N° MARE/2014/40 - European Commission

Ref. Ares(2015)21057 - 06/01/2015
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR MARITIME AFFAIRS AND FISHERIES
BALTIC SEA, NORTH SEA AND LANDLOCKED MEMBER STATES
MARITIME POLICY BALTIC AND NORTH SEA
ANNEX I
OPEN CALL FOR TENDERS
N° MARE/2014/40
Study on international best practices for
cross-border Maritime Spatial Planning
TENDERING SPECIFICATIONS
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
INFORMATION ON TENDERING .......................................................................... 3
1.1. Participation....................................................................................................... 3
1.2. Contractual conditions....................................................................................... 3
1.3. Joint tenders....................................................................................................... 3
1.4. Subcontracting................................................................................................... 3
1.5. Content of the tender ......................................................................................... 4
1.6. Identification of the tenderer: legal capacity and status .................................... 5
2.
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS.............................................................................. 5
2.1. Background........................................................................................................ 5
2.2. Objectives and tasks of the contract .................................................................. 8
2.3. Duration of the tasks, deliverables and budget................................................ 12
2.4. Content, Structure and graphic requirements of the study .............................. 13
3.
EVALUATION AND AWARD ............................................................................... 14
3.1. Evaluation steps............................................................................................... 14
3.2. Exclusion criteria............................................................................................. 14
3.3. Selection criteria.............................................................................................. 14
3.4. Award criteria.................................................................................................. 16
3.5. Technical offer................................................................................................. 17
3.6. Financial offer ................................................................................................. 17
3.7. Financial evaluation......................................................................................... 18
3.8. Award of the contract ...................................................................................... 18
APPENDIX: EVALUATION GRID ................................................................................ 19
Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111
1. INFORMATION ON TENDERING
The European Commission referred to as "the Commission", in particular the
Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (DG MARE) is launching an
invitation to tender with a view to concluding a service contract valid for an initial period
of 15 months from the starting date of the contract.
The services that will be covered by this contract form part of a Programme whose
implementation has been delegated to the European Agency for Small and Medium-sized
Enterprises (EASME). The contract will therefore be signed by EASME
By submitting a tender, the tenderer accepts the terms and conditions of the annexed draft
contract.
1.1. Participation
Participation in this tender procedure is open on equal terms to all natural and legal
persons coming within the scope of the Treaties and to all natural and legal persons in a
third country which has a special agreement with the Union in the field of public
procurement on the conditions laid down in that agreement. Where the Multilateral
Agreement on Government Procurement1 concluded within the WTO applies, the
participation to the call for tender is also open to nationals of the countries that have
ratified this Agreement, under the conditions laid down in it.
1.2. Contractual conditions
The tenderer should bear in mind the provisions of the draft contract which specifies the
rights and obligations of the contractor, particularly those on payments, performance of
the contract, confidentiality and checks and audits.
1.3. Joint tenders
A joint tender is a situation where a tender is submitted by a group of economic operators
(consortium). Joint tenders may include subcontractors in addition to the joint tenderers.
In case of a joint tender, all economic operators assume joint and several liability towards
the Contracting Authority for the performance of the contract as a whole. Tenderers must
designate a single point of contact for the Contracting Authority.
A joint tender has to be signed either by all members of the group or by one of the
members which has been duly authorised by the others. In all cases, joint tenderers must
designate a single point of contact for the Commission. After the award, the Commission
will sign the contract with one member, duly authorised by the other members via a
power of attorney.
1.4. Subcontracting
Subcontracting is the situation where a contract is to be established between the
Commission and a contractor and where the contractor, in order to carry out that contract,
enters into legal commitments with other legal entities for performing part of the service.
However, the Commission has no direct legal commitment with the subcontractor(s).
1
See http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_E/gproc_e/gp_gpa_e.htm
3
Tasks provided for in the contract may be entrusted to subcontractors, but the contractor
retains full liability towards the Commission for performance of the contract as a whole.
Accordingly:
− the Commission will treat all contractual matters (e.g. payments)
exclusively with the contractor, whether or not the tasks are performed by
a subcontractor;
− under no circumstances can the contractor avoid liability towards the
Commission on the grounds that the subcontractor is at fault.
During contract execution, the change of any subcontractor identified in the tender will
be subject to prior written approval of the Commission.
