tromso-2006-01-pt

Agenda for the meeting:

• hvilken anskaffelsesprosedyre skal vi benytte
• hvilke kvalifikasjonskrav skal vi stille, og hvordan skal oppfyllelse av kravene dokumenteres
• hvilke utvelgelseskriterier og hvilken vekting skal vi benytte
• hvilke krav til tilbudets utforming skal vi stille
• aktiviteter, arbeidsfordeling og arbeidsform videre i prosessen
• tidsplan

• regulated by law
• following three principles:
  • konkurranse
  • gjennomsiktighet
  • etterprøvbarheit

Public tender procedures

• open competition
  • open to all
  • no negotiation
  • can be used any time
• limited competition
  • based on qualification criterion
  • no negotiation
  • can be used any time
• competition with negotiation
  • selected few attenders
  • allows negotiation
  • only available below EES value limit
• direct investment (kjøp)
  • only applicable below the national value limit (500 000,- NOK)

Documentation

Technical description

• Rather technical specifications for speed, functionality, etc. instead of references to the appearance of the product
• no brands should be mentioned

Selection criteria

• relevant to the value of the tender
• relevant to the service or object bought
• concrete and precise, no subjective evaluation
• not breaking the law and its principles

Qualification criteria

• financial and economical
• technical qualifications
• should be objective
• should not discriminate

How the bidder should document the qualification criteria:

• we are pretty much free to choose
• required documents:
  • tax statement or similar
  • health, safety and work condition document

Typical errors made in public tender processes

Errors can be complained about to KOFA (Norway: Klagenemnda for offentlege anskaffingar) by non-winning bidders.

• errors in the procedure
• inconsistencies and unclarities in the PT documents
• irrelevant criterias
• incomplete or unexpected evaluation

Subjective evalutations based on the field in question is not a concern for KOFA.

The main service + the option of maintenance work for 5 year. The total of this will most likely go above the limit value, thus we have only two options: open and limited competition.

Decision:

Open competition.

Economical stability

What documentation is needed?

• siste årsrekneskap
• omsetning siste 3 år
• obligatoriske dokument:
  • skatteattest
  • HMS-erklæring (gjeld det arbeid utført i utlandet?)

Technical qualifications

• Unicode-based - ok
• Language technology - ok
• experience with integration - needs thinking, might be problematic as a qualification criterion
• established cooperation with MS - needs thinking, as above

Documentation for the above:

• Unicode:
  • gje dei ei liste med (ord som inneheld) alle teikn vi bruker (eller sannsynlegvis vil bruka) og be dei dokumentera at dei klarar å handtera alle teikna korrekt
  • vurdering frå referansepersonar
• Language technology:
  • A document describing the formalism used by the language technology in the company
  • A document describing how the existing technology could be applied to the Saami phenomenas mentioned in the PT documents.
  • References to previous work covering similar phenomenas

Technical compatibility

• relates directly to the service to be bought
• relevant to the value of the offer
• can be easily evaluated (the amount of work needed to become compatible)
• could be further explained another place (as a background, probably not needed, as our linguistic resources and basic technology will be described elsewhere)

Future long-term cooperation

We're asking for alternating offers:

• open, do-it-ourself solution
  • they should specify price and licensing conditions
  • also the tools licensed
• closed, you-do-everything solution
• how do we compare the two? Price versus openness: higher weighting the more openness.

Reformulate it as a price criterion? = Maintenance costs. Open versus closed is principally weighted equally, but the total costs will guide our decision. The open option means more local competence, which is good, and therefore preferred.

Added new point covering total costs in a longer perspective.

Kvalitet, funksjonalitet og brukarvenlegheit

This is a summary of points 3 and 4 (new points 4 and 5). Documentation:

The companies should write a rather precise description of

• how they're constructing/building the tools
• how they're going to further develop them (e.g. for dyslecsis, specified elsewhere)
• references to customers/end users

Dyslectic correction should be moved to a product specification document.

Long term stability

• The first subpoint in the present version is illegal here, and covered elsewhere. Removed in the new version.

Relationship (licensing, API documentation) to MS is supposed to be in order, and should be documented by the companies (one is not supposed to have the required documents without MS' cooperation, cf "Norsk språk" and Kunnskapsforlaget). It is removed from the selection criterias.

In the end we removed the whole point regarding long-term stability. It is (and should be) covered elsewhere.

Deadlines

Final delivery May 31. 2007. "Dagbot" (0,15 %) if not delivered within deadline (cf standardavtale frå Statskonsult).

Weighting

Postponed till later and thus removed from the document, it isn't a requirement that it is part of the announcement of the tender.

Prismodell, prisutfyllingsskjema

Modell

Modularisert fastpris.

The modules are:

• MS Office/Win
• MS Office/Mac
• InDesign/Mac
• InDesign/Win (opsjon)

• Dysleksitilpassing av MS Office

• Vedlikehald for alle modulane

=============================

• Samlepakke I: MS Office Win+Mac
• Samlepakke Ia: MS Office Win+Mac + dysleksitilpassing

• Samlepakke II: MS Office + InDesign (alt frå ein leverandør)

Vedlikehald for alle modulane

Vedlikehaldet er modularisert tilsvarande som for modulane sjølve.

• Språklege oppdateringar:
  • Fast pris pr år, månadsleveransar(? kanskje halvår er nok?) så sant SD har noko nytt.

• Tekniske oppdateringar (ny verson):
  • (låg) fastpris pr oppdatering.

• Anna arbeid etter timepris.

10. februar

Kunngjering

• tidsfristane
• kontraktinformasjon (kven, kva, kor)
• hovudtrekka i kval.-krava
• kort skildring av innkjøpet

20. februar

Konkurransegrunnlaget ferdig

• produktspesifikasjon (kravspekk)
• kvalik-krav
• utveljingskriterium
• prisutfyllingsskjema

Praktisk informasjon: fristar, tilbodsmottakar, kontaktoppl. for meir info, ...

Tasks

• Ole Henrik:
  • koordinerer hovuddokumentet
  • samlar det som er skrive til no, samt det vi har kome fram til i dag
  • rammeverk ferdig om omkring ei veke
• Sjur:
  • skriv ferdig kravspekken
  • NB: for å unngå tvil om eventuelle habilitetsproblem, skal Børre og Tomi alltid lesa gjennom "inhabil" dokumentasjon
• Alle:
  • leveringskrav
  • kontrakt(utkast)

13. april

Frist for tilbod

mai

Vedtak, klagefrist, kontrakt