dgcfi incoming correspondence · dgcft/asep service category to be replaced by ibc sen/ice category...
TRANSCRIPT
DGCFI INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE
Note to D«TCFI l^vd L F^^l tv" o-l^rOl^l.
Agreement/ApprovalComment/Clearance
NotingInformation
~T
Through: ^SF>PA
Prepared: T>5-T-5 Sn/i i-Ti_i
SUBJECT: T>ST=&^&-!S-
i^"F«/^
Top PriorityUrgentHigh PriorityRoutine
^
Comments:1,^~> o—sr 'F> i^A •'--^
r-C^Z. VO^^ ^.&^^^^ ̂ E-^'
T^5.S^-^<\ To F^.<=>) Foe. Ar'r'^O-y'At—PR'0.< ~T~0
DGCFI Comments
-•> Ff^l
(^vris r-eeoyv\wve^4 ^oj <^»pr0^€, no1WK T^ovv^ ^/^\\ ^ ^r^i^ ̂o^ o^>
\^\-
^Os>U <Jl<X/ ^ON^&l^c
Oo^o-cr^.
t^Ao^ol
s22
FOR-OFFICAL-USE-ONLY
Australian Government
Department of DefenceDefence Support and Reform Group
PROJECT PROCUREMENT PLAN
FILE REFERENCE:
PROJECTDEFENCE INFRASTRUCTURE PANEL (DIP) RETENDER
PROJECT SPONSOR: DGCFI
PROJECT VALUE: No value associated with panel establishment
DOCUMENT DEVELOPED BY: Pete Smith
Executive Review and Approval* Refer to the DEQMS for Executive Review and Approval delegations
ENDORSEMENT
I have reviewed and endorse/do not ondorsc this Project Procurement Plan (PPP) inaccordance with the Executive Review and Approval PrQs^ss on the DEQMS.
Name; Bob Baird Sign:
Date: ^7 May 2016
Position: EDPA
APPROVAL
I approve this Project Procurement Plan (PPP) for the establishment of the DefenceInfrastructure Panel and approve for this procurement to proceed.
Name: Mr Chris Birrer
Date: ?^ May 2016Position: FASI
Sign
FOR-OFFICAL-USE-ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
s22
s22
s47F
s47F
FOR-OFFICAL-USE-ONLY
PPP AMENDMENT LIST
No. Change Approved by Date
1,
2.
3.4.5.
6.
FOR-OFFICAL-USE-ONLY
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
s47F
s47F
TABLE OF CONTENTS
References................................................................................................. "..—..... ""....—.....^
Background....................................................................................................... ".....................^
Project Aim and Description..................................................................................................^
Previous Consideration..........................................................................................................^
Issues and Risk Assessment............................................................................................... 12
Procurement Requirements................................................................................................. 15
Project Advertising................................................................................................................. 19
PLANNED Project Timetable............................................................................................... 19
Approvals.................................................................................................... "........ "................ 20
Recommendation................................................................................................................... 20
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
REFERENCES
A. Project Procurement Plan - Planning Stage Consultants dated 16 Oct 15B. DGCFI Minute - Stakeholder Consultation to Inform Future Infrastructure Panel
Requirements dated 6 Jan 16C. Research and Consultation Report - BMV Solutions dated 21 Feb 16D. DGCFI Minute Defence Infrastructure Panel Tender Process dated 1 Apr 16E. Endorsement to Proceed - Evaluation Software Procurement dated 22 Apr 16
PURPOSE1. The purpose of this Project Procurement Plan (PPP) is to detail:
a. the scope of the subject project;b. the risks facing the project and the strategy for mitigation of these risks;
and
c. the method of procurement that is consistent with the CommonwealthProcurement Rules and mandatory Defence policy.
2. Approval of this PPP also constitutes an 'Endorsement to Proceed' under thePublic Governance, Performance and Accountability Act {PGPA Act).