Any intention to subcontract part of the contract must be clearly stated in the tender.
Tenderers must provide:
− a document stating clearly the identity, roles, activities and responsibilities
of subcontractor(s) and specifying the volume/proportion for each
subcontractor;
− a letter of intent by each subcontractor stating its unambiguous
undertaking to collaborate with the tenderer if he wins the contract and the
extent of the resources that it will put at the tenderer’s disposal for the
performance of the contract.
In order to prove their legal capacity and their status, all tenderers and identified
subcontractors must provide a signed Legal Entity Form with its supporting evidence.
The declaration on honour is also required for identified subcontractors whose intended
share of the contract is above 10%. If the total amount subcontracted is above 20% of the
total contract value, ALL the identified subcontractors must submit a declaration on
honour.
Tenderers must prove their economic, financial, technical and professional capacity to
carry out the work subject to this call for tender.
The evidence requested must be provided by each member of the group in case of joint
tender and by any identified subcontractor whose intended share of the contract is above
10%. If the total amount subcontracted is above 20% of the total contract value, ALL the
identified subcontractors must submit the requested documents. A consolidated
assessment will be made to verify compliance with the minimum capacity levels.
1.5. Content of the tender
The tenders must be presented as follows:
− Part A: Identification of the tenderer (see below)
− Part B: Evidence for exclusion criteria (see section 3.2)
− Part C: Evidence for selection criteria (see section 3.3)
− Part D: Technical offer (see section 3.5)
4
− Part E: Financial offer (see section 3.6)
1.6. Identification of the tenderer: legal capacity and status
The tender must include a cover letter presenting the name of the tenderer (including all
entities in case of a joint offer) and identified subcontractors if applicable, and the name
of the single contact person in relation to this tender.
If applicable, the cover letter must indicate the proportion of the contract to be
subcontracted.
In case of a joint tender, the cover letter must be signed by a single tenderer duly
authorised by other tenderers (with power of attorney).
Subcontractors must provide a letter of intent stating their willingness to provide the
service foreseen in the offer and in line with the present tender specifications.
In order to prove their legal capacity and their status, all tenderers must provide a signed
Legal Entity Form with its supporting evidence. The form is available on:
http://ec.europa.eu/budget/contracts_grants/info_contracts/legal_entities/legal_entit
ies_en.cfm
Tenderers that are already registered in the Contracting Authority’s accounting system
(i.e. they have already been direct contractors) must provide the form but are not obliged
to provide the supporting evidence.
The tenderer (or the single point of contact in case of joint tender) must provide a
Financial Identification Form and supporting documents. Only one form per offer should
be submitted (no form is needed for subcontractors and other joint tenderers). The form is
available on:
http://ec.europa.eu/budget/contracts_grants/info_contracts/index_en.cfm
Tenderers must provide the following information if it has not been included with the
Legal Entity Form:
− For legal persons, a legible copy of the notice of appointment of the
persons authorised to represent the tenderer in dealings with third parties
and in legal proceedings, or a copy of the publication of such appointment
if the legislation which applies to the legal entity concerned requires such
publication. Any delegation of this authorisation to another representative
not indicated in the official appointment must be evidenced.
− For natural persons, where applicable, a proof of registration on a
professional or trade register or any other official document showing the
registration number.
2. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
2.1. Background
2.1.1. MSP in Europe
The use of Europe's sea-areas is increasing and gives rise to potential conflicts and
competition for maritime space, both between different users, and between maritime uses
and the preservation of the marine environment. This development increases the demand
5
for Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP), an instrument that is essential for resource
efficiency in maritime activities. MSP provides a framework for the management of
human sea uses in a context of intensifying economic activity in sea basins around
Europe. As such, it has a vital role to play both in terms of maximising the development
potential for crucial activities, such as offshore renewable energy production, and of
arbitrating between human activities to ensure that the cumulative impact of ongoing
activities is sustainable. By providing long-term stability, predictability and transparency,
MSP encourages investments for sustainable growth and jobs and secures ongoing
activities.
The impact on the marine environment of economic activities also needs to stay within
clear boundaries. MSP supports sustainable use of marine resources in line with the EU
Sustainable Development Strategy and the requirement of the Marine Strategy
Framework Directive on the application of the ecosystem approach by providing the
means to effectively control human use of the marine space.
