€¦ · Web viewappointment of adults & childrens ict change management. partner (including software/hardware) invitation to negotiate. strictly confidential. all sections of this

ITN for Project Impress

APPOINTMENT OF ADULTS & CHILDRENS ICT CHANGE MANAGEMENTPARTNER (INCLUDING SOFTWARE/HARDWARE)

INVITATION TO NEGOTIATE

STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL

ALL SECTIONS OF THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AND RETURNED VIA THE AUTHORITYS ELECTRONIC TENDERING PORTAL IN-TEND

BY NO LATER THAN 12 NOON ON MONDAY 27th JulyFAILURE TO DO SO WILL INVALIDATE CONSIDERATION

[IL2: PROTECT]

1 of 51


Contents

Part 1 – Introduction 1.1 OJEU1.2 The Invitation1.3 The Structure of the ITN1.4 Contact Information 1.5 Indicative Timetable1.6 Meetings at ITN stage 1

Part 2 – Important Notices2.1 General2.2 Participant’s Warranties 2.3 Confidentiality2.4 Accuracy of the ITN and liability of the Authority2.5 Conflicts of Interest2.6 Canvassing2.7 Non-Collusion2.8 Intellectual property2.9 Publicity2.10 Rights to reject Bids2.11 Further Information2.12 Freedom of Information2.13 The Participants2.14 Bidding Process and Costs2.15 Internal Approval2.16 Governing Law

Part 3 – Submission: General Requirements3.1 General3.2 ITN Documents3.3 Dates for Submission3.4 Information available to Participants and Data Room3.5 Arrangements for liaison, inspection and surveys3.6 Clarifications3.7 Procedure for the submission of ITN3.8 Negotiations Meetings3.9 The Contract3.10 re-evaluation process3.11 Final Tender

Part 4 – Background of the Project and Specification4.1 Background relating to the Project – Overview4.2 Detailed Bid Requirements and Outcome Specification

Part 5 – Evaluation Criteria and Methodology5.1 Evaluation Criteria5.2 Evaluation Stages5.3 Evaluation Scoring Methodology for Quality5.4 Cost Evaluation Methodology5.5 Integrity of the bid Methodology 5.6 Legal Evaluation Methodology5.7 Quality Evaluation Methodology5.8 Evaluation Summary

[IL2: PROTECT]

2 of 51


Part 6 – Compliance Documents6.1 Anti-Collusion Certificate6.2 Declaration6.3 The Contract

[IL2: PROTECT]

3 of 51


PART 1 – Introduction

1.1 OJEU

1.1.1 On the 25 February 2015 a voluntary notice was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2015/S 042-072485) (“the OJEU Notice”) inviting expressions of interest from economic operators to provide an implementation change partner and software/hardware for Children and Adult Services (“the Services”/”the Project”) to the Borough Authority of Sandwell (“the Authority”).

1.2 Invitation

1.2.1 This formal Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) is being issued to Participants and represents the first stage of two stages (The second stage is Final Tender).

1.2.2 The Participants who are being invited to negotiate are listed below in alphabetical order (the Lead Organisations only are listed):

(i) Liquidlogic Ltd(ii) OLM Systems Ltd(iii) PriceWaterhouseCoopers Ltd(iv) Servelec Corelogic Ltd

1.2.3 The purpose of the ITN is to:

(i) initiate negotiations with the Participants;

(ii) enable the Authority, using objective criteria to arrive at a shortlist of two (2) Participants who will be invited to continue negotiations with the Authority leading to the submission of Final Tenders; and

(iii) to allow the Authority to discuss aspects of the Project with Participants with a view to finalising its requirements.

1.3 The Structure of the ITN

1.3.1 The ITN is structured as follows:

Part 2 – Important NoticesIncludes requirements to be followed by participants throughout the Negotiated Procedure

Part 3 – Submission of Bids – General Requirements

Includes general requirements regarding the submission of a ITN bid

Part 4 – Background and detailed bid requirements

Background relating to the Project and Specification

Part 5 – Evaluation Criteria and Methodology

Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Cost ModelScoring methodology

Part 6 – Compliance DocumentsAnti-Collusion Certificate, DeclarationThe Contract

[IL2: PROTECT]

4 of 51


1.4 Contact Information

1.4.1 Participants should not make any contact with Elected Members or Officers without the Authority’s prior invitation or agreement.

1.4.2 All enquiries relating to the completion of this ITN should be submitted as a “Correspondence” on the In-tend Supplier Portal

1.5 Indicative Timetable Including Second ITN Submission

Process/Stage Indicative Dates 2015

1 Issue of invitation to negotiate (ITN) sent to four shortlisted providers Friday 22nd May

2 First stage Negotiations/dialogue meetings

w/c Monday 1st June – Friday 17th Julyrefer to timetable on page 7

3 Receive proposals in response to ITN 12 noon Monday 27th July

4 Analysis of response to ITN Tuesday 28th July - Friday 21st August

5 Second stage submissions of ITN – if more than 2 bidders fail Lot 1 or Lot 2

Monday 24th August - Friday 4th September

6 Evaluation of second stage ITN submissions

Monday 7th September – Friday 18th September

7 Issue of Best and Final Offer Document Monday 21st September8

Best and Final Offer MeetingsTuesday 22nd September – Friday 2nd October

9 Return of Best and Final Offer Document 12 noon Friday 9th October

10 Analysis of Best and Final Offer Document Monday 12th October – Friday 23rd October

11 Notice of Intention to Award w/c Monday 26th October

12 Standstill period

13 Contract Award TBC

14 Commencement TBC

[IL2: PROTECT]

5 of 51


Indicative Timetable No2 Where Second ITN submission is not necessary

Process/Stage Indicative Dates 2015

1 Issue of invitation to negotiate (ITN) sent to four shortlisted providers Friday 22nd May

2 First stage Negotiations/dialogue meetings

w/c Monday 1st June – Friday 17th Julyrefer to timetable on page 7

3 Receive proposals in response to ITN 12 noon Monday 27th July

4 Analysis of response to ITN Tuesday 28th July - Friday 21st August

5 Issue of Best and Final Offer Document Monday 24th August

6 Best and Final Offer MeetingsTuesday 25th August – Thursday 10th September

7 Return of Best and Final Offer Document 12 noon Friday 11th September

8 Analysis of Best and Final Offer Document Monday 14th – Friday 25th September

9 Notice of Intention to Award w/c Monday 28th September

10 Standstill period

11 Contract Award TBC

12 Commencement TBC

[IL2: PROTECT]

6 of 51


1.6 Meetings at ITN stage 1

MONDAY TUESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY

Wk 1 w/c 1 JuneBidder 1

Intro, overview & demo

09:30 – 12:30

Bidder 2Intro, overview &

demo13:00 – 16:00


demo09:30 – 12:30


demo14:00 – 17:00

Wk 2 w/c 8 June Technical meetings take place during weeks 2 – 5 to include Legal, Procurement, Service Change etc

Wk 3 w/c 15 June

Wk 4 w/c 22 June

Wk 5 w/c 29 June

Wk 6 w/c 6 JulyBidder 1

Follow up negotiation meeting

14:00 – 17:00

Bidder 2Follow up negotiation

meeting09:30 – 12:30

Bidder 3Follow up

negotiation meeting14:00 – 14:00

Wk 7 w/c 13 JulyBidder 4

Follow up negotiation meeting

09:30 – 12:30

Bidder 3Final Meeting 14:30 – 16:00




1.6.1 The timetable above is indicative only and the Authority reserves the right to change the dates as it sees fit.

[IL2: PROTECT]

7 of 51


PART 2 - Important Notices

2.1 General

2.1.1 The Important Notices shall be deemed to be repeated at each and every stage of the Negotiated Procedure and shall, for the avoidance of doubt, apply to all further information and documentation provided or made available as part of this Negotiated Procedure. Participants shall be responsible for ensuring that their Bid complies with the requirements set out in this ITN and any associated documents.

2.2 Participant’s Warranties

2.2.1 In submitting its Bid, the Participant warrants, represents and undertakes to the Authority that:-

(i) all information, representations and other matters of fact communicated (whether in writing or otherwise) to the Authority by the Participant, its staff or agents in connection with or arising out of the ITN are true, complete and accurate in all respects, both as at the date communicated and as at the date of their Bid;

(ii) it has made its own investigations and undertaken its own research and due diligence and has satisfied itself in respect of all matters (whether actual or contingent) relating to the ITN and that it has not submitted its Bid in reliance upon any information, representation or assumption which may have been made by or on behalf of the Authority; and

(iii) it has full power and authority to respond to this ITN and to perform the obligations in relation to Services and will, if requested, produce evidence of such to the Authority’s reasonable satisfaction.

2.2.2 Participants warrant that any statement made in the ITN submission remains true and accurate in all material respect save to the extent that the Participant has specifically disclosed any changes to the Authority.

2.2.3 Where there is a change to the information provided to the Authority at any time the Participant must advise the Authority as soon as practicable, even if this is prior to the date of submitting the ITN, and disclose such changes in full.

2.3 Confidentiality

2.3.1 Subject to the exceptions referred to in section 2.3.3 below, the ITN and any associated documents are being made available by the Authority on condition that:-

(i) Participants shall at all times treat the ITN as confidential;

(ii) Participants shall not disclose copy, reproduce, distribute or pass the ITN to any other person at any time;

(iii) Participants shall not use the ITN for any purpose other than for the purposes of preparing (or deciding whether to prepare) a response to the ITN; and

[IL2: PROTECT]

8 of 51


(iv) Participants shall comply with the provisions of section 2.9 (which contains restrictions on publicity activity within any section of the media or similar).