BACKGROUND
3. The Defence Infrastructure Panel (DIP) provides for streamlined access,
through a Standing Offer arrangement, to a range of expert consultants to assist inthe planning, development and delivery of Defence Infrastructure concepts and majorcapital facilities projects. The DIP is utilised extensively across InfrastructureDivision, Estate Services Division (ESD), other Defence areas and CommonwealthAgencies.
4. The DIP 2010-2017 was established via open tender in 2010 with an initial termto January 2014. This term was subsequently extended by a further three years toJanuary 2017. As no further options to extend the Panel term beyond January 2017are available, the Directorate of Program Assurance (DPA), within Capital Facilitiesand Infrastructure Branch (CFI) has undertaken a range of planning activities tosupport and inform the procurement process to establish a new Panel arrangement.
PROJECT AIM AND DESCRIPTION
5. This procurement process will result in commercial arrangements via a Deed ofStanding Offer, to procure services regularly required by Infrastructure Division andafford procurement efficiencies and streamlined processes to engage repeatservices.
6. The planned key project milestones are as follows:
a. Project Procurement Plan approved by FASI - 30 May 16;b. Tranche 1 tender documents released - 9 Jun 16c. Tranche 1 tender period close - 21 July 16d. Tranche 1 evaluation process complete - 7 Oct 16
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
e. Tranche 2 tender documents released - 7 Jul 16
f. Tranche 2 tender period close - 18 Aug 16g. Tranche 2 evaluation process complete - 18 Nov 16h. Tranche 3 tender documents released - 4 Aug 16i. Tranche 3 tender period close - 15 Sept 16
j. Tranche 3 evaluation process complete 16 Dec 16k. Panel Deeds finalised and executed with each successful respondent - 18
Jan 17
PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION
7. As part of the initial procurement planning activities for this procurement DPAsought the services of an external Professional Services Provider (PSP) andsubsequently engaged BMV Solutions (BMV). The PSP's role was to consult withSubject Matter Experts (SME) and other stakeholders within Infrastructure and Estate
Services Divisions to review the various service categories and associated scopes ofservices on the current DIP. This was to determine their continued validity, identifyany emerging service categories that may be required in a new panel arrangementand assist in the consideration of appropriate procurement and contracting strategiesthat would be efficient and economical for both Defence and industry to retender thePanel.
8. Based on the outcomes of this review and consultation (Ref C) the followingservice categories were recommended for inclusion in a new DIP;
Services Category Sponsor
Branch
Comment
Acoustics ASEP Service category for theprovision of noise monitoringand Australian Noise
Exposure Forecast (ANEF)modelling capabilitiesrelevant to the Defence
estate
Scope of services to bereviewed and modified to
reflect current industry bestpractice
Estate Strategic Planning ASEP Sen/ice category establishedto support estate planningprocesses
Scope of services to bemodified to incorporate Town
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
Planning and Socio Economicservices categories oncurrent DIP
Infrastructure
Engineering
Assessments
ASEE Service category to replaceFacilities Maintenance
Investigation Services
Scope of services to bemodified to incorporatecondition and maintenance
assessments of Base
infrastructure.
Project Management /
Contract Administration
DGCFI • Service category in support ofMajor Capital Facilitiesproject development anddelivery
• Current Development andDelivery service categorieswill be incorporated into asingle PMCA servicecategory
• Scope of services to bemodified to incorporateelements of Cost Planningand Construction
Programming servicecategories on the current DIP.