The European Commission's intention is to support the development of MSP processes
throughout the EU, by facilitating cooperation between Member States in the
management of the maritime space in sea basins surrounding the EU. To this end, the
Communication "Roadmap for Maritime Spatial Planning: Achieving common principles
in the EU"2 was adopted by the Commission in 2008. In a Communication adopted in
December 20103, the Commission reported on the implementation of the roadmap, as
well as other developments on MSP. The stakeholder consultation revealed broad
agreement on the need for a common approach on MSP and confirmed an interest to
develop MSP further at EU level.
The Commission has also initiated a number of studies on various aspects of MSP:
− A study on the legal aspects of MSP (2008)4;
− A study on the economic effects of MSP (2010)5, which concluded that
economic effects of MSP are reduced transaction costs for new maritime
activities and an improved investment climate;
− A study looking into the potential of MSP in the Mediterranean (2011)6.
Directive 2014/89/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014
establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning7 entered into force in September
2014. The main purpose of the Directive is to promote the sustainable growth of
maritime activities by establishing a framework for the implementation of maritime
spatial planning in EU waters.
The operational objectives of the Directive are procedural in nature. Member States are
required to develop and implement coherent processes to plan human uses of maritime
space, and to establish appropriate cross border cooperation among them. A key added
value of the proposal is support for the inclusion of land-sea interactions in MSP
processes. Planning details and the determination of management objectives are left to
Member States. The core elements of Directive 2014/89/EU are:
2
3
4
5
6
7
COM (2008) 791final
COM(2010) 771 final
http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/pdf/legal_aspects_msp_report_en.pdf
http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/study_msp_en.html
http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/study_msp_med_en.html
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2014.257.01.0135.01.ENG
6
− Acknowledgement of maritime spatial planning as a cross-sectoral tool to
analyse and organize human activities in marine areas to achieve
ecological, economic and social objectives;
− Transposition of the Directive into national law, and creation of competent
authorities to put it into effect, within 2 years;
− EU Member States (except land-locked ones) are to prepare cross-sectoral
maritime spatial plans by 2021.
− The plans should:
o apply the ecosystem-based approach;
o contribute to the preservation, protection and improvement of the
environment;
o contribute to the sustainable development of energy sectors at sea,
maritime transport, and fisheries and aquaculture;
o allow Member States to pursue additional objectives such as
sustainable tourism or the extraction of raw materials;
− Take into account land-sea interactions and promote coherence between
MSP and Integrated Coastal Zone Management;
− Cross-border cooperation:
o Member States sharing a sea should cooperate to ensure that their
MSP are coherent and coordinated across the marine region.
Means of cooperation are left to Member States to decide.
o Member States should cooperate with third countries on their
actions with regard to maritime spatial planning (where
geopolitically possible).
− Public information from an early stage and participation of relevant
stakeholders, authorities, and public concerned;
− Use of best available data and organisation of the sharing of information
between stakeholders.
2.1.2. MSP in the world
Maritime Spatial Planning is currently being developed in many areas of the world. The
USA, Canada and Australia especially have long been at the forefront of implementing
MSP. The UNESCO initiative on marine spatial planning made a first inventory of MSP
examples around the world, which, though dated, can be a useful first step8. The World
Ocean Council has also created a MSP Working Group which keeps track of
international developments9.
The EU is at the forefront of cross-border cooperation on MSP, both through projects that
have brought together representatives from various Member States in the Baltic10,
Atlantic11, North Sea12 and Adriatic13, and through the legal obligation required by
8
9
10
11
12
13
http://www.unesco-ioc-marinesp.be/msp_around_the_world
http://www.oceancouncil.org/site/planning.php
http://planbothnia.org/ and http://www.baltseaplan.eu
http://www.tpeamaritime.eu/wp/
https://www.wageningenur.nl/en/show/Maspnose-Maritime-spatial-planning-in-the-North-Sea.htm
http://adriplan.eu/
7
Directive 2014/89/EU. However, examples of cross-border cooperation on maritime
planning are not numerous elsewhere. A good example can be found below:
Gulf of Maine
An example of cross border marine management is the region of the Gulf of Maine in the
North-West Atlantic region14. The Gulf of Maine is bordered by three American states
(Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine) and two Canadian provinces (New
Brunswick and Nova Scotia). In 1989, the Gulf of Maine Marine Environmental Council
was created in order to implement transboundary cooperation on the basis of shared
ecosystem goals and objectives achieved through the implementation of quinquennial
Action Plans. Joint initiatives include: Gulfwatch monitoring program, Ecosystem
Indicator Partnership, Climate Network, Habitat Restoration Program and Coastal and
Marine Spatial Planning Program (CMSP). The Gulf of Maine council serves as a forum
for the exchange of data and knowledge related to CSMP. A CMSP committee has also
been established in order to follow and share information regarding national CMSP
efforts across the border and to advise the council on possible CMSP actions.
