The Social Inclusion and Community Activation Programme (SICAP) Date:

The Social Inclusion and Community Activation Programme
(SICAP)
WEEKLY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
FOR TENDERERS
Date:
Questions received by:
Questions numbering:
Thursday 23rd October 2014
Wednesday 22nd October 2014
1 - 12
Question #: 1
Within Financial/Professional Fees/Other is it allowable to include expenditure on SICAP
related research, evaluation or monitoring costs?
Answer #: 1
Financial/Professional Fees/Other Costs are as defined in the Excel SICAP Budget
Template. This does not include expenditure on SICAP related research, evaluation or
monitoring costs. These are to be included in action costs. Monitoring requires a specific
value to be entered on Sheet 1; research and evaluation costs should be factored in under
the relevant actions costs (as non-salary costs). There may also be staff who will be working
on evaluation and research activities; these costs should be included in direct salary costs
for the relevant staff costs.
Question #: 2
For whom does the “Personal Action Plan” need to be prepared? Is it for every individual
registered as part of the SICAP caseload?
Answer # 2:
A Personal Action Plan needs to be prepared for every individual registered as part of the
SICAP caseload under Goal 2 and Goal 3 – see p.28 SICAP Specifications and
Requirements document.
Question #: 3
The formal performance review will take place after a 9 month probationary
period. Following the review the contract will either be allowed to continue or
otherwise. What happens during the intervening period whilst the review is taking place, i.e.
will the contract be temporarily rolled over into 2016 until the result of the performance
review is made known?
Answer #: 3
The duration of the contract issued to successful tenderers will be for a maximum of 33
months (from estimated 1st April 2015 to 31st December 2017). The review will take place
after a probationary period of 9 months, i.e. in the 10th month, and it will take a short time to
complete. While the review is taking place the contract will still run.
Question #: 4
If, following the performance review, the contract with the successful tenderer is not
renewed, what happens if the next highest scoring tenderer no longer exists for whatever
reason? Would the contracting authority then have the option of going to the third highest
scoring tenderer and so on? Or in that situation would a new contract award procedure be
initiated?
Answer #: 4
The procedure for addressing this situation is described under section 2.27 of the ITT
Document.
Question #: 5
Arising out of the previous question above, we would be very concerned that a competitor
may either exaggerate the Targets proposed in the Tender or exaggerate the savings on
administration costs to an ultimately unachievable level, safe in the knowledge that the next
highest scoring tenderer would no longer exist having failed to secure the requisite
contract. In other words, what is the deterrent against unrealistic targets and budgets being
submitted?
Answer #: 5
Each LCDC will carefully consider all tender proposals before making an award decision. In
addition, we believe that the options reserved under section 2.27 of the ITT Document will
prevent the scenario you describe.
1
Question #: 6
Under the lot targets does part-time employment include work placement programmes such
as Community Employment schemes, TUS etc? Does work experience gained or
volunteering placements count as part-time/full time employment?
Answer #: 6
For individuals who participate in work placement programmes such as the Community
Employment Scheme and the Tús initiative, these should not be included as progression to
part-time or full-time employment as it does not constitute employment in the open labour
market.
In addition, work experience or volunteering placements should not be included as
progression to part-time or full-time employment, as it does not constitute paid employment
in the open labour market.
Question #: 7
The type format (Arial, font size 11) does not mention anything in terms of spacing between
lines. Is there to be a standard for this?
Answer #: 7
In terms of the responses to Criterion 1-5, there is no prescribed line spacing. Tenderers
must ensure that the response provided is clearly legible and does not exceed the maximum
permitted response length for each Criterion.
Question #: 8
All prices are to be included at VAT exclusive cost. We are Vat Exempt, i.e. VAT on
expenditure incurred is a cost to the company. We are thus placed at a disadvantage
against any competitors who may be able to recover VAT on expenditure. How are we to
treat the VAT on expenditure when compiling the budget?
Answer #: 8
As per the ITT, all prices and rates quoted should be exclusive of VAT in the Form of
Tender and the Budget Template. This is an EU requirement to assist comparison between
tenders.
Question #: 9
Can you please clarify for me if an error has been made with the indicative budgets for the
West Cork Islands lot and the Mayo Islands lot which came out from Pobal on Monday.
It seems to me that an historic budget figure from 2009 has been used by mistake and not
the budgets used since 2011.
Answer #: 9
The indicative Lot Budget for the West Cork Islands Lot (Lot No. 18-7) and the Mayo Islands
Lot (Lot No. 29-1), as published on the ‘Lot Budgets’ document on the Pobal website, is
correct. The budget covers the timeframe from April - December 2015. SICAP is a new
programme and the budget for each Lot has been set by the Department of the
Environment, Community and Local Government.
As advised in the ITT, it is possible that the budget for each Lot may vary following the
publication of the national annual budget in October 2014; in such case, Pobal will notify
Tenderers by email of any changes by Friday 7th November 2014. The final budget awarded
may also be subject to changes as part of the contractual process.
Question #: 10
In respect of Mayo Lot 29-1, Mayo Islands:
2
a)
Please provide the names of the individual islands within each ED
b)
Will three Actions per Goal be necessary for Island Lots, given the very small
populations and budgets involved and the particular Island circumstances?
c)
Where Island Community Development Projects are in place and funded currently,
will they be continued for the duration of SICAP?
Answer #: 10
a) Mayo Lot 29-1 consists of four Small Areas (SAs): 157081003; 157050001;
157102001/157102008; 157001004/157001005, contained within four EDs
respectively: Gleann Chaisil; Clare Island; Kilmeena; Acaill. The Lot is not
necessarily made up only of islands but may also include parts of the mainland. This
information is provided to prospective tenderers within the ITT for that Lot. The small
areas are available to view on Pobal Maps.
b) Yes, the same specifications and requirements apply across all Lots. The population
size and deprivation levels have been taken into account when setting the Lot
minimum targets and budget.
c) It is not appropriate to comment on the continuity or otherwise of other programmes
outside of SICAP as this is a SICAP procurement process.
Question #: 11
Under Criterion 4, where a Stage two tenderer can apply for more than one Lot, can the
same staff be named for the delivery of the programme in each separate Lot tender
submission?
Answer #: 11
Tenderer are required to specify the staff who will deliver SICAP in each Lot tender. If the
same staff member is listed in more than one Lot, please ensure that the sum of their time
does not exceed 1 FTE (if seeking to be awarded a contract for more than one Lot). This will
be reviewed during the regional audit and co-ordination process.
Question #: 12
Criterion 2b. How is "in-house provision" defined? For example, is a training course where
the SICAP programme staff identify the need, recruit the participants, organise the venue,
and then engage a training provider "in-house"?
Answer #: 12
In terms of Criterion 2b (Validated Programme of Learning/Industry Certified Training), inhouse provision refers to a situation where a SICAP Programme Implementer delivers the
training directly i.e. the training is undertaken by employees of the organisation as opposed
to a scenario where an external organisation is contracted to deliver the training.
3