Project Management /
Contract Administration
Disposal
ASPM • Service category in support ofasset divestment processes
• Scope of services to includemanagement of environmentand heritage consultants andadministration ofcontamination remediationcontracts
Probity Services DGCFI Service category in support ofDivision procurement andcontract activities
Scope of services to bereviewed and modified toreflect current business
processes
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
Spatial ASEP Service category for theprovision of spatial datasurvey capabilities relevant tothe Defence estate
Scope of services to bereviewed and modified to
reflect current industry bestpractice
Electronic Project
Information Management
DGCFI New service category tosupport the exchange andmanagement of electronicproject information forincorporation into Defencesystems (IBIS/GEMS)following project completion
Detailed scope of services tobe developed in consultationwith DGCFI resources
Initial Business Case ASEP New service category insupport of IBC development
Detailed scope of services tobe developed in consultationwith ASEP resources
Commercial Real Estate
Services
ASPM New service category toobtain professional real estateand valuation services
Scope of services to coverbuying, selling, leasing,strategic planning and marketadvice
Detailed scope of services tobe developed in consultationwith ASPM resources
Project Support Services DGCFI • New service category tosupport the engagement of a"solution integrator" who canrapidly procure and managead-hoc consultants services
not covered by other Panelservice categories
• Detailed scope of services tobe developed in consultation
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
with DGCFI resources
Process Audit Services DGCFI • New service category insupport of business processcompliance and auditrequirements
• Detailed scope of services tobe developed in consultationwith DGCFI resources
9. The consultation and review process further recommended the following servicecategories be discontinued and not included in a new DIP;
Services Category Sponsor
Branch
Comment
Aircraft Pavement ASEE/DGCFI Service category has hadlittle use over the term of thecurrent DIP
Stakeholder consultation
determined that this servicewould be better served bylong term supplyarrangement with one or twoqualified providers
Some elements to be
incorporated into the PM/CAscope of services
Airfield Ground Lighting ASEE/DGCFI • Sen/ice category has hadlittle use over the term of thecurrent DIP
• Stakeholder consultationdetermined that this servicewould be better served bylong term supplyarrangement with one or twoqualified providers
• Some elements to beincorporated into the PM/CAscope of services
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
Asbestos ASEE • No evidence that this service
category has been used byDefence during the term ofthe current DIP.
• A stakeholder with subjectmatter knowledge of thisservice category could not beidentified
• These services would be
suitable for delivered under
the Base Services contracts
Construction
Programming
DGCFI No evidence that this service
category has been used byDefence during the term ofthe current DIP.
Stakeholder consultationdetermined that this service
would be better served byincorporating requiredelements into PMCA scope ofservices
Cost Planning DGCFI • No evidence that this service
category has been used byDefence during the term ofthe current DIP.
• Stakeholder consultation
determined that this service
would be better served byincorporating requiredelements into PMCA scope ofservices
Electronic Recording DGCFI No evidence that this service
category has been used byDefence during the term ofthe current DIP.
Stakeholder consultation
found that these services are
primarily provided via sub-contract to PMCA
Elements will be modified and
incorporated into the
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
Electronic Project Informationservice category
Public Private
Partnership Advice
ASEP • No evidence that this service
category has been used byDefence during the term ofthe current DIP.
• No future purchasingrequirement for this service isanticipated
• A stakeholder with subjectmatter knowledge of thisservice category could not beidentified
Strategic Business Case
/ Detailed Business
Case
DGCFt/ASEP Service category to bereplaced by IBC sen/icecategory in new DIP
DBC requirements areincorporated into PMCAscope of services
Town Planning / Socio
Economics
ASEP • Both services to beincorporated into EstateStrategic Planning servicecategory in new DIP
Fire Safety Survey
Fire Engineering / Fuel
Farm / High Voltage
ASEE
ASEE
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
Stakeholder consultationfound that a panelarrangement is not a suitablemethod to procure theseservices
Stakeholder consultationdetermined that theseservices would be betterserved by long term supplyarrangement with one or twoqualified providers
Consultation with EstateServices Branch found thatthese sen/ices could bedelivered under the BaseServices contracts
Service categories have hadlittle use over the term of thecurrent DIP
10
• Stakeholder consultation
found that a panelarrangement Is not a suitablemethod to procure theseservices
• Stakeholder consultation
determined that these
services would be better
served by long term supplyarrangement with one or twoqualified providers
10. DGCFI subsequently wrote to each ID Branch Head at Ref D seeking theirendorsement of the service categories proposed for inclusion on the new DIP andtheir commitment to provide resources to support the procurement process. Theseresource commitments included being available during time offender, undertakingthe two stage tender evaluation and participation in debriefing activities.
11. Ref D also advised that those service categories identified as not being suitablefor the Panel arrangement, but where a future need still existed, would not be the
subject of this procurement activity. Where alternative procurement methods arepreferred in respect to long term contract arrangements the sponsor Branch would beresponsible for such procurements.