2.2. Objectives and tasks of the contract
The objectives of the contract are to:
1. Establish a detailed inventory of MSP implementation in the world
2. Explore four case studies of MSP implementation to identify best practices in
relation to the requirements of Directive 2014/89/EU
3. Prepare recommendations on the format, scope and added-value of international
cooperation on MSP
4. Organise a high level final conference presenting best practices and
recommendations, and involving representatives from the four case studies.
The “study” will be composed of elements 1, 2 and 3.
2.2.1. Inventory of global MSP implementation
Building on existing knowledge (see section 2.1.2), the contractors will be asked to
develop an accurate list of existing MSP implementation outside the EU. MSP should be
defined as closely as possible to the understanding of it found in Directive 2014/89/EU,
and essentially, as a cross-sectoral process. The list shouldn't include cases where the
planning exercise has involved only one sector or one type of stakeholders (for instance,
the establishment of a MPA should not be considered as MSP if it doesn't include
broader maritime activities around and within the MPA).
The list of MSP experiences should include at least, but not limited to them, the
following elements for each case:
− Authorities, sectors and stakeholders involved
− Procedure for consultation
− Initial planning issue or driver for MSP
14
http://www.gulfofmaine.org/2/gomc-home/the-gulf-of-maine/
8
− Timing
− Size of the area
− Funding
− Legal basis
− Final or expected outcome
− Internet links
The contractors should also list all ongoing international or cross-border cooperation on
MSP, summarising, at least, objectives, leading authority, participation, expected
outcome and legal bases (for instance, the work of the Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity on Marine Planning).
Information collected by the study will be uploaded into the pages of the Assistance
Mechanism for MSP (see Call for Tenders MARE/2014/23) on the Maritime Forum of
the Commission in a format that will allow the regular review and updating of the data.
The contractors should draft a summary of the main lessons learnt through the
establishment of the inventory. The summary should not be longer than 20 pages and
should include lessons learnt on the success of MSP experiences. A sub-section should
be dedicated to best practices on cross-border cooperation.
2.2.2. Case studies
Contractors will have to identify four examples of MSP implementation and conduct case
studies to identify best practices that are relevant for the implementation of Directive
2014/89/EU in Member States. The four cases chosen by the contractors should be
presented in the technical offer. It should clarify the rationale for this choice considering
the task described below. If relevant, tenderers can identify one case of Maritime Spatial
Planning in the high seas.
At least two out of the four cases should involve cross-border cooperation between at
least two different countries. The remaining can be cases of MSP implementation in a
single country or between two states within the one federal country. A case study can
also be developed on cooperation between countries to implement MSP in the High Seas.
The four cases should together present a balanced world geographic coverage.
The main aim of the contract is to find best practices in terms of cross-border
cooperation. A strong emphasis should therefore be given to that dimension. All case
studies should look for best practices on:
− Application of the eco-system-based approach (or equivalent concept)
− Mechanisms for exchange of data (across sectors and across borders)
− Cross-sectorial involvement of stakeholders and authorities
− Means of public participation
− Links between land and marine planning
− Enforcement of the plans
− Application of MSP in the High Seas (if relevant)
− Sustainability of funding
9
Each case study must involve, in terms of background research to be carried out, at least:
− On-site visits
− Discussion with all the main stakeholders involved in the MSP process
− Detailed analysis of the outcome of the MSP process (plan, report...)
− Detailed analysis of the enforcement and financing procedures
The presentation of the case studies must include a description of the background
research done, with appropriate data on site visits and stakeholder interviews.
The study should be policy-oriented. Applicants should keep in mind that its aim is to
provide concrete input for Member States implementation of MSP.