2.3.2 Participants shall procure that each member of the Participant's Team who receives any of the ITN is made aware of, and complies with, the provisions of section 2.3 as if they were a Participant.

2.3.3 Participants may disclose, distribute or pass the ITN to another person (including, but not limited to, for example, employees, consultants, subcontractors or advisers to the Participant, the Participant's insurers or the Participant's funders) if either:-

(i) is done for the sole purpose of enabling a response to be prepared and the person receiving the ITN undertakes in writing to keep the ITN confidential on the same terms as set out in this ITN; or

(ii) the Participant obtains the prior written consent of the Authority in relation to such disclosure, distribution or passing of the ITN.

2.3.4 The Authority may disclose detailed information relating to the Bids to the Authority’s members, directors, officers, employees, agents or advisers and they may make the key documents relating to the Bids available for private inspection by the Authority’s members, directors, officers, employees, agents or advisers.

2.3.5 The Authority also reserve the right to disseminate information that is materially relevant to all Participants, even if the information has only been requested by one Participant, subject to the duty to protect any Participant's commercial confidence in its Bid. Should Participants wish to avoid such disclosure (for example, on the basis that the request contains, or the likely response will contain, commercially confidential information or may give another Participant a commercial advantage) the request must be clearly marked "In confidence - not to be circulated to other Participants" and the Participant must set out the reason or reasons for the request for non-disclosure to other Participants.

2.3.6 The Authority will act reasonably as regards the protection of commercially sensitive information relating to the Participant, subject to the Authority’s duties under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

2.4 Accuracy of the ITN and Liability of the Authority

2.4.1 The ITN has been prepared by the Authority in good faith but does not purport to be comprehensive or to have been independently verified. Participants should not rely on the detailed information contained in the ITN and should carry out their own due diligence checks and verify the accuracy of the detailed information contained in the ITN. Nothing in this ITN and any associated documents is, or should be construed as, a promise or representation as to the future.

2.4.2 Participants considering entering into a contractual relationship with the Authority should make their own enquiries and investigations of the Authority’s requirements beforehand. The subject matter of this ITN shall only have contractual effect when it is contained in the express terms of an executed contract.

[IL2: PROTECT]

9 of 51


2.4.3 Neither the Authority or any of its members, directors, officers, employees, agents or advisers make any representation or warranty as to, or (save in the case of fraudulent misrepresentation) accept any liability or responsibility in relation to, the adequacy, accuracy, reasonableness or completeness of the ITN or any part of it (including but not limited to loss or damage arising as a result of reliance by the Participant on the ITN and any associated documents or any part of it).

2.4.4 No offer or Final Tender is deemed accepted until the relevant contractual documents have been duly signed on behalf of the Authority, the Preferred Participant and all other relevant parties and declared unconditional. No dialogue or communication with the Authority whether prior to, during or subsequent to the Negotiated Procedure (including any notification of Preferred Participant status) imply acceptance of any offer or constitute an indication that the Participant will be awarded the contract. Only the express terms of any written contract which is finally agreed and signed for and on behalf of the relevant parties and which is duly declared unconditional shall have any contractual effect.

2.5 Conflicts of Interest

2.5.1 The Authority requires all actual or potential conflicts of interest to be resolved to the Authority’s satisfaction prior to the submission of a Bid in response to this ITN. Failure to declare such conflicts and/or failure to address such conflicts to the reasonable satisfaction of the Authority may result in a Participant being disqualified.

2.6 Canvassing

2.6.1 The Authority reserves the right to disqualify (without prejudice to any other civil remedies available to the Authority and without prejudice to any criminal liability which such conduct by a Participant or a member of the Participant's Team may attract) any Participant or member of the Participant's Team who, in connection with this ITN:-

i. Offers any inducement, fee or reward to any member or officer of the Authority or any person acting as an advisor for the Authority in connection with the Project; or

ii. Does anything which would constitute a breach of the Prevention of Corruption Acts 1889 to 1916 or under Section 117 of the Local Government Act 1972; or

iii. Commits any offence under the Bribery Act 2010; or

iv. Canvasses any of the Authority’s members, directors, officers, employees, agents or advisors in connection with the Project; or

v. Contacts any officer of the Authority prior to the Contract being awarded about any aspect of the Project in a manner not permitted by this ITN (including without limitation a contact for the purposes of discussing the possible transfer to the employment of the Participant of such officer for the purpose of the Project),

[IL2: PROTECT]

10 of 51


2.7 Non-Collusion

2.7.1 Any Participant who, in connection with this Project:

i. Fixes or adjusts the amount of his Bid by or in accordance with any agreement or arrangement with any other Participant (other than a member of its own consortium); or

ii. Enters into any agreement or arrangement with any other Participant that he shall refrain from making a Bid or as to the amount of any Bid to be submitted; or

iii. Causes or induces any person to enter such agreement as is mentioned in either the paragraph above or to inform the Participant of the amount or approximate amount of any rival Bid for the Project; or

iv. Canvasses any of the persons referred to in connection with the Project; or

v. Offers or agrees to pay or give or does pay or give any sum of money, inducement or valuable consideration directly or indirectly to any person for doing or having done or causing or having caused to be done in relation to any other Bid or proposed Bid for the works any act or omission; or

vi. Communicates to any person other than the Authority the amount or approximate amount of his proposed Bid (except where such disclosure is made in confidence in order to obtain quotations necessary for the preparation of the Bid (for example, for insurance, a contract guarantee bond or performance bond),

will be disqualified (without prejudice to any other civil remedies available to the Authority and without prejudice to any criminal liability that such conduct by a Participant may attract). As referred to in Part 6 of this ITN, Participants are required to return the Anti-Collusion Certificate set out in the appendices with their Bid.

2.8 Intellectual Property

2.8.1 The copyright in this ITN and any associated documents is vested in the Authority. This ITN and associated documents may not be reproduced, copied or stored in any medium without the prior written consent of the Authority except in relation to the preparation of a Bid. All documentation supplied by the Authority in relation to this ITN and any associated documents is and shall remain the property of the Authority and must be returned on demand, without any copies being retained.

2.8.2 The Authority reserves the right to require the assignment or grant of a royalty free non-exclusive licence of all intellectual property relating to or in connection with any Bid resulting in the award of contracts.

[IL2: PROTECT]

11 of 51


2.9 Publicity

2.9.1 Participants shall not undertake (or permit to be undertaken) at any time, whether at this stage or after financial close, any publicity activity with any section of the media in relation to the Project other than with the prior written agreement of Authority. Such agreement shall extend to the content of any publicity. In this section the word "media" includes (but without limitation) radio, television, newspapers, trade and specialist press, the internet and email accessible by the public at large and the representatives of such media.

2.10 The Authority’s Right to Reject Bids

2.10.1 The Authority reserves the right to reject or disqualify a Participant and/or the members of the Participant's Team where:-

(i) a Bid is submitted late, is completed incorrectly, is materially incomplete or fails to meet the Authority’s submission requirements which have been notified to Participants;

(ii) the Participant and/or the members of the Participant's Team are unable to satisfy the terms of Article 45 of Directive 2004/18/EC and/or Regulation 23 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 at any stage during the Negotiated Procedure;

(iii) the Participant and/or the members of the Participant's Team are guilty of material misrepresentation in relation to its application and/or the process;

(iv) the Participant and/or the members of the Participant's Team contravene any of the terms and conditions of this ITN; or

(v) there is a change in identity, control, financial standing, previous bid position or other factor impacting on the selection and/or evaluation process affecting the Participant and/or the members of the Participant's Team.

2.10.2 The disqualification of a Participant will not prejudice any other civil remedy available to the Authority and will not prejudice any criminal liability that such conduct by a Participant may attract.

2.11 Provision of Further Information by Participants Prior to Submitting a Bid

2.11.1 The Authority is relying on the information provided by Participants during the PQQ stage (including but not limited to information concerning the Participant's Team and consortium structure). If, at any time during the Negotiated Procedure there are any material changes to the same, the Participant must advise the Authority as soon as practicable (even if this is prior to the submission of the ITN). Upon receipt of such information, the Authority shall be entitled to revisit the selection and/or evaluation of the Participant and exclude the Participant, if necessary, as a result of that process.

2.12 Freedom of Information

2.12.1 The Authority is subject to the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). FOIA provides a general right of access to information held by public authorities.

[IL2: PROTECT]

12 of 51


2.12.2 FOIA provides for information to be exempt from the general right of access in certain circumstances, for example where the information has been provided in confidence, is a trade secret, or where release would or would be likely to prejudice commercial interests. Because the Authority has to comply with its statutory duties, if information is requested the Authority may be forced to disclose such documentation, irrespective of a Participant’s wishes, if it is not covered by an exemption under FOIA. Please also note that the availability of some exemptions is subject to a test of whether the public interest lies in disclosing the information or keeping it confidential.

2.12.3 You are required to identify any information contained in your Bid which you would prefer not to be released if a request under FOIA is received. Requests for information to be treated as commercially confidential should accompany your response and must include a clear and substantive justification (which the Authority is able to disclose) together with a time limit after which any such information may be disclosed. You should make sure any information that you consider commercially confidential is clearly marked as such (preferably by marking each relevant page of the document “commercially confidential”). You should be aware that a Bid that indicates that all of the information you provide in it is confidential without a clear and substantive justification is unlikely to be acceptable to the Authority.

2.12.4 If the Authority receives a request under FOIA for the release of information which has been provided by a Participant, the Authority will use reasonable endeavours to consult with the relevant Participant as soon as practicable where it considers that the requested information may include exempt information relating to that Participant. Where the Authority consults with the Participant, the Participant must respond to the Authority's requests urgently, so that the Authority can comply with its obligation to answer a FOIA request within the relevant time limit.