12. Responses from each Branch Head endorsed the panel composition andcommitted to provide the required resources with the exception of the following;
a. Director National Airfields Program advised that both the AirfieldPavements and Ground Lighting categories should be retained;
b. ASPM advised that the Commercial Real Estate category is not required;and
c. ASPM advised that a specific PMCA Disposal category is not required butsome elements may need to be incorporated in the general PMCAservices category. Upon further assessment of the request to integrate thisinto the standard PMCA development and delivery scope DPA havedetermined this needs to be a separate category for the purposes of theprocurement due to the specialised nature of disposal services and, assuch, should be assessed on its merits rather than integrated. Theconstruct of the final panel may result in an integrated panel however thiswill be determined post tender evaluation. This approach will reduce anyprobity risks that may be present with incorporating into the PMCA servicecategory and will enable the disposal expertise and experience to beassessed on its merits.
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
11
ISSUES AND RISK ASSESSMENT
13. To determine what risks were involved in the procurement process DPAundertook a lessons learnt exercise on the previous DIP retender activity andreviewed those areas of high risk and high workload.
14. The key areas identified were:
a. Time;
b. Evaluation processes;c. Evaluation Personnel resources;
d. The procurement process;e. Quality;
f. Buget; andg. Scope.
Time
15. As the current DIP expires in January 2017 there are no further options toextend. The key risk was that if this date was not achieved Defence will be unable toefficiently procure critical services under a panel arrangement and therefore have tosource those core services from the open market. If Infrastructure Division wererequired to conduct open procurement activities for each project the timeframe andrate of effort for each procurement process would significantly increase the workloadand timeframe for each project across the Division. Therefore the date forcommencement of the new panel is not flexible and as such new Deeds must be inplace by no later than the 17 January 2017.
16. To mitigate this major risk the project needs to be resourced sufficiently and theproject team'and the Division need to be prepared for the significant expectedvolume of work.
Evaluation Processes\1. DPA have engaged administrative resources in the form of additional •have also developed streamlined panel retender procurement and administrationprocesses based on the lessons learnt. This will ensure efficiency in theadministration of the procurement process as well as demonstrate defendableprocesses are applied.
18. DPA have also engaged a service provider for the provision of an evaluation^software tool to assist in the retender process. The benefit oUhis software programhas'been'proven within other areas of Defence on projects of a larger and morecomplicated nature by:
a. providing a robust management framework for the management of largevolumes of tender responses,
DIP Procurement Plan V1.012
b. managing the complex and technical evaluations of the tender responses;and
c. providing a management tool within the system to enable real timemonitoring and management on the progress of evaluations as part of riskmitigation measures.
19. This system is endorsed for use on the Defence Restricted Network and the keyfeatures of the system complement the project management framework.
20. The time afforded to industry to prepare their tender responses and the timerequired to complete the evaluation stage are important factors that must also beconsidered. While the volume of the responses and resultant time required to
complete evaluations will vary by service category, it is expected that the typical timerequired will be approximately 6 to 8 weeks per category inclusive offender boarddeliberations and report development and approval. The evaluation stage will alsorequire the dedication of two, full time resources for each service category with themajority of the effort being concentrated in CFI and EP Branch and to a lesser extentEE and PM Branch.
Evaluation Personnel Resources
21. DPA have engaged with and sought Branch Head commitment to participate inthis process in a timely manner. The commitment includes development of the scopeof services relevant to their business, responsiveness to technical queries during thetender period and participation as an evaluator. Should any of the participants fail tocommit to these roles during the scheduled timeframe this could represent asignificant time risk to the project.
22. This will be monitored progressively to ensure any potential delays can beidentified before they become a reality. To assist with this monitoring DPA willleverage off the management progress functionality that is part of the evaluationsoftware tool to identify any areas of concerns early. Should delays occur that aredeemed to impact on the success of this project then the issue will be escalated tothe relevant Branch Head for resolution.
