[Skip to content]

Supply Management logo

The purchasing and supply website

.

Five tips: accounting for past performance

Advertisement

17 January 2013 | Paul Barton

How to assess a supplier’s track record when considering bids for public contracts.

Last year was an interesting one for public sector procurement and outsourcing arrangements. The government is keen to avoid an encore of the G4S deal and the West Coast Main Line franchise fiasco, so departmental bodies are now required to assess a bidder’s previous performance before awarding certain new contracts.

This new policy applies to the award of all contracts for the purchase of IT/telecoms, facilities management or business process outsourcing where the total value of the deal will be more than £20 million. The Cabinet Office has published a Procurement Policy Note that sets out details of implementation and compliance.

Here are some tips on how to deal with the new policy.

1. Tell bidders how the policy will be applied in your procurement. A departmental body must include information about the new policy in all relevant procurement documentation. Bidders should establish what the minimum standards of reliability are in the context of the goods/services being purchased and tailor their submissions accordingly.

2. Assess the whole supply chain against the minimum standards of reliability. Departmental bodies should look at the past performance of subcontractors, other members of a consortium and group companies the bidder is part of. Even if a subcontractor is delivering a small aspect of the contract, its past performance will have an impact on the overall assessment. Bidders should consider applying the specified minimum standards of reliability to its supply chain and weed out non-compliant subcontractors before including them in a tender response.

3. Seek evidence of good performance. Bidders should emphasise their good track record by obtaining certificates from authorities they have worked with. If these are not forthcoming, a supplier could self-certify. Bidders will need to satisfy departmental bodies that any previous poor performance would not recur. The Cabinet Office will create a central repository of such certificates and related information against which to verify information.

4. Re-assess compliance at key stages. The suitability of the bidder may be assessed more than once at different stages in the procurement process, taking into account material changes to the bidders’ circumstances. Potential suppliers should be asked to update evidence previously provided to reflect more recent performance on existing or new contracts.

5. Take care when excluding bidders. Bodies must ensure that bidders are treated equally, transparently and without discrimination. Use a qualified panel to determine whether a bidder meets the minimum standards, document the decision and, where appropriate, seek legal advice before excluding the bidder. In some circumstances, it may be appropriate to allow the supplier to make representations.


☛ Paul Barton is a partner in the technology and outsourcing law group at Field Fisher Waterhouse

Configure your Portal

  • Main (left)
Configuration
WHITEPAPER:
"Putting Down a Marker"
PMMS "Putting down a marker" whitepaper cover
REPORT: "Guide to Salaries 2013"
Michael Page salary survey 2013 cover
INFOGRAPHIC
"Business Traveller Report 2012"
Egencia-Business Traveller Report 2012 - Infographic - banner
CPO Agenda logo
Live Webinar series. Click here for sponsorship opportunities.
Interserve
"How to add value to FM procurement"
Click here to watch the webinar

The winners of the CIPS Supply Management Awards 2012 have been announced. Click here to find out who was victorious and click here to watch video interviews with the winners.

Buyography blog logo
PMI reports logo

Check out the latest commodity prices.

View latest prices

  • Main (right)
Configuration
REPORT:
"A Guide to Contract Management"
Bravo - A guide to contract management image
WHITE PAPER:
"Ten Strategies for Best-in-Class Public Sector Procurement"
top 10 strategies
WHITE PAPER:
"Value Creation: The EIPM Surfboard Shop":

EIPM - Surfboard Shop whitepaper cover
WHITE PAPER
"Global Travel Forecast: A Guide for Pricing and Negotiation in 2013"
Egencia button
WHITE PAPER:
"Forrester Research - Economic Benefits of Supplier Information Management Solution 2012"
Forrester Report
Q & A icon

Need advice on a procurement & supply chain or work-related matter?

Click here to get free expert advice.

Comments
Please enter your comments below
Fill out the all the boxes and click the 'Submit comments' button to make a comment on this page
*Comments are added to the bottom of the page. They are moderated and will not be published until approved by the Supply Management team. They may be edited. Please note unless marked “confidential” your feedback may be published on our letters page
I would have added that if the procurement team gets negative information on a bidder/supplier that the bidder/supplier be afforded the opportunity to address the information- especially if it is the deciding factor for excluding the bidder. Wouldn't want to exclude a bidder and then find out the information was inaccurate or incomplete. i.e. board hears "under investigation for fraud" only to find out the investigation cleared the bidder. That would result in some lawsuits I would imagine.

M. Firth (22/01/2013 00:06:52)