2.12.5 The decision on what is, or is not exempt information shall be determined by the Authority having considered the representations of Participants. The Authority shall not be liable for any loss, damage, harm or other detriment however caused arising from any disclosure of information under FOIA, Environmental Information Regulations 2004 or other legislation governing access to information including but not limited to Guidance Notes and Codes of Practice issued by the Information Commissioner.

2.13 The Participants

2.13.1 The members of the Participant's Team, and the principal relationships between the team members, may only be changed with the prior consent of the Authority and subject to any replacement team member satisfying the requirements of the PQQ.

2.13.2 All Participants shall be deemed to have consented to any changes in other Participant's Teams.

2.14 Bidding Process and Costs

2.14.1 The Authority reserves the right at any time:-

(i) to issue amendments or modifications to the ITN during the Negotiated Procedure;

(ii) to alter the timetable for the Negotiated Procedure; [IL2: PROTECT]

13 of 51


(iii) not to award a contract;

(iv) not to be bound to accept the lowest or any Bid and reserves the right to accept any Bid either in whole or in part or parts;

(v) to cancel or withdraw from the Negotiated Procedure at any stage;

(vi) to disqualify any Participant who makes material changes to any aspect of either their pre-qualification submission or Bid unless substantial justification can be provided to the satisfaction of the Authority.

2.14.2 Any costs or expenses incurred by any Participant or the Participant's Team or any other person will not be reimbursed by the Authority and neither the Authority nor any of their representatives or advisers will be liable in any way to any Participant or the Participant's Team or any other person for any costs, expenses or losses incurred by any Participant or the Participant's Team or any other person in connection with this Negotiated Procedure.

2.15 Internal Approval

2.15.1 Award of the contract is subject to the Authority seeking final internal approval. The Authority reserves the right to not award the contract in the event that the contract is not approved.

2.16 Governing Law

2.16.1 All negotiations will be conducted, and all documents will be prepared, in the English language. The negotiations and all subsequent contracts negotiated will be subject to English law and the exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts.

PART 3 - Submission of Bids: General Requirements

3.1 General

3.1.1 The ITN sets out the steps that the Authority will take to obtain specific information to enable the Authority to select a Preferred Participant and subsequently award a contract for an Adults & Childrens ICT Change Management Partner (Including Software/Hardware) (“the Contract”).

3.1.2 This ITN is issued to Participants on the 22nd May 2015 and represents the beginning of the first stage of the negotiated process. Through this stage the Authority will conduct negotiations with each Participant with a view to calling those Participants who can meet the Authority’s requirements to Final Tender.

3.1.3 The Authority is following the Negotiated Procedure in accordance with the requirements of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006. Participants are deemed to understand the processes that the Authority is required to follow under the Public Contract Regulations 2006 and all applicable European and domestic legislation and shall cooperate with the Authority in those processes. Participants are reminded that they will not have the opportunity to revise their Bids following submission of their Final Tender.

[IL2: PROTECT]

14 of 51


3.2 The ITN Documents

3.2.1 The ITN documents set out the Authority's current requirements in respect of the Project. In the event of any inconsistency, the ITN documents and enclosures will take precedence over any documents previously issued by the Authority.

3.3 Dates for Submission

3.3.1 Participants are provisionally invited to submit Bids to the Authority by 12 noon on Monday 27th July.

3.3.2 Participants must submit a Bid which includes as a minimum the Services set out in the Outcome Specification.

3.3.3 The Authority invites and strongly encourages innovation from the Participants in the formulation of their Bid, within the constraints set out in the ITN documents.

3.4 Information available to Participants and Data Room

3.4.1 Information relating to this project will be made available via the In-tend supplier portal. Participants are required to undertake their own due diligence and to request clarification of any of the information via the In-tend supplier portal.

3.5 Arrangements for liaison, inspection and surveys

3.5.1 It is the responsibility of each Participant to ensure that they have all of the information they need to prepare their tender.

3.6 Clarifications

3.6.1 All enquiries relating to the completion of this ITN should be submitted as a “Correspondence” on the In-tend Supplier Portal by no later than 12 noon on Monday 20th July. The Authority is under no obligation to respond to clarification enquiries received after this date.

3.6.2 All enquiries received and responses provided may be circulated to all Tenderers. If a Tenderer believes an enquiry relates to a confidential aspect of their submission, it must mark the enquiry as “confidential”. If the Authority agrees that the enquiry should be answered confidentially, the Authority will send a response only to the Tenderer that submitted the enquiry.

3.7 Procedure for the Submission of ITN

3.7.1 All sections of this ITN must be completed and returned via the In-tend Portal by 12 noon on Monday 27th July 2015.

3.7.2 All prices must be fully priced in Sterling (£) and totalled in clear terms.

3.7.5 Where there have been changes in the information supplied by the Participant to the Authority at any time previous to the submission of the Bid, such changes should be disclosed in full.

[IL2: PROTECT]

15 of 51


3.7.6 The Authority reserves the right to require Participants to provide presentations in

support of their Bid. 3.7.8 All Participants will be notified of the Authority's decision as early as possible.

3.7.9 Any documents requiring signature shall be returned with your Bid and signed:-

3.7.9.1 by the Participant as follows:-

(i) where the Participant is bidding as a consortium, by each Consortium Member;

(ii) where the Participant is a prime contractor supported by Significant Subcontractors, by the prime contractors and each Significant Subcontractor;

(iii) where the Participant is a single organisation (or a single organisation supported by subcontractors that are not Significant Subcontractors) by that single organisation;

(iv) where the Participant is an unincorporated association, by the person duly authorised for that purpose to sign on its behalf, stating their position;

(v) where the Participant is a partnership, by two duly authorised partners; and

(vi) where the Participant is a company, by two directors or by a director and the secretary of the company, such persons being duly authorised for that purpose,

3.8 Negotiation Meetings

3.8.1 The Authority reserves the right to extend any time period and reduce or increase the amount of negotiation meetings if considered necessary during the Negotiated Procedure.

3.8.2 The Authority will endeavour, as far as possible, to agree agenda items and confirm attendees before each meeting. In order for the discussions to be productive, it is assumed that each Participant will be empowered to make decisions at the relevant dialogue meeting.

3.8.3 Points of clarification provided by the Authority during the meetings will be shared with Participants unless a Participant demonstrates to the Authority's reasonable satisfaction that the information should be treated as confidential, in which case the provisions of section 3.6.2 shall apply.

3.8.4 Whilst Participants will be invited to discuss their Bids, nothing said or intimated by

the Authority at these meetings will constitute an approval of their proposals or an [IL2: PROTECT]

16 of 51


acceptance of their adequacy in meeting the Project requirements. However, the Authority will endeavour to indicate to Participants whether it believes the proposed Bid is unlikely to meet its objectives. These meetings will be treated as confidential between the Authority and each Participant.

3.9 The Contract

3.9.1 The Authority requires that all Participants confirm in their Bid that they accept the Contract (as set out in Part 6).

3.9.2 Participants may propose Project specific amendments to the Contract (marked in red) PROVIDED that they do not change any risk allocation and/or any commercial term to the detriment of the Authority. The Authority reserves the right (at its sole discretion) to reject any amendments.

3.9.3 The Authority intends to enter into ONE Contract with the Preferred Participant. It is therefore the Lead Participants responsibility to ensure they have adequate ‘back to back’ arrangements with its Consortium or Significant Contractors.

3.10 Re-evaluation Process

(1) After the first stage negotiations meetings the Bidders will submit their response to the ITN.

(2) Once the Authority has assessed the responses to the ITN it will provide feedback to the bidders on their scores.

(3) It is important to note that if Bidders fail to meet the minimum threshold for Lot 1 AND Lot 2 (mandatory Lots) at any stage they will be eliminated from the competition.

(4) If two or more Bidders fails to meet the minimum threshold (based on objective criteria) for Lot 1 OR Lot 2 (mandatory Lots) ALL Bidders subject to para (3) above will be given an opportunity to forward a revised ITN response within 28 days. Note if the revised proposal results in a change to a consortium member, any new member of a consortium will have to be reassessed in relation to the pre-qualitative criteria; if the pre-qualitative criteria are NOT MET the Bidder will be eliminated from the competition.

(5) The Authority may also wish to enter into further first stage negotiation meetings within the 28 days period. The revised ITN response will be assessed against the original objective criteria. If any Bidder fails to meet the minimum threshold (based on the objective criteria) for Lot 1 OR Lot 2 at this stage they will be eliminated from the competition.

(6) At the end of Stage 1 negotiation meetings and when all Bidders have submitted their responses to the ITN (or at the end of the extended stage as set out above), the Authority will shortlist 2 Bidders who will be invited to continue negotiations (stage two negotiations) with the Authority leading to the submission of Best and Final Tender.

(7) The aim of the above process is to create a fair mechanism that ensures healthy competition is maintained at the early stages of the procurement process.

[IL2: PROTECT]

17 of 51


Examples of Elimination /shortlisting

Example 1Following the assessment of the ITN by the Authority: Bidder 1 + Bidder 2 pass both Lot 1 and Lot 2, however Bidder 3 fails Lot 1 and Bidder 4 fails Lot 2, this means 2 or more Bidders have failed more than one Lot. All the Bidders will be given individualfeedback on their scores and will then be given 28 days to revise/ enhance their bids including Bidders 1 and 2. The top scoring 2 Bidders will be taken through to stage 2.