This work should be complementary to the recent work done by the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP), the Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel of the
Global Environment Facility (GEF-STAP), and the Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity15.
2.2.3. Recommendations for international exchange on MSP
The work described above should be the basis for the proposal of recommendations on
further steps to be taken on international exchange of information concerning MSP.
Based on the inventory (2.2.1.) and the case studies (2.2.2), contractors should identify
what in the implementation of MSP, and especially in the requirements of the Directive
would benefit most from setting regular dialogue on MSP at international level. The
recommendations should include, at least, the following considerations:
− What elements of MSP implementation would benefit from international
cooperation?
− What should be the format of the dialogue and why?
− Who should participate? At what political level?
− What areas of the world would benefit from international dialogue on
MSP?
− Should this cooperation be conducted within the framework of an existing
international organisation? (The recommendations should be backed by an
analysis of the pros and cons for relevant organisations).
− What lessons can we learn and what recommendations can be made on the
implementation of MSP in the High Seas?
The contractors should review the relevance of the conclusions of the CALAMAR
project, which focused on "cooperation across the Atlantic for marine governance
integration" between January 2010 and June 201116. Although CALAMAR had a broader
policy scope and only focused on EU-US dialogue, some of their conclusions might
prove relevant for this contract.
The contractor shall formulate the Recommendations in the draft final report (section
2.3.3.).
15
16
UNEP & GEF-STAP (2014) “Marine Spatial Planning in Practice – Transitioning from Planning to Implementation. An analysis
of global Marine Spatial Planning experiences”. Thomas, H. L., Olsen, S., & Vestergaard, O. (Eds), UNEP Nairobi, pp. 36.
http://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-18/information/sbstta-18-inf-23-en.pdf
http://calamar-dialogue.org/
10
2.2.4. Final conference
The contractors will be asked to organise a high level final conference in Brussels to
present the results of the study (best practices that are relevant for the implementation of
2014/89/EU) and also the Recommendations. The conference should gather, at least:
− EU Commissioner(s), Directors
− High-level representation of Member States where MSP has been
implemented
− High level representation of countries involved in the cases studied
− Relevant MEPs
− Authoritative academic figures in the field of MSP
− NGOs and stakeholders
The one-day conference will take place in Brussels, with an expected attendance of ca.
250 people. The contractor will be expected to cover all costs related to the organisation
and implementation of the conference, inter alia hire of venue, provision of logistics and
catering, reimbursement of travel and accommodation for selected participants and
speakers, interpretation, etc.
The Commission may ask for any combination of the following services and goods,
before, during and after the event:
− Identification and contact with speakers;
− Proposal for a draft programme, incl. description of sessions;
− Assistance with identification of key stakeholders that should be invited to
participate in the event;
− Search for an appropriate venue for the event;
− When not provided by the venue itself, ensuring the provision of services
like catering, cleaning and security, storage, floral arrangements and other
decoration, flipcharts and similar items, photocopying, mounting and
dismantling of stands and displays, etc.;
− Where necessary, ensuring the provision of local related services such as
interpreters, photographers, local transport for participants, locallysourced event assistants and hostesses, facilitators, and other necessary
elements for the event organisation;
− Reimbursing the travel costs and paying subsistence allowances for the
paid participants. This includes (notably in connection with paperless
emailed tickets) obtaining proof from the participants that the travel costs
were effectively paid and how;
− Drafting, translation and dissemination of minutes (and/or thematic
dossiers) emerging from the event to all participants (publication of
speeches/addresses etc. on paper and in electronic form);
− Ensuring the printing of material (including executive summary of the
study);
11
− Ensuring video coverage (webstreaming).
All decisions related to the conference will be subject to prior Commission approval.
Especially, tenderers are reminded that when the Commission requests the contractor to
write or otherwise prepare content of a leaflet, brochure, webpage etc. for the event, the
contractor, after completing a draft, will be required to submit it to the Commission for
checking whether it agrees with the content and considers it in line with its policies. The
contractor is always accountable for spelling and accuracy. All prices quoted in the
financial tender documents must include the work of proofreading, correcting, editing,
finalising etc., whenever relevant. During the implementation of the contract, such costs
may not be charged separately.
2.3. Duration of the tasks, deliverables and budget
The total duration of the execution of the tasks (including the submission of the final
report) cannot exceed 15 months. An interim report shall be delivered within 7 months
from the signature of the contract. A draft final report shall be delivered within 13
months from the signature of the contract.