Procurement Process
23. The final measure applied by DPA to address the time risk is the tranched, twostage procurement process. This is discussed further in this Plan but in summary thiswill allow for three stages of services released progressively as an opportunity toindustry.
24. This approach will allow a longer period for evaluation for those servicecategories that are expected to attract the greatest market response (for example -expected response for PMCA services will be in excess of 100 tender submissions)and will ensure critical services are available for procurement from a panelarrangement by the expiry of the current DIP. A tranched release will allow for the
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
13
spread of resources required for evaluation rather than taking up to 33 staff off-lineas an entire group for a prolonged period. It is also expected that this approach willequally realise benefits for industry as they will also be able to spread the resourcethey will be required to dedicate to preparing their responses.
25. Further measures to mitigate against the resource and time risks are:
a. to adopt a single stage tender approach, with evaluation undertaken in twophases, and
b. applying an upper limit of panel membership for each service category.
26. The two phase evaluation will consist of an initial screening based on pastperformance and a subsequent technical evaluation based on an assessment oftenderer's proposed approach to deliver the services, their key people and theirmanagement approaches. This will maximise the efficiency of the evaluation as it willreduce the number of tender responses that will require the greatest evaluation effort.It is also expected that applying the initial screening criteria and the limitation to panelmembership may influence a tenderer's decision to invest resources in participatingin the procurement process thereby reducing the volume offender responses. Thisapproach has been reviewed and endorsed by the project Probity Advisor.
27. All of these mitigation strategies will ensure the project does not incur any timedelays.
Quality28. The current panel provides streamlined and quality procurement processes,certainty for industry on Defence's sourcing methods and provides Defence withaccess to service providers who have been pre qualified to provide the services.Additionally, it provides a robust probity framework for the conduct of Panelprocurement activities.
29. This approach clearly identifies efficiencies for not only our internal businessbut provides industry with a process that reduces the tendering burden in eachengagement. The panel sourcing process clearly demonstrates alignment with theFirst Principles Review outcomes.
30. The principles for the new panel are in line with the efficiencies demonstratedh'the current panel and DPA have sought feedback on its use in order to validateand improve the usability. These have been applied and will enhance usage onceimplemented
31. The quality of the tendering process to establish the Panel unde^hisproject^illbe quaran^edtby'the'robust administrative framework that has been develop^ andtheaformal probity advisor role that will be present over all stages. All steps of theDIP Procurement Plan V1.0
14
procurement process will be reviewed and validated by the lead staff members, LisaDrummond and Pete Smith, to ensure no risks are represented and compliance tothe procurement rules and policy are demonstrated.
Budget
32. The budget risk for this project has been assessed as low. This assessment is
based on the fact that there is no expenditure beyond the engagement of consultantsand temporary resources, and potentially some travel expenses. Funding wassought for the FY 2016/2017 to cover the costs of the supporting resources and thishas been deemed as sufficient and allows for float to increase resourcing shouldurgent additional resources be required.
Scope
33. The scope risk is assessed as low for this project. DPA has undertaken asignificant consultation activity with the subject matter experts for each service andthe scope that will be reflected in the final version will be based on identified needsfrom each relevant area. DPA will also seek Branch Head endorsement on the finalscope to ensure ownership and ensure an accurate reflection of the business
process at time of release to industry. This will significantly reduce any need toamend the scope during the time offender.
34. In summary, the risk mitigation strategies being applied for this project areconsidered sufficient to manage all risks. Weekly meetings will be held by theretender team to review progress and to assess any areas of concern that representa risk to the success of the project. These meetings will include the legal and probityadvisors that have been appointed. Remedial actions will be applied accordingly andshould any issue represent a significant risk, it will be notified immediately to theExecutive Director Program Assurance (EDPA).
PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS
Probity Adviser
35. Given the risks associated with this project the services of a Probity Adviserhave been sought to review, report and sign-off on the conduct of the tenderprocesses. Endorsement to engage project consultants for the DIP procurementprocess, including Probity, was approved via separate Procurement Plan at RefA.An RFQ seeking a proposal from F J Byrne Consulting was issued under the Wholeof Government Standing Offer panel arrangement, administered by the Dept ofForeign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), on 19 April 2016 and the response wasdetermined to represent value for money for the Commonwealth.36. The estimate for the Probity Adviser fee is and is based on a scheduleof rates whereby the Commonwealth will be charged for actual hours incurred.