Example 2Following the assessment of the ITN by the Authority: Bidders 1, 2 and 3 pass both Lot 1 and 2 and Bidder 4 fails Lot 1, Bidder 4 will be eliminated from the process with no opportunity to revise or enhance the bid; this is because 3 Bidders have remained in the process after stage 1 therefore there is healthy competition. The top scoring 2 Bidders will be taken through to stage 2.

Example 3Following the assessment of the ITN by the Authority: If a Bidder fails both Lots at stage 1 they will be eliminated from the process. A Bidder that fails both Lots at Stage 1 will never be given an opportunity to revise or enhance their bid.

Example 4Following the assessment of the ITN by the Authority: Bidder 1 and Bidder 2 passes both Lots (Lot 1 and Lot 2) and Bidder 3 fails Lot 1 and Bidder 4 fails Lot 2; after feedback has been given on their scores all Bidders will be given 28 days to revise and enhance their bids including Bidders 1 and 2. Bidder 1 revises their ITN so a new partner joins their consortium. The new partner must be reassessed on the prequalitative criteria (PQQ). If the new partner fails the PQQ Bidder 1 will be eliminated. If they pass the PQQ, Bidder 1 will be assessed to establish whether they will be shortlisted to proceed to stage 2. The top scoring 2 Bidders will be taken through to stage 2.

3.11 Final Tender

3.11.1 The Authority will evaluate ITN bids and intends to invite a shortlist of 2 Participants to Final Tender. The Authority reserves the right to increase the number of Participants invited to submit a Final Tender if it has a reasonable justification.

3.11.2 The Authority intends to invite Final Tenders on the 24th August or 21st September, subject to ITN stage submissions (refer to timetables on page 5/6). The Authority reserves the right to change this date.

[IL2: PROTECT]

18 of 51


PART 4 – Background Relating To The Project And Detailed Bid Requirements - Output Specification

4.1 Background relating to the Project - Overview

4.1.1 The Authority (Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council) is procuring a new Adults and Children’s service ICT system. The Authority recognises that procuring a new ICT system alone will not meet its objectives to ensure the system is embedded effectively; and used efficiently to its full capacity to enable staff using the system to manage cases effectively and efficiently. The Authority is therefore seeking an experienced Implementation Change Partner (ICP) in addition to the ICT system to assist with the transition to the new system and support the implementation of the new software solution and hardware (the Project).

4.1.2 The procurement is split into Lots and bidders must apply for Lot 1 and Lot 2. Lot 3 is optional.

LOT TITLE Mandatory/optional Lot 1 Implementation Change

PartnerMandatory

Lot 2 Software package MandatoryLot 3 Hardware. Optional

4.1.3. Lot 1 (Mandatory) – Implementation Change Partner (ICP). As stated in 1.1 the Authority is seeking an experienced ICP to assist with the transition to the new system and to support the implementation of the new software solution and hardware. The ICP will be required to understand the processes of both the Adults and Childrens Social Care Departments, and engage with the officers of these and other relevant Authority departments and partners to deliver the key outcomes of the Authority. The ICP must take a holistic view of the process and provide the support and guidance needed to deliver the outcomes identified for a successful implementation. The ICP will need to provide relevant training and support packages to officers to assist them in using the software and hardware and to develop their learning. It is therefore a requirement that the ICP Provider must be experienced in having worked previously with a software provider or a similar provider and must fully understand the software package and procedures for a successful implementation.

4.1.4 Lot 2 (Mandatory) – Software package. The Authority is looking for an innovative user friendly ICT system solution for its Adults and Childrens Social Care departments. The successful solution must deliver the Authority’s key outcomes and requirements in line with legislation, regulations and guidance including but not limited to the Children Act 1989, Care Act 2014 and Data Protection Act 1998. This system will need to be able to share data effectively between professional organisations and departments. The Authority will consider all system types and wishes to explore the benefits of a hosted solution or a Cloud based solution. The solution should fully facilitate and support agile working. The software must deliver the outcomes for both the Adults and Childrens departments. The new software will need to be compatible with the Authority’s Corporate ICT infrastructure and must also work with the software systems currently used by the Adults and Childrens departments.

[IL2: PROTECT]

19 of 51


4.1.5 Lot 3 (Optional) – Hardware. This Lot is optional. The Authority is looking for the supply of end user devices that would ensure that staff within Adults and Children Social Care can make best use of the business applications supplied under Lot 2. The Authority is looking for a mixed type of devices that will support the working methods of the Authority officers, including agile and mobile working. The Authority is open to negotiate on the maintenance of these devices. The reason why this Lot is optional and not mandatory is that the Authority will only award a contract under this Lot if it represents value for money and provides added value to the overall solution (Lot 1 and Lot 2) compared with procuring hardware through alternative procurement arrangements. The Authority will carry out a benchmarking activity in order to ascertain whether the proposal represents value for money.

4.1.6 The Authority anticipates that the contract for the project (the Contract) will have initial terms which will be subject to negotiation and according to each of the Lots:

Lot 1 - The maximum time period will be 36 months. Lot 2 - The maximum time period will be 120 months.Lot 3 - The maximum time period will be 36 months.

4.1.7 The Authority will be looking to negotiate a reasonable break clause within the duration however the Authority would like to leave this to negotiation so that Bidders can put forward appropriate durations as part of the negotiations.

4.1.8 The total range of values for the maximum term for each of the Lots is set out below

Lot 1 – Between £1,000,000 and £2,000,000Lot 2 – Between £2,500,000 and £6,000,000Lot 3 - Between £500,000 and £1,000,000

4.2 Detailed Bid Requirements and Outcome Specification

LOT 1

Bidders are required to submit a method statement and a project plan that includes a complete profile of the experienced Implementation Change Partner (ICP) and full details that explain how they will assist with the transition to the new system and support the implementation of the new software solution (and hardware if applicable). The method statement and project plan must evidence that the ICP understands the processes of both the Adults and Childrens Social Care Departments.

The method statement and project plan must give full details that show how the ICP will engage with the officers of Adults and Childrens Social Care and other relevant Authority departments to deliver the key outcomes of the Authority.

The method statement and project plan must fully explain how the support and guidance needed to deliver the outcomes identified for a successful implementation will be provided.

[IL2: PROTECT]

20 of 51


The method statement and project plan must include full details of how the ICP will provide relevant training and support packages to officers to assist them in using the software (and hardware if applicable) and to develop their learning.

The method statement and project plan must fully and clearly address and evidence all of the Outcomes listed below and all of the Considerations listed within the Quality Evaluation Criteria for LOT 1. Bidders are required to include KPI’s relating to each of the evaluation criteria set out within this ITN.

In relation to Lot 1 the Authority is seeking to achieve the following outcomes:

to engage staff, at all levels, to effectively and routinely use the new software to facilitate good quality social work

to engage staff, at all levels, so that they use the new software within principles of continuous improvement and performance management

staff routinely operating on a flexible basis, undertaking a range of appropriate tasks from different locations including the homes of clients

staff recognising the value of good quality client data and that they have an obligation to assist in maintaining the integrity of the data

more effective use of the software results in the better use of available resources in line with service objectives

staff, at all levels, valuing training and recognising the need to maintain their knowledge of the system

creation of a variety of learning methods which is able to differentiate between new and established staff

using the new software to promote collaborative working and exploit opportunities for multi-agency working and joint decision making

staff being able to make better informed decisions and therefore able to manage service demand more effectively

the full participation of staff in the on-going development of the use of the software within a controlled and structured framework

creation of an effective communication process to support all aspects of the system and user training

deliver the transfer of knowledge and expertise so that change is sustainable

Engage, cooperate, liaise and work effectively with the Authority’s relevant partners, contractors and providers.

[IL2: PROTECT]

21 of 51


LOT 2

Bidders are required to submit a method statement and a project plan that includes full details of the ICT system solution for its Adults and Childrens Social Care departments. The method statement and project plan must fully explain how the successful solution will deliver the Authority’s key outcomes and requirements in line with legislation, regulations and guidance including but not limited to the Children Act 1989, Care Act 2014 and Data Protection Act 1998.

The method statement and project plan must clearly explain and evidence how the system will share data effectively between professional organisations and departments. The Authority will consider all system types and wishes to explore the benefits of a hosted solution or a Cloud based solution.

The method statement and project plan must clearly explain and evidence how the solution will fully facilitate and support agile working, and how the software will deliver the outcomes for both the Adults and Childrens departments.

The method statement and project plan must give assurance that the new software will be compatible with the Authority’s Corporate ICT infrastructure and must evidence how it will work with the software systems currently used by the Adults and Childrens departments.

The method statement and project plan must fully and clearly address and evidence all of the Outcomes listed below and all of the Considerations listed within the Quality Evaluation Criteria for LOT 2. Bidders are required to include KPI’s relating to each of the evaluation criteria set out within this ITN.

In relation to Lot 2 the Authority is seeking an ICT software system solution that achieves the following outcomes:

delivers the Authority’s key outcomes and requirements in line with legislation, regulations and guidance including but not limited to the Children Act 1989, Care Act 2014 and Data Protection Act 1998

meets ISO/IEC 27001 Information Security Management System requirements and certified compliant

that operates in accordance with practice demands and does not impose restrictions on the practice due to how it operates

enables easy navigation and quicker input of data freeing up social worker time to focus on working directly with clients

is intuitive to user requirements and practically supports better quality social work

fully enables mobile and flexible working, online and off-line, so that services can be delivered locally

[IL2: PROTECT]

22 of 51


improves the customer journey by enabling social workers to understand the complexity of the case readily and therefore make better informed and more timely decisions.

enables good quality supervision and case planning

provides an interactive environment where the community and service providers are able to update their own records where appropriate

allows for access by partner organisations involved in service delivery

provides analytical data that can be used to inform service development and the deployment of resources

is easily configured in-house by the customer

is fully supported by the supplier to respond to issue resolution and development requests

runs in a standard browser without the requirement for additional ‘plug ins’, and will work within a virtual desktop environment

provides specific apps for Android and IOS-based devices

is able to support Equality Act 2010 compliance with staff and the community as users of the system

Engage, cooperate, liaise and work effectively with the Authority’s relevant partners, contractors and providers.