The final conference, for which the draft final report should be published and distributed
to participants, should take place no later than three weeks before the end of the contract.
Whilst the reports shall include the scientific analyses and supporting data, they shall be
written so as to ensure that the information and analyses are accessible to a non-scientific
audience, and that any conclusions or recommendations are relevant for policy purposes.
The maximum amount awarded for this contract is € 500 000 and shall cover all the
expenditures incurred during the implementation of this study.
2.3.1. Inception meeting and report
The inception meeting will take place within 2 weeks of the signature of the contract.
Within four weeks from the signature of the contract, the contractors will submit an
inception report including a detailed roadmap for the project and methodology including
that for all case studies.
2.3.2. Interim report
An interim report shall be submitted no later than 7 months after the signature of the
contract. The report shall present an overview of the tasks performed during the first
interim period. It shall describe the state of progress in implementing the project; identify
any obstacles encountered and whether they have hindered progress. It shall describe the
measures taken to overcome those obstacles, or whether the obstacles persist. The report
will be presented to the Member States Expert Group on MSP and other relevant expert
groups, as discussed with the Commission.
The interim report should include the inventory, as specified in 2.2.1.
2.3.3. Draft report and final conference
The contractor shall organise a conference no later than three weeks before the end of the
contract, as outlined in 2.2.4. The conference shall be planned in collaboration with the
Commission.
12
Ahead of the conference and within 13 months from the signature of the contract, the
contractors shall ensure that a draft final report of the study, including the inventory, case
studies, best practices and recommendations, is submitted to the Commission. The text
shall be approved by the Commission before its distribution to the participants. The
contractor should take into account the outcome of the conference to make relevant
changes in view of delivery the final report.
2.3.4. Final report
A final report shall be submitted no later than 15 months after the signature of the
contract. The report will address all the terms of reference as outlined in section 2.2. It
will include a comprehensive list of information sources and related technical and
administrative documentation. Any scientific papers produced in the process of the
implementation of this service contract shall be provided in annex.
2.4. Content, Structure and graphic requirements of the study
All studies produced for the European Commission and Executive Agencies shall
conform to the corporate visual identity of the European Commission by applying the
graphic rules set out in the European Commission's Visual Identity Manual, including its
logo17.
The Commission is committed to making online information as accessible as possible to
the largest possible number of users including those with visual, auditory, cognitive or
physical disabilities, and those not having the latest technologies. The Commission
supports the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 of the W3C.
For full details on Commission policy on accessibility for information providers, see:
http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/standards/accessibility/index_en.htm
Pdf versions of studies destined for online publication should respect W3C guidelines for
accessible pdf documents. See: http://www.w3.org/WAI/
2.4.1. Content
2.4.1.1.
Final study report
The final study report shall include:
− an abstract of no more than 200 words and an executive summary of
maximum 6 pages, in English;
− the following standard disclaimer:
“The information and views set out in this [report/study/article/publication…] are
those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the
Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included
in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s
behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information
contained therein.”
− specific identifiers which shall be incorporated on the cover page provided
by the Contracting Authority.
17
The Visual Identity Manual of the European Commission is available upon request. Requests should be made to the following email address: [email protected]
13
2.4.1.2.
Published executive summary (for distribution at the final
conference)
The publishable executive summary shall be provided in English and shall include:
− the following standard disclaimer:
“The information and views set out in this [report/study/article/publication…] are
those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the
Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included
in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s
behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information
contained therein.”
− specific identifiers which shall be incorporated on the cover page provided
by the Contracting Authority.
2.4.2. Graphic requirements
For graphic requirements please refer to the template provided in the annex 7. The cover
page shall be filled in by the contractor in accordance with the instructions provided in the
template. For further details you may also contact [email protected].
3. EVALUATION AND AWARD
3.1. Evaluation steps
The evaluation is based on the information provided in the submitted tender. It takes
place in three steps:
1. Verification of non-exclusion of tenderers on the basis of the exclusion criteria
2. Selection of tenderers on the basis of selection criteria
3. Evaluation of tenders on the basis of the award criteria
Only tenders meeting the requirements of a step will pass on to the next step.
