* the figures in the table reflect a pool of requests currently envisaged to be launched in Q4
2020. Neither their proportionate distribution per sectorial areas, nor their average value or
countries of implementation shall be regarded as more than an indication of the values,
thematic or geographical distribution of the requests for services to be launched during a part
of, or during the entire duration of the framework contract.
DG REFORM clarified that it provides information on the individual tenders through the
notification letters, making available all the relevant information from the evaluation report,
and that further individual debriefs are not foreseen.
IV. General feedback from DG REFORM
IV.1 Feedback on the specific tenders
provided the representatives of the framework contractors with the following feedback from
the DG REFORM units:
a)
Overall all teams point to the good quality of offers received by tenderers:
Strong willingness to adjust to the local context
The mix of local and international experts is highly appreciated
Subcontracting/partnering with specialised companies is well appreciated.
b)
Certain possible improvements are identified:
More tailor-made offers would be appreciated.
o
The analysis of the local context could be improved.
o
In some instances, a substantial part of the offer repeats the request for service, in
particular sections related to the methodology. In some instances, tasks to be
performed by the contractor were not sufficiently detailed.
The readability of the section on resource allocation could be improved: contractors are
invited to avoid abbreviations (or add an easy to read legend). The presentation and
rationale behind the allocation of time and resources across deliverables should be
elaborated in greater detail.
A combination of international and national expertise is overall regarded as positive.
However, in certain cases the Requests for cervices require that contractors offer a
combination of international and national expertise but this requirement is not fully
addressed;
Given the specificity of certain projects, subcontracting to more specialised companies
(when considered necessary) would be appreciated;
In some offers the distinction between quality control and team specialisation could be
better made;
The quality control measures are rarely tailor made to the specific project.
Expertise could be reinforced in 2 areas:
o
taxation and Public financial management
o
Insolvency, insurance undertakings and pensions, crisis management and green
finance).
In these areas, targeted expertise is needed such as drafting legislation, raising awareness and
communication campaigns and digitalisation.
The Contractors were reminded to perform robust consistency checks between the technical
and financial offers.
3
IV.2 Feedback related to the quality of project implementation
Positive feedback by all teams: overall good experience.
DG REFORM appreciates the fact that implementation issues are addressed very
quickly and in an appropriate manner. Technical reports are, in general, of good
quality
The Contractors should be aware of the specific roles of the beneficiaries in the MS
and the contracting authority. The Contractors should continue working closely with
the beneficiary Member States, however DG REFORM is the contracting authority
with whom there is a contractual relation and should be always informed proactively
of issues, invited to meetings and consulted when needed.
-handled: rapidly reported and addressed. Contractors show a
high level of flexibility and adaptability to the demanding environment of the
beneficiar
.
Reports and deliverables are of good quality.
Some improvements can be identified:
Quality of the team is crucial: in highly technical projects, the expertise of the
consultants is crucial. It is crucial that at all times the very same level of expertise, if
not higher, is provided within the team at all levels and not on average or through
quality assurance.
Quality control of the reports: structure, English could be better reviewed.
Good capacity to manage the complexity of projects. A need to improve the quality of
project management and quality control has been raised in the area of finance and
access to finance.
It is reminded that DG REFORM should be invited to key meetings and in particular
to any meeting that may affect the terms of the technical support and/or the terms of
the contract.
Contractors are reminded of the requirement to ensure compliance with the provisions
on visibility and intellectual property rights set in the FWC2.
IV.3 Questions and Answers
Q.3.1.: Please clarify the distinction between quality control and the team of experts.
A.3.1: DG REFORM expects that quality control is applied vigorously e.g. in the case of
replacement of an expert, quality control is applied to ensure that the replacement expert has
equivalent expertise.
Q.3.2. Can DG REFORM provide the framework contractors with advance information on
the pending projects to be launched?