LOT 3 - This Lot is optional

Bidders are required to submit a method statement that includes full details of the supply of end user devices that would ensure that staff within Adults and Children Social Care can make best use of the business applications supplied under Lot 2. The method statement must list the range of the mixed type of hardware that the Authority requires to support the working methods of the Authority officers, including agile and mobile working, along with the price for each device so that the Authority can carry out a benchmarking exercise. The Authority is open to negotiate on the maintenance of these devices.

The reason why this Lot is optional and not mandatory is that the Authority will only award a contract under this Lot if it represents value for money and provides added value to the overall solution (Lot 1 and Lot 2) compared with procuring hardware through alternative procurement arrangements. In order to establish whether the proposed solution represents value for money the Authority will carry out a benchmarking exercise. The benchmarking will use the same evaluation criteria as set on within this document to ensure a valid comparison.

The method statement must fully and clearly address and evidence all of the Outcomes listed below and all of the Considerations listed within the Quality Evaluation Criteria for LOT 3.

[IL2: PROTECT]

23 of 51


In relation to Lot 3 the Authority is seeking the supply ONLY of end-user devices to social care ‘field workers’ that achieve the following outcomes:

fully support the desired outcomes of Lots 1 and 2 above, and specifically allows the software supplied under Lot 2 to be utilised in a fully mobile environment;

support appropriate security configuration for the classification of information being accessed and also adheres to the various compliance regimes to which the Authority must comply;

support all appropriate methods of network connectivity (local area network, WiFi, 3G/4G, etc.).

allow access to other corporate or line-of-business applications where this is appropriate – whether these reside in a cloud-hosted environment or within the Authority’s secure infrastructure;

are able to support Equality Act 2010 compliance with staff and the community as users of the application(s) running on the device;

are capable of being fully configured and managed by the Authority’s in-house ICT team;

[IL2: PROTECT]

24 of 51


PART 5 – Evaluation Criteria & Methodology

Evaluation IndexEvaluation Criteria 5.1Evaluation Stages 5.2Evaluation Scoring Methodology for Quality 5.3 Cost Evaluation Methodology 5.4Integrity of the bid Methodology 5.5Legal Evaluation Methodology 5.6Quality Evaluation Methodology 5.7

5.1 Evaluation Criteria

5.1.1 The underlying principle of the Evaluation Methodology is to select the Most Economically Advantageous Tender that meets the Authority’s requirements for the Project. The Evaluation Methodology is designed to provide a structured and auditable approach to evaluating bids submitted by the Participants.

5.2 Evaluation Stages

Bids will be assessed using the following criteria:

LOT 1 – Implementation Change Partner

Criteria Level 1

Weighting Criteria Level 2

Cost 40%Price (20%)Financial Considerations (10%)Risk Value (10%)

Quality 60%

Service Delivery & Improvement (15%)Staff engagement, development & communication (15%)Sustainability and Transfer of Knowledge (10%)Integrity of bid (10%)Legal (10%)

[IL2: PROTECT]

25 of 51


LOT 2 – Software

Criteria Level 1


Cost 40%Price (20%)Financial Considerations (10%)Risk Value (10%)

Quality 60%

Key business functions (20%)Business continuity, Resilience & Inter-operability and risk (10%)Implementation Support (5%)Approach to Service Management (5%)Integrity of bid (10%)Legal (10%)

LOT 3 Hardware

Criteria Level 1


Cost 60% Price (60%)

Quality 40%

Usability – functionality and ease of use (10%)Supportability & Configuration (10%)Security & Compliance (10%)Vendor Sustainability & Viability (10)

5.3 Evaluation Scoring Methodology for Quality

5.3.1 Returned ITN submissions will be evaluated using a 0 to 10 scoring system which correspond to each criteria. The scoring systems are set out in the corresponding section of the ITN for the criteria.

5.3.2 The Authority reserves the right to award half marks.

[IL2: PROTECT]

26 of 51


5.4 Cost Evaluation Methodology (40%)

Cost Evaluation Methodology Lot 1 and Lot 2 – (40%)

The Cost Evaluation for Lot 1 and Lot 2 will be undertaken against the criteria provided in the table below:

Cost 40% Price (20%) Financial Considerations (10%)Risk Value (10%)

Participants are required to answer the questions set out below. All answers must take into account and respond to all considerations listed.

Price (20%)

The evaluation will consider:

The whole life comparison of cost relative to the lowest tendered price. The bid providing the lowest price over the contract term will be awarded the maximum allocated % with other Bids awarded a score proportionate to its price relative to the lowest price (Lowest Price / Submitted Price x 0.2 = Percentage Score). For example, where the lowest price is £500,000 and if it is awarded a score of 20% a Bid of £1,000,000 will be awarded 10% etc.)

Question Number

Topic Question Instruction Maximum Score Available

1 Price Please show by completing the cost model and payment profile

Complete the cost model and payment profile: Sandwell ITN evaluation cost model.xls

20%

[IL2: PROTECT]

27 of 51


Financial Considerations 2a – (10%)


The completeness and quality of the financial information provided in the price schedule. (4 points)

The proposed payment profile throughout the contract period linked to achievement of your proposed KPI’s (4 points)

The balance between resources used to directly benefit the service and resources used up in overheads costs (4 points)

How the risk value (question 2b) will be managed to ensure the financial sustainability of the service, including if the performance targets are not met (4 points)

The link between the proposed KPI’s you have submitted within your method statement and project plan, the payment profile submitted and risk value submitted in Question 2b (4 points)

Whether the proposed risk value adequately incentivises the delivery of the proposed KPI’s (4 points)

Question Number

Topic Question Maximum Points Available

2a Financial Considerations

Give full details of your proposed costs and payment profile. Also provide details of how you propose to ensure the financial sustainability of the project.

24

(10%)

Evaluation Scoring Methodology for Financial Considerations 2a (10%)

Score Evaluation Measure Definition

0 Unacceptable The quality of the financial information

provided in the price schedule very poor and does not link to the specification.

The proposed payment profile requires all up-front funding and is not linked to satisfactory achievement of KPI’s.

The balance between resources and costs used to directly benefit the service and those used for other aspects such as overheads, profit margins etc. is weighed heavily in favour of the other aspects and not the service.

The proposal does not offer a solution to managing the risk value to ensure a financially sustainable service, particularly if the targets are not met.

There is no link between the proposed KPI’s; payment profile and risk value.

The propose risk value does not incentivise the delivery of the KPI’s

[IL2: PROTECT]

28 of 51

Instructions and Guidance to Participants – Version 1`

Score Evaluation Measure

Definition

1 - 2 Poor The quality of the financial information provided in the price schedule is poor and incomplete.

The proposed payment profile requires a majority of up-front funding and is not linked to satisfactory achievement of KPI’s.

The balance between resources and costs used to directly benefit the service and those used for other aspects such as overheads, profit margins etc. is weighed in favour of profits, overheads etc.

Does not offer a credible solution to managing the risk value to ensure a financially sustainable service, particularly if targets are not met.

There is no credible link between the proposed KPI’s; payment profile and risk value.

The propose risk value provides minimal incentive to the deliver the KPI’s

3-4 Fair The financial information provided in the price schedule is reasonable and links to the specification.

The proposed payment profile requires most payments to be made prior to satisfactory achievement of KPI’s.

The balance between resources and costs used to directly benefit the service and those used for other aspects such as overheads, profit margins etc. is weighted equally between overheads and the service.

The proposal is differentiable from the above (score Satisfactory) but represents the next strata of credible and sustainable proposals to ensure a financially sustainable service even if targets are not met.

There are limited links between the proposed KPI’s; payment profile and risk value.

The propose risk value does not adequately incentivise the delivery of the KPI’s

5 - 6 Satisfactory The quality of the financial information provided in the price schedule is complete and links to the specification.

The proposed payment profile requires some payments to be made only upon satisfactory achievement of KPI’s.

The balance between resources and costs used to directly benefit the service and those used for other aspects such as overheads, profit margins etc. is marginally weighed in favour of the service.

The proposal is differentiable from the above (Score Good) but represents the next strata of credible and sustainable proposals to ensure a financially sustainable service even if targets are not met.

There are clear links between the proposed KPI’s; payment profile and risk value.

The propose risk value incentivises the delivery of the KPI’s

7 - 8 Good The quality of the financial information provided in the price schedule is complete and the price schedule clearly supports all elements of the specification.

The proposed payment profile requires the majority of

[IL2: PROTECT]29


payments to be made only upon satisfactory achievement of KPI’s.

The balance between resources and costs used to directly benefit the service and those used for other aspects such as overheads, profit margins etc. is weighed in favour of the service.

The proposal is differentiable from the above (Score Very Good) but represents the next strata of credible and sustainable proposals to ensure a financially sustainable service even if targets are not met.

There are clearly defined and measurable links between the proposed KPI’s; payment profile and risk value.

The propose risk value clearly incentivises the delivery of the KPI’s

9 - 10 Very good The quality of the financial information provided in the price schedule is complete, the bases used in calculations are clear and the price schedule clearly supports all elements of the specification.

The proposed payment profile requires all payments to be made only upon satisfactory achievement of KPI’s.

