Government Conference Centre Rehabilitation Construction Management Services Procurement

Table of Contents

1. Background and Introduction
2. Project Requirement
3. Attestation of Assurance
4. Objectives of the Fairness Monitor Assignment and Methodology
5. Fairness Monitor Specific Activities and Findings
6. Reference Documents

Background and Introduction

Knowles Consultancy Services Inc. and Hill International Inc. in Joint Venture was engaged as the Fairness Monitor (FM) to observe the competitive procurement process for the Government Conference Centre Rehabilitation – Construction Management Services Procurement undertaken by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) through Solicitation Number EP760-140543/A and Solicitation Number EP760-140543/B.Knowles Consultancy Services Inc. andHill International Inc. in Joint Venture is an independent third party with respect to this activity.

We hereby submit the Final Report covering our activities commencing with the review of a Letter of Interest and Qualification (LOIQ) through the identification of prequalified bidders, issue of a Request for Proposal (RFP) and the selection of the recommended bidder.

This report includes our attestation of assurance, a summary of the scope and objectives of our assignment, the methodologies applied, and specific activities and relevant findings.

Project Requirement

The Government of Canada identified a requirement for the services of a company to provide PWGSC with Construction Management Services during the rehabilitation of the Government Conference Centre. PWGSC intends to retain a Construction Manager in order to ensure that the project is delivered on schedule, within the construction estimate, and to the level of quality required for a building of this stature. In general, the scope of the contract for Construction Management Services includes services and construction.

Attestation of Assurance

The FM hereby provides the following unqualified assurance statement concerning the procurement process to select a Construction Manager in order to ensure that the project is delivered on schedule, within the construction estimate, and to the level of quality required for a building of the stature of the Government Conference Centre.

It is our professional opinion that the competitive process we observed, was carried out in a fair, open and transparent manner.

Note: For all references in this report concerning fairness related comments being provided to project officials, it is confirmed that, as necessary, project officials provided clarification to the FM or took appropriate action to address the comments, and as a result no fairness deficiencies were recorded.

Objectives of the Fairness Monitor Assignment and Methodology

The overall objective was as follows: provide PWGSC with independent observation of project procurement activities; provide fairness related comments to project officials as early as possible so that appropriate action could be taken to resolve the concerns before fairness was impacted; bring any potential fairness concerns to the attention of the Operational Integrity Sector if there is no timely resolution with project officials; and attest to the fairness of the procurement process, including its execution.

To accomplish the objective we undertook the following activities:

• became familiar with the project governance structure;
• reviewed the Letter of Interest and Qualification (LOIQ);
• reviewed the Request for Proposal (RFP);
• reviewed all amendments and addenda to the LOIQ and RFP including questions submitted by bidders and answers provided;
• reviewed the procedures to be used for the evaluation of responses and the guidance provided to the evaluation team;
• observed the evaluation of responses to the LOIQ and RFP to ensure that the specified evaluation and contractor selection procedures and departmental policy were followed and consistently applied during the evaluation and selection process; and
• observed the debriefing of unsuccessful bidders. (This activity will be reported on in an addendum to this report after any debriefings.)

Fairness Monitor Specific Activities and Findings

Fairness Monitor Activities and Findings during the Development of the RFP and Posting on the Government Electronic Tendering System (GETS)

During the period May 24, 2013 to July 22, 2013, we reviewed draft versions of the LOIQ and provided fairness related comments to the Contracting Authority. Appropriate action was taken by project officials.

The LOIQ was posted on GETS on July 22, 2013 (Document 1).During the period July 24, 2013 to August 21, 2013, we reviewed Amendments 1 to 5 (Documents 2 to 6) in draft and final form including questions from interested suppliers and answers provided. Fairness related comments were provided and appropriate action was taken by project officials.

The LOIQ closed on August 29, 2013.

Fairness Monitor Activities and Findings during the Evaluation of Responses to the LOIQ and Identification of Phase One Prequalified Bidders

We observed the consensus evaluation of the Phase One responses on September 6, 2013 which resulted in a list of prequalified bidders. We provided fairness related comments and appropriate action was taken by project officials.

On September 10, 2013 and September 11, 2013, we reviewed draft letters to all bidders that responded to the LOIQ advising them of the results of the Phase One evaluation. Bidders that failed to meet the prequalification requirements were advised as to why they were not prequalified and what clarifications would be required if they chose to re-submit their response to the LOIQ, which at the latest, had to be received prior to the issue of the RFP for Phase Two. We provided fairness related comments on the draft letters and appropriated action was taken by project officials. The letters advising bidders of the results of the Phase One evaluation were issued on September 11, 2013.