3.2. Exclusion criteria
All tenderers shall provide a declaration on their honour (see Annex 4), duly signed and
dated by an authorised representative, stating that they are not in one of the situations of
exclusion listed in the Annex 4.
The declaration on honour is also required for each member of the consortium in case of
joint tender and for identified subcontractors whose intended share of the contract is
above 10%.
The Contracting Authority reserves the right to verify all information contained in the
declaration by requiring the supporting documents listed in Annex 4.
3.3. Selection criteria
Tenderers must prove their economic, financial, technical and professional capacity to
carry out the work subject to this call for tender.
14
The evidence requested should be provided by each member of the group in case of joint
tender and identified subcontractor. However, a consolidated assessment will be made to
verify compliance with the minimum capacity levels.
3.3.1. Economic and financial capacity criteria and evidence
In order to prove their economic and financial capacity, the tenderer (i.e. in case of joint
tender, the combined capacity of all members of the consortium and identified
subcontractors) must comply with the following criteria:
− Average turnover of the last two financial years of at least € 500.000
The following evidence should be provided:
− Copy of the profit & loss account and balance sheet for the last two years
for which accounts have been closed,
− Failing that, appropriate statements from banks or, where appropriate
evidence of professional risk indemnity insurance.
The tenderer should also provide the simplified balance sheet for the last 2 years for
which accounts have been closed (see template in Annex 5)
If, for some exceptional reason which the Contracting Authority considers justified, a
tenderer is unable to provide one or other of the above documents, he or she may prove
his or her economic and financial capacity by any other document which the Contracting
Authority considers appropriate. In any case, the Contracting Authority must at least be
notified of the exceptional reason and its justification in the tender. The Commission
reserves the right to request any other document enabling it to verify the tenderer's
economic and financial capacity.
3.3.2. Technical and professional capacity criteria and evidence
a. Criteria relating to tenderers
The successful tenderer(s) must provide the relevant amount of expertise, scientific and
technical resources and workforce to carry out the services requested in this tender.
Tenderers (in case of a joint tender the combined capacity of all tenderers and identified
subcontractors) must comply with the following criteria:
− The tenderer must prove experience in the field of marine policy or
maritime spatial planning with at least 4 projects delivered in this field in
the last three years with a minimum value for each project of € 80 000.
− The tenderer must prove capacity of working in the main languages used
by stakeholders in each of the case studies proposed by the tender. At least
1 project should have been conducted in each area where a case study is
proposed in the last three years.
− The tenderer must prove experience of working on international projects
or studies with at least 4 projects delivered in the last three years.
− The tenderer must prove experience in policy-oriented studies and drafting
reports and recommendations for governmental authorities.
b. Criteria relating to the team delivering the service:
15
The team delivering the service should include, as a minimum, the following profiles.
The same person can have a combined expertise.
Project Manager: At least 10 years' experience in project management, team management,
including overseeing project delivery, proven ability to coordinate complex multi-country
projects in international setting, quality control of delivered service, client orientation and
conflict resolution experience in project of a similar size and scope.
Expert in marine policy: 10 years' professional experience in the field of maritime
affairs.
Expert in maritime spatial planning: 5 years' professional experience in the field of
maritime spatial planning.
Expert in Law of the Sea: 10 years professional experience on the application of the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Expert in event organisation: At least 5 years' experience in organisation of high-level
events of similar size and scope.
Language capacity: at least half of the members of the team should have native-level
language skills in English, or equivalent, as guaranteed by a certificate or past relevant
experience.
c. Evidence:
The following evidence should be provided to fulfil the above criteria:
− List of relevant services provided in the past three years, with sums, dates
and recipients, public or private. The most important services shall be
accompanied by certificates of satisfactory execution, specifying that they
have been carried out in a professional manner and have been fully
completed;
− The educational and professional qualifications of the persons who will
provide the service for this tender (CVs) including the management staff.
Each CV provided should indicate the intended function in the delivery of
the service.
3.4. Award criteria
The tender will be awarded according to the best-value-for-money procedure. The quality
of the tender will be evaluated based on the following criteria. The maximum total
quality score is 100 points. Tenders must score minimum 50% for each criterion and subcriterion, and minimum 60% in total. Tenders that do not reach the minimum quality
thresholds will be rejected and will not be ranked.