The balance between resources and costs used to directly benefit the service and those used for other aspects such as overheads, profit margins etc. is significantly weighed in favour of the service.

The bidder who offers the best or equal to the best solution to managing the risk value to ensure a financially sustainable service even if targets are not met.

There are clearly defined and measurable links between the proposed KPI’s; payment profile and risk value that are supported throughout the bid.

The propose risk value demonstrates clear and measurable incentive to deliver the KPI’s

Risk Value – 2b (10%)


The bid offering the highest realistic (as supported in the financial considerations and quality section) percentage value of the contract that is put at risk dependent upon satisfactory completion of project, will be awarded the maximum allocated % with other bids awarded a score proportionate to its percentage relative to the highest percentage (submitted percentage/ highest percentage x 0.1 = percentage score). For example, where the highest percentage put at risk is 50% and it is awarded 10%, a bid of 25% at risk will be awarded 5%.

2b Risk Value

The overall proportion of the contract value put at risk.

10%

NOTE. This is not to be so high as to put the financial stability of the service at risk. This should be supported in the financial considerations.Cost Evaluation Methodology Lot 3 – (60%)

[IL2: PROTECT]30


The Cost Evaluation for Lot 3 will be undertaken against the criteria provided in the table below:

Criteria Level 1


Cost 60% Price (40%)

Bidders are required to submit a list of devices along with the price of each device. This will enable a benchmarking exercise to take place to ascertain value for money.

[IL2: PROTECT]31


5.5 Integrity of the bid Methodology 10%

This evaluation methodology will be used to evaluate the Integrity of the bid Quality element for LOT 1 and LOT 2.

Bidders must score at least half of the maximum points available for each of the Level 2 Criteria in order for their bid to be considered.

Criteria Level 1

Weighting Criteria Level 2 Maximum Points Available

Integrity 10%

The Method Statement must show that the whole solution is deliverable (50%) 30The Method statement must show how your solution will add value (50%) 20

The evaluation will consider (including but not limited to):

The extent the bidder’s proposals when considered in its entirety present a solution that is deliverable in a holistic context, is integrated and demonstrably provides added benefit to the Authority. (10 points)

The proven commercial track record of the proposed solution; (10 points) The robustness of the programme for delivery; (10 points) The extent to which the proposed management and staffing structure is

identified and demonstrated as being appropriate for the project; (10 points) The compatibility of the proposed solution with existing contracts (10 points)


Definition

0 Unacceptable The information is either omitted or fundamentally unacceptable to the Authority

1-2 Poor The information submitted does not demonstrate that the solution would be able to deliver the services or add benefit.

3-4 Fair The information submitted does demonstrate only limited evidence that the solution would be able to deliver the services or add benefit.

5-6 Satisfactory The information submitted does demonstrate that the solution would be able to deliver the services and add benefit, although there is only limited evidence of track record of such delivery.

7-8 Good The information submitted does demonstrate good evidence that the solution would be able to deliver the services and add benefit.

9-10 Very Good The information submitted does demonstrate strong evidence that the solution would be able to deliver a best practice services in excess of the specified service outcomes and will add benefits.

5.6 Legal Evaluation Methodology 10%

[IL2: PROTECT]32


This evaluation methodology will be used to evaluate the Legal Quality element for LOT 1 and LOT 2.

Bidders must score at least 5 points for each of the Level 2 Criteria, and at least 5 points in their Risk Allocation and Commercial Terms matrix in order for their bid to be considered.

Criteria Level 1

Weighting Criteria Level 2Maximum

Points Available

Legal 10%Risk Allocation and Commercial Terms (70%)

10

Commercial Deliverability (30%) 10

The Authority will be reviewing Participants’ responses to the Legal ITN Questions to consider the impact of the proposed amendments upon the Authority’s position on risk allocation and, more particularly, the extent to which such amendments provide a value for money benefit to the Authority.

Risk Allocation and Commercial Terms (10 points)

Please complete the contract risk matrix below indicating whether you accept the Authoritys risk profile and if not stating and justifying any derogation from the Authoritys position?

Key Risk Risk Allocation

Is the allocation accepted

Derogation from risk allocation

Justification for derogation

Contractual Structure (10 points)

Please detail how your contract structure with consortium members or sub-contractors demonstrates commercial deliverability e.g. robust back to back agreements with consortium members, robust mirror contracts with sub-contractors, parent companies guarantees, performance bonds, robust governance arrangements etc.

A score out of 10 will be awarded using the scoring methodology in the table below:

[IL2: PROTECT]33


Score Terms Explanation

0 Unacceptable Insufficient or no response received. Overall contractual position of the Participant is entirely unacceptable to the Authority due to the number and seriousness of deviations from the Authority’s position on risk allocation. The Authority would not be willing to contract on this basis.

1-2 Poor The information submitted does not demonstrate; (i) an acceptance of the Authority’s proposed risk allocation and commercial terms; or (ii) a deliverable contractual structure; or (iii) any evidence of the identification of key Project risks and/or value for money proposals (or, in each case, equivalent). The Authority has serious concerns about contracting with the Participant on this basis.

3-4 Fair The information submitted contains assumptions or deviations that demonstrate only limited: (i) acceptance of the Authority’s proposed risk allocation and contractual terms and limited or no reasoning/identification of benefits to support derogations; or (ii) evidence of a deliverable contractual structure; or (iii) limited evidence of the identification of key Project risks and/or value for money proposals (or, in each case, equivalent).

5-6 Satisfactory The submission confirms: (i) an acceptance of the Authority’s proposed risk allocation and contractual terms and reasoning/identification of benefits provided to support derogations; or (ii) a deliverable contractual structure; or (iii) satisfactory evidence of the identification of key Project risks and/or value for money proposals (or, in each case, equivalent).

7-8 Good The submission confirms (i) an acceptance of the Authority’s proposed risk allocation and contractual terms and persuasive reasoning/identification of benefits provided to support derogations; or (ii) a deliverable contractual structure; or (iii) demonstrates a good appreciation of key Project risks and means by which such risks may be mitigated for the benefit of the Project (or, in each case, equivalent).

9-10 Very Good The submission provides (i) an enhanced risk allocation and commercial terms in favour of the Authority and persuasive reasoning/identification of benefits provided to support derogations; or (ii) a deliverable contractual structure; or (iii) an excellent appreciation of key Project risks and means by which such risks may be mitigated for the benefit of the Project (or, in each case, equivalent).

5.7 Quality Evaluation Methodology

[IL2: PROTECT]34


The Integrity of the Bid Quality Evaluation and the Legal Quality Evaluation for Lot 1 will be evaluated separately. Please refer to 5.5 Integrity of the Bid Evaluation Methodology and 5.6 Legal Quality Evaluation Methodology.

The remaining elements of the Quality Evaluation for LOT 1 will be undertaken against the criteria provided below. Please refer to the separate considerations for each of the Criteria.


LOT 1 – Implementation Change Partner

Criteria Level 1 Weighting Criteria Level 2Maximum Points Available

Service Delivery & Improvement 15%

Method Statement to show how all the requirements in the Authority's outcome specification will be met. Please ensure your response takes into account all the considerations listed below. Please provide KPI’s that link to Service Delivery and Improvement which will act as an incentive to achieve the outcomes

110

Staff engagement, development & communication

15%

Method Statement to show how all the requirements in the Authority's outcome specification will be met. Please ensure your response takes into account all the considerations listed below.Please provide KPI’s that link to Staff Engagement, Development and Communication which will act as an incentive to achieve the outcomes

80

Sustainability and Transfer of Knowledge

10%

Method Statement to show how all the requirements in the Authority's outcome specification will be met. Please ensure your response takes into account all the considerations listed below.Please provide KPI’s that link to Sustainability and Transfer of Knowledge which will act as an incentive to achieve the outcomes

20

The evaluation will consider whether proposals will demonstrate that all the key requirements and outcomes of the specification will be met including but not limited to;

For Service Delivery and Improvement we will consider the extent to which;

[IL2: PROTECT]35


The proposal will embed flexible & agile working practices.(10 points) The proposal will enable effective decision making by social workers. (10

points) The proposal will facilitate ongoing personal professional development. (10

points) The proposal will support Sandwell’s ongoing improvement journey. (10

points) The proposal will enable staff to recognise the importance of maintaining

good quality data. (10 points) The proposal will engender staff to work more collaboratively with partners.

(10 points) The proposal puts forward new and innovative approaches and can

demonstrate added value beyond that being specified. (10 points) The proposal will consider how resources will be deployed. (10 points) The proposal embeds the intelligent use of good quality data to inform

decision making and improve outcome for Children’s and Adults services. (10 points)

The proposal will consider how continuous improvement will be achieved through performance management and monitoring linked to effective use of software identified in Lot 2. (10 points)

The proposal will articulate Key Performance Indicators and how these should be measured. (10 points)

For Staff engagement, development & communication we will consider the extent to which;

The proposal will approach staff engagement & communication, recognising the different needs of each service area, and groups within each service. (10 points)

The proposal will recognise and offer a range of learning methods which meet staff needs at all levels and are appropriate to service requirements. (10 points)

The proposal will enable staff to recognise what good looks like. (10 points) The proposal will support the continuous development of staff to fulfil their

role in recording and maintaining good quality data. (10 points) The proposal will articulate their approach to culture and change

management, recognising the different needs of each service area, and consequently how resources are deployed. (10 points)

The proposal recognises the Sandwell context and the challenges faced within this local context. (10 points)

The proposal recognises the differences between Childrens and Adults services. (10 points)

The proposal supports and complements continuous professional development. (10 points)

For Sustainability & transfer of knowledge we will consider the extent to which;

[IL2: PROTECT]36


The proposal’s transition planning and exit strategy ensures a smooth handover back to the Authority such that continued improvement is maintained after the ICP has ceased to work with the Authority. (10 points)

The proposal builds upon skills, knowledge and experience of the management team and staff across both services. (10 points)

Scores will be awarded using the scoring methodology in the table below:


Definition

0 Unacceptable The information is either omitted or fundamentally unacceptable to the Authority and does not demonstrate that the solution will provide the all of the Service Delivery & Improvement, Staff Engagement, Development and Communication essential to the success of the project. The solution does not include Sustainability and the Transfer of Knowledge.