On September 24, 2013 we observed the consensus evaluation of re-submissions from three bidders that had initially failed to meet the prequalification requirements. Fairness related comments were provided and appropriate action was taken by project officials.

On September 25, 2013 and September 30, 2013 we reviewed draft letters to the three bidders advising them of the results of the evaluation of their re-submissions. Two of these bidders were advised by letters sent on September 25, 2013 and September 30, 2013 respectively, that they had met the prequalification requirements as a result of their re-submissions. The third bidder was advised by letter on September 25, 2013 that it had failed to meet the prequalification requirements and the reasons why that was the case.

Fairness Monitor Activities and Findings during the Development of the Phase Two RFP for Prequalified Bidders and Posting on GETS

During the period August 26, 2013 to October 3, 2013, we reviewed draft versions of the RFP and provided fairness related comments to the Contracting Authority. Appropriate action was taken by project officials.

The RFP was posted on GETS on October 8, 2013 (Document 7). During the period October 9, 2013 to November 14, 2013, we reviewed Amendments 1 to 6 of the RFP (Documents 8 to 13) in draft and final form including questions from interested suppliers and answers provided. Fairness related comments were provided and appropriate action was taken by project officials.

The RFP closed on November 18, 2013.

Fairness Monitor Activities and Findings during the Evaluation of Responses to the Phase Two RFP

On November 27, 2013 we observed the consensus evaluation of proposals received in response to the Phase Two RFP and provided fairness related comments. Appropriate action was taken by project officials.

On November 28, 2013 the Contracting Authority advised us that the combined technical and financial evaluation had been completed and verified by a second official and that a recommended bidder had been identified. No fairness related issues were identified.

Reference Documents

The following documents are referenced by number in the attached report.Unless otherwise indicated, these documents are available through the Government Conference Centre Rehabilitation Construction Manager Procurement project office.

Table Summary

The following table includes a list of documents referred to in the report such as the Request for Proposal (RFP), amendments, clarification letters, debriefing letters, etc. Each row is numbered, followed by the document title, then a document identifier such as a date or document number.

Reference Documents

No.	Document	Additional information
1	Letter of Interest and Qualification (LOIQ)	Published on GETS on July 22, 2013
2	Amendment 1 to LOIQ	Published on GETS on July 25, 2013
3	Amendment 2 to LOIQ	Published on GETS on July 29, 2013
4	Amendment 3 to LOIQ	Published on GETS on August 12, 2013
5	Amendment 4 to LOIQ	Published on GETS on August 15, 2013
6	Amendment 5 to LOIQ	Published on GETS on August 15, 2013
7	Request for Proposal (RFP)	Published on GETS on October 8, 2013
8	Amendment 1 to RFP	Published on GETS on October 11, 2013
9	Amendment 2 to RFP	Published on GETS on November 1, 2013
10	Amendment 3 to RFP	Published on GETS on November 1, 2013
11	Amendment 4 to RFP	Published on GETS on November 10, 2013
12	Amendment 5 to RFP	Published on GETS on November 13, 2013
13	Amendment 6 to RFP	Published on GETS on November 14, 2013

Addendum to the Final Report
July 14, 2014

Addendum to Fairness Monitor Contractor’s Final Report dated December 31, 2013 concerning Government Conference Centre Rehabilitation Construction Management Services Procurement

This Addendum to the Fairness Monitor Contractor's Final Report covers the period following the conclusion of the evaluation phase and includes the debriefings of bidders.

On March 3, 2014 and March 4, 2014 we reviewed written debriefings that were to be provided to the bidders. The debriefings sent to the three unsuccessful bidders provided information as to why the contract was not awarded to the bidder. No fairness deficiencies were identified. The three unsuccessful bidders requested further information concerning their responses and we observed the requested debriefings on March 20, 2014 April 1, 2014, and May 13, 2014. No fairness deficiencies were identified.

Fairness Monitor Attestation of Assurance

It is the opinion of the Fairness Monitor that the post evaluation activities, including the debriefings, were carried out in a fair manner. In this context, fairness is defined as decisions made objectively, free from personal favouritism and political influence, and encompasses the elements of openness, competitiveness, transparency and compliance.