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
15
s22
Legal Service Provider37. Endorsement to engage a Legal Services provider was also gained via Ref A.The engagement of Clayton Utz was completed via a competitive process from theWhole of Government Legal Services Multi Use List (LSMUL). Defence Legal is theprocurer of legal services under the LSMUL and is providing funding for theseservices.
Evaluation Software and Associated Evaluation Consultants Services38. Ref E endorsed the purchase of user licences and associated consultantservices for the AWARD proprietary software system to support the evaluationprocess for this procurement. The AWARD system will provide a framework whichensures consistency in the application of evaluation process across multiple anddisparate teams and also time savings through not having to distribute and controllarge volumes of tender.
PANEL PROCUREMENT PROCESS40. The Panel composition, intended number of members and schedule oftranchedrelease of tenders is as follows;
CategoryIntended number of panel
t '
members
Tranche 1 - release second we&Kjin June 2016 ^
Probity
Initial Business Case Development
Process Auditing
Project Management and Contract
Administration
Tranche-2 - release second week in July 2016
Approximately 10
Approximately 10
Approximately 10
Approximately 15
Estate Strategic Planning
Aircraft Pavement & Ground Lighting
Spatial
Acoustics
Approximately 10
Approximately 5
Approximately 5
Approximately 5
Tranche 3 - reteaseisecond week in August 2016Electronic Records Information Management
PMCA Disposal Approximately 5
DIP Procurement Plan V1.016
Category,1 ntended^nu mberiOfj panej
.i:^ ;,,.;;;: ••^^s. ^imembers
infrastructure fcngineering Assessments
Project Support Services
Approximately 5
Approximately 5
41. This schedule of tranches prioritises each service category by criticality of needand by the services that are expected to attract the greatest market response thusrequiring the longest evaluation period. This schedule also spreads the resourceburden associated with tender evaluations across stakeholder groups. The limit ofmembership for each service category is based on the anticipated demand forservices for the term of the panel agreement.
42. Tenderers will have the option of tendering for some or all of the servicecategories comprising each tranche and must submit separate responses for eachservice for which they wish to be considered. Where a tenderer is successful for one
or more sen/ice categories, they will be required to enter into a single DeedAgreement which will incorporate the scope of services for each category.
Industry Briefing43. An Industry Briefing will be conducted at Brindabella Business Park one weekafter the release of each tranche of tenders.
Evaluation Methodology
44. Evaluation will be undertaken in three phases with an initial conformance check,an initial screening based on past performance and a detailed technical evaluation
based on an assessment oftenderers proposed approach to deliver the services,proposed key personnel and the approach to Panel management. Concurrent withthis evaluation, DPA will conduct a commercial review of each response to ensurethat all information related to company details, insurance, confidential informationand other contract particulars are complete.
45. A Board Report detailing the outcomes of the initial screening stage for eachservice category will recommend those tenderers that are to continue to the technical
evaluation stage and those tenderers that are to be set aside as they did not meetthe requirements of the initial screening criteria. Once the Board Report is approvedby the Delegate the Board will proceed with a detailed technical evaluation of the
remaining tenderers proposed approach to deliver the service, their key personneland their approach to Panel management. A final Board Report will recommend tothe Delegate the final panel membership for each service category for approval. Atotal of 24 Board reports will be drafted for Delegate approval as a result of thisprocess.
46. Tenderers will be required to submit a schedule of rates against the various skillcategories in their organisation but this element will not be evaluated. Competitive
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
17
tension and value for money assessments will be made on a case by case basis asan element of each future individual panel engagement.
47. It should be noted that the procurement and evaluation processes have beendeveloped in consultation with both the legal and probity advisors engaged to supportthe DIP procurement. Both agree that it is a sound and defensible process.