1-2 Poor The information submitted does not demonstrate that the solution would be able to deliver the Service Delivery & Improvement, Staff Engagement, Development and Communication to a level that is essential to the success of the project. The solution does not evidence how Sustainability and the Transfer of Knowledge will be delivered.

3-4 Fair The information submitted does demonstrate only limited evidence that the solution would be able to deliver the Service Delivery & Improvement, Staff Engagement, Development and Communication to a level that is essential to the success of the project. The solution demonstrates limited evidence of how Sustainability and the Transfer of Knowledge will be delivered.

5-6 Satisfactory The information submitted does demonstrate that the solution would be able to deliver the Service Delivery & Improvement, Staff Engagement, Development and Communication to a level that is essential to the success of the project. The solution demonstrates evidence of how Sustainability and the transfer of knowledge will be delivered although there is limited evidence of a track record of such delivery.

7-8 Good The information submitted does demonstrate good evidence that the solution would be able to deliver the Service Delivery & Improvement, Staff Engagement, Development and Communication to a level that is essential to the success of the project. The solution demonstrates evidence of how Sustainability and the Transfer of Knowledge will be delivered along with a good track record of such delivery.

[IL2: PROTECT]37


9-10 Very Good The information submitted does demonstrate strong evidence that the solution would be able to deliver best practice services in excess of the specified service considerations, along with a good track record of such deliverability and added benefits.

LOT 2 – Software

[IL2: PROTECT]38


The Integrity of the Bid Quality Evaluation and the Legal Quality Evaluation for Lot 2 will be evaluated separately. Please refer to 5.5 Integrity of the Bid Evaluation Methodology and 5.6 Legal Quality Evaluation Methodology.

The remaining elements of the Quality Evaluation for LOT 2 will be undertaken against the criteria provided below. Please refer to the separate considerations for each of the Criteria.



Key Business Functions 20%

Method Statement to show how all the requirements in the Authority's outcome specification will be met. Please ensure your response takes into account all the considerations listed below. Please provide KPI’s that link to Key Business Functions which will act as an incentive to achieve the outcomes.

80

Business Continuity, Resilience & Inter-operability

10%

Method Statement to show how all the requirements in the Authority's outcome specification will be met. Please ensure your response takes into account all the considerations listed below.Please provide KPI’s that link to Business Continuity, Resilience & Inter-operability which will act as an incentive to achieve the outcomes.

100

Implementation Support

5%

Method Statement to show how all the requirements in the Authority's outcome specification will be met. Please ensure your response takes into account all the considerations listed below.Please provide KPI’s that link to Implementation Support which will act as an incentive to achieve the outcomes.

60

Approach to Service Management

5%

Method Statement to show how all the requirements in the Authority's outcome specification will be met. Please ensure your response takes into account all the considerations listed below.Please provide KPI’s that link to Approach to Service Management which will act as an incentive to achieve the outcomes.

80

[IL2: PROTECT]39



For Key Business Functions we will consider the extent to which;

The proposal effectively supports better social work and a better customer journey. (10 points)

The proposal fully supports agile and mobile working. (10 points) The proposal supports compliance with legislation and best practice. (10

points) The proposed software is configured to meet our needs upon initial

deployment and also the ability for ongoing local configuration to respond to national or local requirements. (10 points)

The proposed software enables good quality Business intelligence to be created from data within the system. (10 points)

The proposal enables a range of Authority and non-Authority stakeholders to easily use the system. (10 points)

The proposal supports improved data integrity, through education, prevention and compliance. (10 points)

The proposal demonstrates that outputs from the system meet service requirements. (10 points)

For Business Continuity, Resilience & Inter-operability we will consider the extent to which;

The proposal demonstrates how the proposed IT solution provides real time integration with existing key Authority systems and exposes API’s/web services to aid future integration requirements (10 points)

The proposal enables the extraction, sharing & reporting of data across systems and platforms within the Authority, and with partners using a variety of formats (10 points)

The proposal proves conformity with all appropriate Government and industry ICT standards. (10 points)

The proposed IT solution interoperates with the Authority’s desktop architecture & technology platform (10 Points)

The extent to which the solution is AD aware and supports single sign-on from the SMBC LAN (10 points)

The proposal guarantees high levels of service availability and standards. (10 points)

The proposal guarantees the integrity and protection of data appropriate to its data classification level (10 points)

The extent to which the proposal demonstrates resilience of the IT solution to deliver required service and quality levels, including disaster recovery and business continuity processes (10 points)

The proposal delivers ongoing support, training and guidance post implementation. (10 points)

[IL2: PROTECT]40


The proposal safeguards and monitors information by using pro-active processes to continuously meet recognised compliance standards and regulations (10 points)

For Implementation Support we will consider the extent to which;

The proposal guarantees the timely delivery of user training & user support in line with agreed quality levels (10 points)

The proposal supports the Authority to improve the quality of existing data ready for migration to the new system. (10 points)

The proposal guarantees the timely and accurate migration of data to the new system. (10 points)

The proposal supports the installation of any required technology hardware and software, including the provision of on-going technical support (10 points)

The proposal will support the Authority and partners in User Acceptance Testing to ensure a seamless transition to the new system. (10 points)

The proposal demonstrates that the Authority will be provided with good quality system documentation and user guides. (10 points)

For Approach to Service Management we will consider the extent to which;

The proposal will outline a service level agreement that has appropriate measures to incentivise good performance (10 points)

The proposal demonstrates a robust process for escalation & resolution of issues. (10 points)

The proposals will outline a clear upgrade cycle in line with user initiated system improvement and legislative changes. (10 points)

The proposals will demonstrate that upgrades will be implemented with minimal disruption to services and without additional cost. (10 points)

The proposal delivers ongoing support, training and guidance post implementation. (10 points)

The proposal will articulate Key Performance Indicators and how these should be measured. (10 points)

The proposal will demonstrate user involvement in system improvement through a range of channels, such as user groups and online communities. (10 points)

The proposal will demonstrate how key provider staff and consultants will be made available when required. (10 points)


Score Evaluation Definition

[IL2: PROTECT]41


Measure0 Unacceptable The information is either omitted or fundamentally

unacceptable to the Authority and does not demonstrate that the solution will provide all of the Key Business Functions, Business Continuity, Resilience and Interoperability, Implementation support and Approach to Service Management essential to the success of the project.

1-2 Poor The information submitted does not demonstrate that the solution would be able to deliver all of the Key Business Functions, Business Continuity, Resilience and Interoperability, Implementation support and Approach to Service Management to a level that is essential to the success of the project.

3-4 Fair The information submitted does demonstrate only limited evidence that the solution would be able to deliver all of the Key Business Functions, Business Continuity, Resilience and Interoperability, Implementation Support and Approach to Service Management to a level that is essential to the success of the project.

5-6 Satisfactory The information submitted does demonstrate that the solution would be able to deliver all of the Key Business Functions, Business Continuity, Resilience and Interoperability, Implementation Support and Approach to Service Management to a level that is essential to the success of the project and there is limited evidence of a track record of such delivery.

7-8 Good The information submitted does demonstrate good evidence that the solution would be able to deliver all of the Key Business Functions, Business Continuity, Resilience and Interoperability, Implementation Support and Approach to Service Management to a level that is essential to the success of the project along with a good track record of such delivery.

9-10 Very Good The information submitted does demonstrate strong evidence that the solution would be able to deliver best practice services in excess of the specified service considerations, along with a good track record of such deliverability and added benefits.

LOT 3 Hardware

[IL2: PROTECT]42


The Quality Evaluation for LOT 3 will be undertaken against the criteria provided below. Please refer to the separate Criteria for each Lot.

Bidders must score at least half of the maximum points available for each of the Level 2 Criteria in order for their bid to be considered for benchmarking activity by the Authority.


Usability, functionality and ease of use

10%

Method Statement to show how all the requirements in the Authority's outcome specification will be met. Please ensure your response takes into account all the considerations listed below.