A.3.2. DG REFORM can consider sending all contractors information about the fields in
which RfS are planned to be launched, indicative number of RfS per field, beneficiary
Member States and indicative total maximum amount per request. Such information is
expected to help contractors prepare better tenders.
DG REFORM would like to suggest two levels of information to be provided in advance
of the transmission of the requests for service. The information will be provided by the
same channel (email), simultaneously to all contractors without, however, binding the
Commission to actually proceed with the issuing of these requests for services.
Table including the requests for services
4
V.1 Questions and answers
Q.V.1.1 Does DG REFORM take into account during evaluation the quality of projects
already implemented by the respective contractors?
A.V.1.2 While high-quality of implementation of previous projects is an important issue, it is
not one of the award criteria applied for the evaluation of specific offers
VI. Payments
discussed the issue raised by
several contractors about the possibility to request a pre-financing payment or an interim
payment earlier in the project.
As set out in Article I.6.1 of the framework contract pre-financing is not applicable to this
framework contract. In line with Article I.6.2, the contractors may claim an interim payment.
The interim payment of 40% is envisaged to be made after the submission and approval of
certain deliverables, which will be defined in the request for service.
The contracting authority considers that it will not be possible to bring back interim payment
VII. E-procurement and qualified electronic signature
VII.1 E-Procurement
explained that DG REFORM is in the process of on boarding FWC2 in the
-Procurement. The overall objective is the use of an electronic
exchange with framework contractors of specific requests for service, offers, Q&A, specific
contracts, and invoices. The tool will also allow for the electronic signature of the specific
contracts.
All new elements will be communicated to the framework contractors in writing, followed by
the processing of the contract amendments.
Trainings for framework contractors on eProcurement are envisaged and will be scheduled
shortly after FWC2 is fully on boarded in eProcurement and amendments to the framework
contracts are signed.
eProcurement will allow for reliable and timely notifications, tender submission, evaluations,
contract signatures and processing of invoices.
VII.2. Qualified Electronic Signature
DG REFORM decided to opt for using Qualified Electronic Signature (QES), compliant with
the eIDAS Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 910/20142.
- This QES aims at replacing blue-ink signatures on official contractual documents like
Contracts & Amendments.
2 Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on electronic identification
and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market and repealing Directive 1999/93/EC (OJ L 257,
28.8.2014, p. 73 114).
6
- The goal is to use electronic transmission of documents, rather than printing signing and
dispatching the signed documents by surface mail.
- It is of our interest to know if the FWC2 contractors are also able to use an equivalent
(eIDAS compliant) feature for electronic counter-signature of the documents.
VIII. Presentation by DG DIGIT of the Funding and Tenders Portal
Once the FWC2 is in production in the Funding and Tenders Portal, contractors will be able to
see all invitations (RfS) once DG REFORM starts publishing them in the portal. LEARs will
receive notifications by email with a link to the portal (the e-mail contractors have indicated
in their EU Login account). Contractors will also see the notification in the portal about any
related activity thus they will not have to visit the portal every day to see if something has
been published.
d to the present Minutes.
IX. Closing remarks
DG REFORM participants thanked all parties for taking part in this meeting.
X. Questions raised by framework contractors in writing during the meeting
Q.X.1 Will there be a dedicated REFORM FWC space in the Funding and Tenders portal?
A.X.1 -No this is not provisioned but contractors will be able to add criteria in their search to
filter it.
Q.X.2 How does this apply then to the current FWC2, since there will be no page dedicated to
the current contract - do we expect all FWC2 requests will be posted there only and visible to
us as pre identified contractors via the PIC number and all login processes?
A.X.2 Once the FWC2 is on boarded in the Funding and Tenders portal, and once DG
REFORM starts sending requests for services via the portal, LEARS will receive notifications
to their email addresses with a link to each launched RfS. A training will be provided to all
framework contractors prior to the start of sending RfS via the portal.
Thank you for your participation!
Annex: Presentation by DG DIGIT of the Funding and Tenders Portal
7