1. Quality of the proposed methodology (60 points – minimum threshold 50%)
− Sub-criterion 1.1: Relevance and added value of the tender. (20 points –
minimum threshold 50%) The tender shall explain how the study will support the
implementation of Directive 2014/89/EU. It shall describe some of the challenges
inherent to reaching this objective. It shall describe in which way the outputs
from the project will be used concretely by decision-makers. The tender shall
explain the added value and relevance of the proposed case studies.
16
− Sub-criterion 1.2: Definition of the envisaged process and of each step necessary
to deliver the expected results. (30 points – minimum threshold 50%). To this
end, the tenderer should explain the working methods to carry out the tasks
required to achieve the aims of the study. Inter alia, the tenderer should describe
the approach in details, an example of a detailed methodology for one case study,
proposals for the logistics and organisation of the high-level conference.
− Sub-criterion 1.3: Sources of information. (10 points – minimum threshold 50%).
The tenderer should present how they intend to ensure the reliability and accuracy
of information. A preliminary list of sources for the inventory should be
presented. Tenderers should especially demonstrate their link to the governance,
stakeholder and academic players of the cases chosen – or demonstrate how they
will build such links.
2. Organisation of the work (40 points – minimum threshold 50%)
− Sub-criterion 2.1 Approach to project management (20 points – minimum
threshold 50%) The tender should present the structure of the team (i.e. number of
persons, allocation of tasks and responsibilities, organisation chart). The tenderer
shall ensure that staff assigned to the implementation of the tasks reflect the
objectives set out in section 2.2. The tender will explain how coordination will be
carried-out, will provide a roadmap (including a work and time schedule) and the
provisions taken to manage the project and interface with the Commission. The
tender should provide details on the rationale behind the choice of this allocation.
− Sub-criterion 2.2 Quality control measures (20 points - minimum threshold 50%)
The tender should describe the main challenges and risks for the provision of the
services, including the timely delivery of reports of the required quality,
continuity of the service in case of absence of the member of the team, and the
possible mitigation measures envisaged should unforeseen arise. Specific focus
should be given to the service foreseen concerning the quality of the deliverables,
the language quality check (to be made by a native speaker) and the peer review
system. The quality system should be detailed in the tender and specific to the
tasks at hand; a generic quality system will result in a low score.
3.5. Technical offer
The technical offer must cover all aspects and tasks required in the technical specification
and provide all the information needed to apply the award criteria. Offers not covering all
requirements may be excluded on the basis of non-conformity with the tender specifications
and will not be evaluated.
3.6. Financial offer
The price for the tender must be quoted in euro. Tenderers from countries outside the euro
zone must quote their prices in euro. The price quoted may not be revised in line with
exchange rate movements. It is for the tenderer to assume the risks or the benefits
deriving from any variation.
Prices must be quoted free of all duties, taxes and other charges, including VAT, as the
European Union is exempt from such charges under Articles 3 and 4 of the Protocol on the
privileges and immunities of the European Union. The amount of VAT may be shown
separately.
17
The quoted price must be a fixed amount, which includes all charges (including travel and
subsistence). Travel and subsistence expenses are not refundable separately.
3.7. Financial evaluation
The financial value of the tenders that pass the quality examination will be determined by
calculating the price index as follows:
(Lowest price tender / Price of the tender in question) X 100
3.8.Award of the contract
The contract shall be awarded to the tender offering the best quality/price ratio, with a 70/30
weighting between technical quality and financial value.
This will be achieved by multiplying:
− the result of the technical evaluation (number of points) by 0,7
− the result of the financial evaluation (price index) by 0,3
The two results will be added together and the contract will be awarded to the tender
obtaining the highest score at the end of this process.
18
APPENDIX: EVALUATION GRID
Maximum
Minimum
Evaluation
committee's
score
Award criteria
Scores
proposed
60
30
Sub-criterion 1.1 - Relevance and
added value of the tender
20
10
30
15
10
5
40
20
Sub-criterion 2.1 - Approach to
project management
20
10
Sub-criterion 2.2 - Quality control
measures
20
10
I. Quality of
methodology
the
Sub-criterion 1.2 - Definition of the
envisaged process and of each step
necessary to deliver the expected
results.
Sub-criterion 1.3 - Sources of
information.
II. Organisation of the work
Total score / General comments
19
Evaluation committee's
written comments
Strengths
Weaknesses