Upload
sofia-bailey
View
215
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Roads 2011 Where are we on Procurement
Monday 21 November 2011, CBI Conference [email protected]
Signed off Strategy• Framework agreement – 4 Lots / Alliances
• Supplier must be able to provide the full range of
services either in house or supply chain
• Direct call-off by clients within the Lot Area.
• Clients only have to take the service they want
• NEC3 Contract
• We want suppliers to work with us and each other
• Value for money!
Four Alliance Areas NE – LoHAC£26m pa
C – LoHAC£56m pa
NW – LoHAC£35m pa
S – LoHAC£55m pa
Total estimated value between £747m and £2.64b
Alliance Development Team
Technical Specification
• Review of 30 odd existing specifications
• First Draft send to Boroughs & TfL
• Two workshops held - 23 Authorities attended
• 2nd Consultation period ended 4th Nov
• Formal responses 14 received» 2 No Comments» 7 very detailed» 5 focused on specific areas
Standard Detail Drawing
• 60 Standard Detail Drawing Produced
• Five Boroughs volunteered to review them
• Comments received back and are being taken on board
Procurement
• OJEU: 5/10/2011
• Industry day 24/10/11 – 22 suppliers attended
• PQQ submission: 16/11/2011
• PQQ Evaluation process 17/11/2011 – 2/12/2011
• PQQ consensus meeting - 9/12/2011
• Prelim report to TLHM Board Dec
• Final recommendation to TLHM Board Mid Jan
Procurement 2
• Announce ITT shortlists end Jan
• Issue ITT early Feb
• Tender submission: 12 weeks
• Award of contracts: November 2012
• Contract commence: April 2013
Framework Approach • TfL is letting the Frameworks on TLHM behalf
• TLHM Board have reserved the right to award more than one Lot to a single contractor.
• Common governance and performance management.
• NEC Price List provision for Target Cost and Cost Reimbursable
• Common schedule of rates – Area wide
– Base price - uplifts for road type / ToD / restrictions
• Individual Authorities Lump Sum prices
• Individual Authorities unique item / requirement prices
Common Contract
• Reviewed existing contracts
• Input from htma, existing suppliers & authorities
• Eversheds now appointed to support the project
• Draft of Framework produced under review within TfL and by external Lawyers.
• Draft Call off Contract circulated to three volunteer Boroughs for review
• Allow use of client buying power via E Auctions
Performance Regime
• Working very closely with the LoHAC Culture Change Working Party
• Contractual and Non Contractual KPIs– Contractual measure contract compliance– Non Contractual measure client and supplier joint
working and contribution towards client goals
• Contractual KPIs linked to Framework term length– Eight year Framework Term– Supplier doesn't achieve them - term reduced– Supplier does perform - lost time is awarded back
Stakeholder Liaison
• All Boroughs asked to give:– Any expression of interest– If interest for what services and from when– Under what basis they wish to procure Lump Sum - SoR
• Regular meeting with Boroughs most likely to use the new contracts from 2013/14 – Tier 1.
• Regular forum established with Tier 1 Boroughs. - Open to others
• Potential users provided with list of asset and contract information required for inclusion in ITT.
National Comparison
• Highways Maintenance Efficiencies Programme Survey - Over 80 authorities (approximately 55%).– The most common form of maintenance contract was
the NEC, with over two thirds of authorities using it in some form.
– A standard form of contract based on the NEC would be welcomed by Local Highway Authorities.
– 95% of respondents supported the development of a standard specification.
– 31% of respondents were already in some form of alliance, and 26% were looking into joining or forming such an arrangement.
Benefits Realisation
• Standard Contract Documents - Staff time savings associated with maintaining bespoke documentation, average £80K* per authority – up to £3m based on those likely to go to the market nationally
in the near future. – overall savings of £12m to be realised if all Local Highway
Authorities move to one standard form.
• Collaborative Alliances for medium sized authorities a figure £1.1m** pa per authority was identified.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/topics/local-authorities/hmep/docs/111027-wsg1-survey-update.pdf
*TLHM Business case 72k ** TLHM Business case 10-15% savings
Summary
• On Track
• Still a lot to do
• Not to late to join
• Borough input is vital and appreciated
• Market response has been very positive
• Large scale collaborate works
• Highway Alliances Work
Questions?