Evaluation Software
Evaluation Resources ^ ^^9c"UA"^mmitmentof~resources to undertake tender evaluations was sought^^gree^ tou by'each ID Branch Head in their response to Ref a F^ow^^ro^l^№as°^oc"u^ent"Plan~ and finalisation of the project schedule, Branch^Heads will belrlelque'stedl to'nominate dedicated, full time resources for thed^ation^f^he^eelTo"n ̂ ^^^'°^e^^^^^^^^l^P'onusTreceived"but is expected to be as long as- e-Qht^eeksfoj the high
service categories and six weeks for the lesser response sen/ice^Xn^sseSca^n9^msafour°each°ser»,ice category win ^P^etwo primarym"emabersand a reserve member who can cover unplanned absences.
50. All tender evaluation teams will be provided with wrNten^ evalu^fon^to^Mnd P^btety"S^^eToaped%'o^hepro^menta^w^e^pected to attend^"n^e"ss^ltrainTng in'the use of the AWARD evaluation software.
DIP Procurement Plan V1.018
PROJECT ADVERTISING
51. An initial advice to industry that outlines the services categories that willcomprise the new DIP and the schedule for release offenders will be published onAusTender before 3 June 2016. Requests for Tender (RFT) for each tranche ofservice categories will be released using AusTender Level 2 functionality.
PLANNED PROJECT TIMETABLE
52. The planned timetable for the tender and evaluation phases of the project issummarised in the table below. A detailed Project Schedule has been included atAnnex C.
Milestone/review point Dates
PPP Approved 30 May 16
Tranche 1
Tenders released to the market 09Jun 16
Industry Briefing 16 Jun 16Tender period closed
Conformance checks and evaluation software development21 July 1622-29 Jul 16
Initial Screening Evaluation 1-12 Aug 16Initial Screening Report development and approval 15-26 AugDetailed Evaluation Period 29 Aug-23 Sept 16Final TEBR development and approval 26 Sept-7 Oct 16Franche 1 Deed development and execution 100ct16-5Dec16
Tranche 2
Tenders released to the market 7Jul16Industry Briefing UJul16Tender period closed 18 Aug 16Conformance checks and evaluation software development 19-26 Aug 16Initial Screening Evaluation 29 Aug-9 Sept 16Initial Screening Report development and approval 12-23 Sept 16Detailed Evaluation Period 26 Sept-4 Nov 16Final TEBR development and approval 7-18 Nov 16Tranche 1 Deed development and execution 21 Nov-5 Dec 16
Tranche 3
Tenders released to the market 4 Aug 16Industry Briefing 11 AugFender period closed 15 Sept 16Conformance checks and evaluation software development 16-23 Sept 16Initial Screening Evaluation 26 Sept-7 Oct 16Initial Screening Report development and approval 10-21 Oct 16Detailed Evaluation Period 24 Oct-2 Dec 16Final TEBR development and approval 5-16 Dec 16Franche 1 Deed development and execution 19-Dec 16 18 Jan 17
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
19
APPROVALS
Executive Review and Approval and Financial ApprovalRefer to the DEQMS
DocumentEndorsement Approval
Delegate
'PPP I Endorsement to Proceed EDPA FASI
Initial Screening Board Reports Probity Advisor EDPA
Technical Evaluation Board Reports Probity AdvisorProbity Advisor
EDPAEDPA
Negotiation Plans, if requiredPGPA s23(3) Commitment Approval incorporating negotiatedoutcomes if any
FASI
PGPA s23(1) Contract Signatory delegate EDPA'
RECOMMENDATION
53. In accordance with the DEQMS, it is recommended that:
a. EDPA review and endorse this Project Procurement Plan;
b. FASI approve this Project Procurement Plan including the proposedprocurement strategy for this project in accordance with the risks,methodology and program; and
c. FASI delegate responsibility to approve Tender Evaluation Board Reportsto EDPA.
Pet^ySmith
Assistant Director Program Assurance
Capital Facilities and Infrastructure BranchExt: 68757
ANNEXES:A. Evaluation, criteria and weightingsB. Stakeholders and Evaluation Board composition
• EDPA may delegate responsibility to execute Panel Deeds to DPA staff at EL1 level.
