Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Laura Steer  
#1 Posted : 22 June 2010 16:42:47(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Laura Steer

Does anyone have anything that can help me.

I have recently been asked to get involved in assessment of PQQ's / tenders from potential contractors and I have been asked to source some guidance on how to grade the contractors responses.

We have quite a detailed set of questions but it is what weighting you put on answers. I am hoping that I am not the first person to be asked the question and would if possible like not to have to re-invent the wheel! Please don't think I am just being lazy, just maybe slightly cheeky :)

One of my suggestions was that any contractor with prohibition notices etc was an immediate fail but some managers feel that this is slightly harsh?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
Ron Hunter  
#2 Posted : 22 June 2010 17:02:09(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

Always a tricky one, and this is (IMHO) wherecommercial PQQ Schemes add value to the tender process.
(Safety Schemes in Procurement, CHAS, etc.)
These schemes all have set criteria and work on a PASS/FAIL system (but obviously allow for resubmission and reassessment).
Weighting systems are always difficult, being prone to subjective analysis and often wide open to challenge by the unsuccessful contractor. Things become even more difficult if you work in the public sector!
For any question you set, you should really know the answer you seek. Ideally, you should express this in guidance issued with your tender.
My first PQQ question would be to ask them to identify which schemes they may already have been passed/approved/accredited by. Demonstrating that should mean they don't have to go through your q-set at all.
I agree with your Managers. Exclusion purely on the basis of having been served a Notice is IMHO far too strict. A great many reputable Organisations have attracted enforcement attention. Many may have been prosecuted in the past for H&S breaches. There but for the Grace of God etc.
What is really important is how they reacted to that enforcement action, learning lessons and implementing improvements etc.
Perhaps your Organisation may wish to consider joining in SSIP etc as a client /subscriber?

Laura Steer  
#3 Posted : 23 June 2010 09:11:23(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Laura Steer

Thank you for the response, it makes sense and I shall look into your suggestions.

Thanks again.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.