Public procurement notice: Contract Award Notice
Published: 2019-09-11
Buyer: University of Edinburgh
Country: UK
Contract type: Services
Procedure: Restricted procedure
CPV classification: 71530000: Construction consultancy services
Award criteria: The most economic tender

Technical requirements: The University of Edinburgh wishes to appoint the services of a commissioning management officer (CMO) for the Darwin tower main contract works. The commissioning manager shall work on the project from pre-tender through to final completion including a 1 year soft landings process, the role will be from RIBA Stage 2 to RIBA Stage 8. This direct appointment with The University is not a hands on physical commissioning role but involves the management of the commissioning process/leading the contracting team through this process.
The commissioning officer will be responsible for managing the commissioning, setting to work and validating as applicable all mechanical and electrical services installed through the enabling works contract.
There is a possibility that additional CMO coverage will be required in other areas of the campus therefore 2 individuals must be available to be designated as CMO’s for the University.
Economic operators may be excluded from this competition if there are any of the situations referred to in regulation 58 of the Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 2015
Stage 1: Pre-qualification via the submission of the completed ESPD (Scotland). Bidders must pass the minimum standards (pass/fail) sections of the ESPD (Scotland). These can be found within the qualification envelope of PCS-T.
Bidders must complete the technical envelope. Specific statements detailing the requirement are detailed below. The responses to these statements will be scored as per the scoring methodology also detailed below. We will take the 6 highest scoring bidders through to the ITT stage and they will be invited to submit a tender.
The University will evaluate all shortlisted bidders/tenderers ITT submissions via undertaking a quality/technical (including an interview assessment) and commercial/cost evaluation.
Technical (quality) scores shall be allocated based on the total percentage achieved by the response out of the maximum possible percentage.
Cost – the bidder who submits the lowest cost will be awarded the maximum score attributed to the commercial (cost) section and others awarded a score prorata, in relation to the lowest bid.
0 = Unacceptable. Nil or inadequate response. Fails to demonstrate previous experience/capacity/capability relevant to this criterion.
1 = Poor. Response is partially relevant but generally poor. The response shows some elements of relevance to the criterion but contains insufficient/limited detail or explanation to demonstrate previous relevant experience/capacity/capability.
2 = Acceptable. Response is relevant and acceptable. The response demonstrates broad previous experience, knowledge and skills/capacity/capability but may lack in some aspects of similarity e.g. previous experience, knowledge or skills may not be of a similar nature.
3 = Good. Response is relevant and good. The response is sufficiently detailed to demonstrate a good amount of experience, knowledge or skills/capacity/capability relevant to providing similar services to similar clients.
4 = Excellent. Response is completely relevant and excellent overall. The response is comprehensive, unambiguous and demonstrates thorough experience, knowledge or skills/capacity/capability relevant to providing similar services to similar clients.
Bidders will be required to provide 3 examples of commissioning manager services carried out during the past 5 years that demonstrate that they have the relevant experience to deliver the services as described in the contract notice.