses according to criteria specified for this procurement procedure by the CA:
• Commitment on exclusion grounds;
• commitment on selection criteria (including absolute values if applicable);
• commitment on minimum technical requirements (including absolute values if applicable);
• set of values for non-price criteria (if applicable);
• set of values for subject specification (if applicable).

Command add-on

In order to describe and include into a bid a set of valuable responses against non-price criteria, the following structure has to be used as an add-on of a common createBid command model:

Attribute	Description
bid.requirementResponses[*]	A list of responses by a tenderer
bid.requirementResponses[*].id	Identifier of specific response
bid.requirementResponses[*].value	An identifier of specific conversion
bid.requirementResponses[*].requirement	An element of schema of this process on which this conversion is related
bid.requirementResponses[*].relatedTenderer	Identifier of element on which this conversion is related
bid.requirementResponses[*].relatedItem	Short description of this conversion

Example

See below an example of requirements specified against both an item and a tenderer:

Ranking for evaluation

As shown in the table below, automated ranking can be undertaken using:

• A set of criteria and the relevant conversions applied by the CA for each available value of each specific requirement for a given procurement procedure;
• the requirement responses submitted by each EO against published criteria.

These two data-sets allow to calculate the score (normalized value) for each bid based on a uniform approach.

	price only	cost only	quality only	rated criteria
scoring function applied	ranking based on absolute value of the amount of price offer	ranking based on absolute value of the amount of price offer considering set of values for quantifiable criteria by the CA (non-price criteria)	ranking based on values for quantifiable and qualifiable criteria by the CA (technical requirements, non-price criteria, criteria on a subject specification)	ranking based on absolute value of the amount of price considering set of values for quantifiable and qualifiable criteria by the CA (technical requirements, non-price criteria, criteria on a subject specification)
scoring function not applied	-	-	-	-

Calculation of normalized price

Correction coefficient

Correction coefficient is the total summary coefficient according to which the normalized price is calculated. The correction coefficient is calculated as the product of all weight coefficients and the values provided by tenderers for the non-price criteria set by the CA. The formula used for the calculation is the following:

Where:

• Cc: correction coefficient;
• Cw: weight of coefficient;
• n: total quantity of Cw;
• k: pointer to current Cw.

Normalized price

Normalized price is the equivalent calculated weights. It is used to average the values for specific verifiable tenderer attributes of proposals made by different tenderers. After disclosure of the submitted bids, this indicator will be calculated automatically based on the following formula for each disclosed bid:

Pn = P * C1 * C2 * ... Cn

Where:

• Pn: value of normalized price;
• P: basic price taken from a bid received for a specific lot, or equal to '1' in case of ‘cost only’ and ‘quality only’ award criteria;
• C1 ... Cn: values of the coefficients to be applied (related with the values of requirements, available for the EO and indicated in the requirement responses inside each particular bid).

Ranking approach

Depending on the award criteria and availability of a scoring function, initial automated ranking can or cannot be provided:

• Price only: where awardCriteria: priceOnly, only the bid.value shall be compared in order to identify the most suitable offer (cheapest goes first);
• Cost only: where awardCriteria: costOnly, assumption is that all the tenderers have the same bid.value equal to lot.value. It means that the normalized price needs to be calculated for each bid received based on lot.value (cheapest goes first);
• Quality only: where awardCriteria: qualityOnly, assumption is that the price doesn't matter and the only valuable part of the bid is quality, meaning a set of values of criteria stated by the EO in the bid. It means that the normalized price needs to be calculated for each bid received based on '1';
• Rated criteria: where awardCriteria: ratedCriteria, assumption is that both price and valuable part of the bid matter for the evaluation. The normalized price needs to be calculated for each bid received based on 'bid.value'.

Criteria-based evaluation in MTender

Preparation for the evaluation by the CA

For all the disclosed bids, the system will automatically generate a set of qualification envelopes (awards) and launch the awarding period (tender.awardPeriod) for this procurement process.

Automated eligibility check

Where it is applicable, the system will automatically verify eligibility based on actual official data available via external bus (Mconnect) for each tenderer whose bid was disclosed according to rules of dispatch under the current procurement method. Those bids that passed the eligibility check, will go to the technical qualification by the CA. All the others that failed will go to automatic exclusion.

Automated ranking based on award criteria

Depending on the award criteria and the method of the initial evaluation applied by the CA (awardCriteriaDetails), the system will rank eligible bids in order of admissibility: from most to least acceptable by applicable criteria.

Automated ranking can be undertaken using a set of criteria and the relevant conversions applied, both by the CA for each available value of each applied requirement, and the requirement responses submitted by each EO against published criteria. These two data-sets allow for the calculation of normalized value for each bid based on the same approach. The award of the most acceptable offer will be marked with statusDetails:awaiting.

Publication of qualification envelopes (awards)

“Awards” section will be added to the initial query-model of the stage and will include all awards that were generated for all disclosed ‘bids’. Initial status of awards will be ‘pending’.

Getting Started

Performance recommendations

To be provided

Authentification

Authentication process follows according to general Authentication mechanisms of Auth Service

Retrieving data

Retrieving process follows according to general data retrieving mechanism 

Creating data

‘X-OPERATION-ID’ mechanism

BPE should always know what client is going to do before this action. Accordingly 'X-OPERATION-ID' is required when the POST-request is sent. 'X-OPERATION-ID' can be got via GET-request..

Also ‘X-OPERATION-ID’ provides request identification. So use your ‘X-OPERATION-ID’ to identify and analyze data received from Feed-Point

   Learn more about X-OPERATION-ID of Operation Service