DIP Procurement Plan V1,020
s22
ANNEX A
EVALUATION CRITERIA AND WEIGHTINGS
DEFENCE INFRASTRUCTURE PANEL (DIP)
Criteria Weighting
CONFORMANCE CHECK
INITIAL SCREENING BASED ON PAST PERFORMANCE
UNDERSTANDING OF AND APPROACH TO DELIVERING THE
SERVICES
KEY PERSONNEL
PANEL MANAGEMENT
SCHEDULE OF RATES
DIP Procurement Plan V1.0
21
s47E s47E
s47E s47E
s47E
s47E
s47E s47E
s47E s47E
s47E
ANNEX B
1. STAKEHOLDERS
Key stakeholders for the project are identified in the table below.
Table 1 : Project Stakeholders
OrganisationInfrastructure Division
Capital Facilities and InfrastructureBranch
Estates Planning Branch
Environment and Engineering Branch
Property Management Branch
Name
Chris Birrer
BRIG Noel Beutel
Brett Cox
Alison Clifton or nominated
representativeLoraine Holcroft
Position
FASI
DGCFI
ASEP
ASEE
A/ASPM
2. EVALUATION BOARD MEMBERSHIPS
Table 2 describes the composition of the Evaluation team for each service category. Initial screeningand detailed technical evaluations will be undertaken by two nominated representatives from thesponsor Branch. One of the sponsor Branch nominations will assume the evaluation BoardChairperson role. Those Schedules that are assessed and not evaluated will be reviewed by DPA.
Table 2: - Evaluation Board Memberships
Service CategoryConformanceAssessment
Initial
ScreeningEvaluation
AssessmentRespondents PanelRep, QualitySystems,CommercialInformation andRates
Detailed TechnicalEvaluation
Probity
Initial BusinessCaseDevelopmentProcess Auditing
ProjectManagement andContractAdministraticEstate StrategicPlanningAircraft Pavement& Ground Lighting
Spatial
Acoustics
ElectronicRecordsInformationManagement
PMCA Disposal
22
s47E
s47F
Australian Government
Department of DefenceEstate and Infrastructure Group
CFI-ID/OUT/2016/R2^7599
w^( 5-1'56)
^^^^^ /jo^ /(.(BP26-B-075)
Minute
Pete Smith
Assistant Director, Program AssuranceCapital Facilities and Infrastructure BranchBrindabella Business Park (BP26-1-B099)PO Box 7925CANBERRA BC ACT 2600S: (02) 6266 8757B: pete. smith@defence. gov. au
AMENDMENT 1 TO THE DIP RETENDER PROJECT PROCUREMENT PLAN(PPP)
Reference:
A. Approved Project Procurement Plan dated 30 May 201 6
1. The DIP Retender Probity Advisor has reviewed Reference A and seeks further detailon the evaluation approach to be applied for the initial screening process.
2. The approach to be applied is as follows and should be read as additional narrative tothe initial screening evaluation approach as defined at Serial 44 of the PPP.
a. If as a result of the outcome from the Initial Screening evaluation the tendererdemonstrates less than 50% capacity through the assignment of a score of 5 orless then the submission will be set aside from further evaluation. The Initial
Screening Board Report must record the determination and the subsequentexclusion and justify the reason why they were deemed uncompetitive.
3. An additional amendment sought to the PPP is for a change at Serial 40 of "IntendedNumber of Panel Members" for the Initial Business Case Development from "Approximately10" to "Approximately 15". This addition was requested by Estate Planning Branch in orderto support their business need.
4. This Minute seeks Delegate approval of these changes and approval for any furtherchanges to the PPP to be approved by Director Program Assurance.
Pete'SmithAssistant Director, Program AssuranceCapital Facilities and Infrastructure Branch
\ June 2016
s22
s22
s22
s22
s22
s22
s22
s22
s22s22
s22
s22
s22 s22 s22
s22
s22
s22
s22 s22
s22
s22
s22
s22
s22
s22
s22
s22
s22