80

Supportability & Configuration

10%

Method Statement to show how all the requirements in the Authority's outcome specification will be met. Please ensure your response takes into account all the considerations listed below

30

Security & Compliance 10%


20

Vendor Sustainability & Viability

10%


40


For Usability, functionality and ease of use we will consider the extent to which;

The functionality of the device enhances the user experience in relation to the business functions required to be delivered. (10 points)

The physical interface aids the user, including icons, buttons, switches, keyboard, responsiveness of interactive panel, touch screen etc. (10 points)

Accessibility is supported, including visual quality of text, images and video presented on the device and audio output, including option to customise according to need (10 points)

The physical attributes of the device support a pleasurable user

[IL2: PROTECT]43


interaction, including an aesthetic design, build quality, robustness/durability etc. (10 points)

The device supports different work-styles, and in particular its portability, i.e. size, weight, battery life etc. (10 points)

The device peripherals support its use, including quality and availability of a protective case, power leads, adaptors etc. (10 points)

The device supports media capture, including capture of still images, video or audio (10 points)

The device navigation aids the user, i.e., menu simplicity, learnability, memorability etc. (10 points)

For Supportability & Configuration we will consider the extent to which;

The device can be supported by the in-house ICT organisation (10 points)

The device is capable of being used with a centralised support system or MDM (Mobile Device Management System) (10 points)

The device can be supported remotely, including software distribution. (10 points)

For Security & Compliance we will consider the extent to which;

The device can be configured to support the Authority’s security guidelines, including whether policies can be used to lock down the device, whether the endpoint can be encrypted etc. (10 points)

The device has the ability to connect to network securely using two factor authentication (10 points)

For Vendor Sustainability & Viability we will consider the extent to which:

The Implementation Service meets the needs of the Authority, including the mechanism for ordering and supply of devices (call off or bulk supply), configuration service, delivery to site/desk. (10 points)

The quality of vendor services supports the solution, including warranty & break-fix provision, speed of resolution, number of support staff, contact points and issue management. (10 points)

Commitment to market - product portfolio, strategy & roadmap, number of existing customers. (10 points)

The potential for additional or indirect cost impacts on the overall cost of the service provision. (10 points)


[IL2: PROTECT]44



Definition

0 Unacceptable The information is either omitted or fundamentally unacceptable to the Authority and does not demonstrate that the solution will support Usability, Functionality and ease of use, Supportability & Configuration, Security & Compliance, Vendor Sustainability & Viability essential to the success of the project.

1-2 Poor The information submitted does not demonstrate that the solution would be able to will support Usability, Functionality and ease of use, Supportability & Configuration, Security & Compliance, Vendor Sustainability & Viability essential to the success of the project.

3-4 Fair The information submitted does demonstrate only limited evidence that the solution would be able to will support Usability, Functionality and ease of use, Supportability & Configuration, Security & Compliance, Vendor Sustainability & Viability essential to the success of the project.

5-6 Satisfactory The information submitted does demonstrate that the solution would be able to support Usability, Functionality and ease of use, Supportability & Configuration, Security & Compliance, Vendor Sustainability & Viability essential to the success of the project. and there is limited evidence of a track record of such delivery.

7-8 Good The information submitted does demonstrate good evidence that the solution would be able to support Usability, Functionality and ease of use, Supportability & Configuration, Security & Compliance, Vendor Sustainability & Viability essential to the success of the project. along with a good track record of such delivery.

9-10 Very Good The information submitted does demonstrate strong evidence that the solution would be able will support Usability, Functionality and ease of use, Supportability & Configuration, Security & Compliance, Vendor Sustainability & Viability essential to the success of the project along with a good track record of such deliverability and added benefits.

[IL2: PROTECT]45


5.8 Evaluation Summary

Each Lot will be evaluated separately in the first instance. Bidders will not be disadvantaged if they do not bid for Lot 3. Lot 3 is optional.

LOT 1

All of the individual scores for each of the Cost and Quality elements listed below will be added together to give a total percentage score for Lot 1;

Cost – Price (20%)Financial Considerations (10%)Risk Value (10%)

Quality Service Delivery & Improvement (15%)Staff engagement, Development & Communication (15%)Sustainability and Transfer of Knowledge (10%)Integrity of Bid (10%)Legal (10%)

LOT 2


Cost – Price (20%)Financial Considerations (10%)Risk Value (10%)

Quality Key Business Functions (20%)Business Continuity, Resilience & Interoperability and Risk (10%)Implementation Support (5%)Approach to Service Management (5%)Integrity of Bid (10%)Legal (10%)

LOT 3


Cost – Price (40%)

Quality Usability, Functionality and ease of use (10%)Supportability & Configuration (10%)Security & Compliance (10%)Vendor Sustainability & Viability (10%)

[IL2: PROTECT]46


Bidders must achieve the minimum points threshold stated for each Lot for their bids to be considered. If any Bidder fails to meet the minimum threshold for Lot 1 and Lot 2 (Mandatory Lots) they will be eliminated from the process.

If two or more Bidders fail to meet the minimum threshold for Lot 1 or Lot 2 refer to Part 3 – Submission of Bids: General requirements 3.10, for the full re-evaluation process.

If all Bidders meet the minimum points threshold for each Lot the two Lot Scores will be combined to give a total Bid Score. The top scoring 2 Bidders will be taken through to Stage 2.

The Authority reserves the right to increase the number of Bidders to be taken through to Stage 2.

Lot 3 – If a Bid meets the minimum points threshold it will be included within a benchmarking activity by the Authority. Any Bid that does not meet the minimum points threshold will not be considered within the benchmarking activity.

[IL2: PROTECT]47


PART 6 – Compliance

6.1 Anti-Collusion Certificate

6.1.1 The essence of the public procurement process is that the Authority shall receive bona fide competitive tenders from all Participants. In recognition of this principle we hereby certify that this is a bona fide Bid, intended to be competitive, and that we have not fixed or adjusted the amount of the Bid or the rates or prices quoted by or under or in accordance with any agreement or arrangement with any other Participant (other than a member of our own consortium). We have not:

1. Entered into any agreement with any other person with the aim of preventing Bids being made or as to the fixing or adjusting of the amount of any Bid or the conditions on which any Bid is made; or

2. Informed any other person, other than the person calling for this Bid, of the amount or the approximate amount of the Bid, except where the disclosure, in confidence, of the amount of the Bid was necessary to obtain quotations necessary for the preparation of the Bid for insurance, for performance bonds and/or contract guarantee bonds or for professional advice required for the preparation of the Bid; or

3. Caused or induced any person to enter into such an agreement as is mentioned in Paragraph 1 and 2 above or to inform us of the amount or the approximate amount of any rival Bid for the Contract; or

4. Committed any offence under the Prevention of Corruption Acts 1889 to 1916 nor under Section 117 of the Local Government Act 1972 nor the Bribery Act 2011; or

5. Offered or agreed to pay or give any sum of money, inducement or valuable consideration directly or indirectly to any person for doing or having done or causing or having caused to be done in relation to any other Bid or proposed Bid for the Services; or

6. Canvassed any other persons referred to in Paragraph 1 above in connection with the Contract; or

7. Contacted any officer of the Authority about any aspect of the Contract including (but without limitation) for the purposes of discussing the possible transfer to the employment of the Participant of such officer for the purpose of the Contract or for soliciting information in connection with the Contract.

6.1.2 We also undertake that we shall not procure the doing of any of the acts mentioned in Paragraphs 1 to 7 above before the hour and date specified for the return of the Bid nor (in the event of the Bid being accepted) shall we do so while the resulting Contract continues in force between us (or our successors in title) and the Authority.

In this certificate

The word "person" includes any person, body or association, corporate or incorporate and "agreement" includes any arrangement whether formal or informal and whether legally binding or not.

[IL2: PROTECT]48


Signed: Signed:

For and on behalf of: For and on behalf of:

Dated: Dated:

6.2 Declaration

The following declaration is to be completed by the Participant.

When you have completed the questionnaire, ensure that;

(a) You have answered all the applicable questions;(b) You have enclosed all documents requested; and(c) You have read and signed the declaration below, ensuring you sign the

appropriate declaration

This section is to be completed by the Participant (i.e. all Participants in a consortium or all individual Participants).

I/We certify that the information supplied (whether initially in this ITN or subsequently under the obligation to inform the Authority of any change to that information) is accurate to the best of my/our knowledge and that I/we accept the conditions and undertakings requested in this ITN. I/We understand that false information could result in my/our exclusion from being considered.

I/We also understand that it is a criminal offence, punishable by imprisonment, to give or offer any gift or consideration whatsoever as an inducement or reward to any servant of a public body or agent representing a public body. I/We understand that any Participant who directly or indirectly canvasses any member or official of the Partners or their financial, legal, technical or other advisers concerning the award of the contract or engages in any other corrupt practice involving the members of officials of the Partners or its advisers will be disqualified.

I/We also understand that in the event of the Authority entering into a contract with me/us the answers to the questions set out in this ITN will be binding upon me/us and any misrepresentation may lead to termination of the contract.

I/We understand that the Authority is not obliged to accept any proposal submitted, or to enter into a contract with any Participant and that I/we have no claim on the Authority for any costs or expenses incurred in applying for inclusion in the list of Participants invited to negotiate

[IL2: PROTECT]49


I/We certify that I/we shall undertake to notify the Authority immediately of any material changes of information and/or circumstances, including change of address, occurring at any time subsequent to the date of submission of this ITN.

This certification should be signed:(a) where the Participant is an individual, by that individual;(b) where the Participant is a partnership, by two duly authorised partners;(c) where the Participant is a company, by two directors or a director and secretary of the company.

Signed: …………………………………………………………….

Name:

Position:

Name of Participant:

Date:

Consortium (including Key Sub-Contractor) Acknowledgement

This section to be completed where the Participant proposes a consortium arrangement (including the use of a Key Subcontractor).

We the undersigned confirm that we are the actual/proposed members of the consortium/Key Subcontractor arrangement referred to in this ITN.

We further confirm that we agree to the organisation named below acting as Lead Organisation.

Lead Organisation

Signed: ..................................................................... Date: ...........................................

Signed: ..................................................................... Date: ...........................................

For and on behalf of: ...........................................................................................................

Proposed/Actual Consortium Members

Signed: ..................................................................... Date: ...........................................

Signed: ..................................................................... Date: ...........................................


[IL2: PROTECT]50


Signed: ..................................................................... Date: ...........................................

Signed: ..................................................................... Date: ...........................................


Signed: ..................................................................... Date: ...........................................

Signed: ..................................................................... Date: ...........................................


6.3 The Contract

[IL2: PROTECT]51