Office accommodation solution for the pay consolidation centre of expertise in Miramichi, New Brunswick

Table of contents

• 1. Introduction
• 2. Miramichi project
• 3. Attestation of assurance
• 4. Methodology
  • 4.1 Fairness monitoring activities and observations: Selection of invitees to tender / Request for qualifications (Part 1 of Phase 1)
  • 4.2 Fairness monitoring activities and observations: Selection of invitees to tender / Request for qualifications (Part 2 of Phase 1)
  • 4.3 Fairness monitoring activities and observations: Request for proposal (Phase 2)
  • 4.4 Fairness monitoring activities and observations: Evaluation phase of request for proposal
• 5. Reference documents

1. Introduction

Samson & Associates was engaged as a Fairness Monitor (FM) to observe the competitive selection process for the office accommodation solution for the Pay Consolidation Centre of Expertise in Miramichi, New Brunswick (herein referred to as the “Miramichi Project”), issued by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) as a result of solicitation 524463. Samson & Associates is an independent third party with respect to this activity.

We reviewed all of the information provided and observed all relevant activities. We had full access to all aspects of the procurement process and co-operation from all stakeholders at PWGSC.

We hereby submit the Final Report, covering the activities of the Fairness Monitor, commencing with the SOIT (selection of invitees to tender) process and continuing through the evaluation phase.

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

2. Miramichi Project

The SOIT, Request for Qualification (RFQ) and Request for Proposal (RFP) for an Irrevocable Offer to Lease (IOL) documents were issued by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) in order to retain a firm to design, build, operate, maintain, and lease a new office building in the city of Miramichi, New Brunswick.

More specifically, firms are requested to submit an IOL for a new building of 9,300 square meters of usable office space. The Land, upon which the new building will be built by Canada, is located in the City of Miramichi, New Brunswick and will be conveyed to the Selected Proponent at fair market value. The Selected Proponent will erect the Base Building on the Land and lease it with the Land to Canada. The Term of the Lease will be twenty (20) years from the Commencement Date.

3. Attestation of assurance

The FM hereby provides the following unqualified assurance statement concerning the competitive selection process to design, build, operate, maintain, and lease a new office building in the city of Miramichi, New Brunswick, commencing with the SOIT process and continuing through the conclusion of the evaluation phase.

It is our professional opinion that the SOIT process we observed, continuing through to RFP evaluation phase, was carried out in a fair open and transparent manner.

4. Methodology

Samson & Associates was engaged as a Fairness Monitor (FM) to observe the competitive selection process for a single service provider to design, build, operate, maintain, and lease a new office building in the city of Miramichi, New Brunswick, and to attest to the fairness, openness and transparency of this monitored activity.

In accordance with the terms of our engagement, we familiarized ourselves with the relevant documents, and observed bid solicitation activities (e.g., SOIT, RFQ, RFP, questions and responses, and related evaluation phases), identifying fairness-related matters to the contracting and technical authorities, and ensuring that responses and actions were reasonable and appropriate.

4.1 Fairness monitoring activities and observations: Selection of invitees to tender / Request for qualifications (Part 1 of Phase 1)

The SOIT was issued by request to interested proponents via a MERX notification on January 16, 2013 and closed March 12, 2013. During the SOIT process, 56 SOIT bid packages were requested.

Questions from the potential bidders were accepted and answers were addressed and distributed to all interested parties, as applicable, prior to the closing date. The FM reviewed all questions and answers provided during the SOIT period to ensure fairness-related considerations were satisfactorily addressed.

At the close of the SOIT, seven (7) addendums were communicated as a result of questions from potential proponents and required clarifications.

Observation:

Questions arising during the SOIT phase and the potential bidders' meeting were handled in accordance with the terms of the SOIT and responses were clear, understandable and communicated to all vendors in a timely fashion. All fairness considerations were satisfactorily addressed.

Fairness monitoring summary of findings on the selection of invitees to tender / Request for qualifications process:

It is the opinion of the Fairness Monitor that the SOIT/RFQ activities observed for the Miramichi Project was conducted in a fair manner. In this context, fairness is understood to encompass the elements of openness, competitiveness, transparency and compliance.

4.2 Fairness monitoring activities and observations: Selection of invitees to tender / Request for qualifications (Part 2 of Phase 1)

The FM reviewed the Evaluation Plan and Terms of Reference, Evaluator and Consensus Scoring Sheets and Summaries. The technical evaluation of the bids was carried out through a review of the documentation provided by the bidders.

Bid evaluation commenced on April 8, 2013, with a briefing session to the technical evaluation team, attended by the contracting authority and the FM. All four technical evaluators were present for the duration of the consensus meetings, as was the contracting authority and the FM. The technical evaluation was completed on April 12, 2013. At the close of the SOIT, only one bidder was qualified for the RFP phase.

No fairness issues were identified.

Observation:

Evaluator instructions and tools were complete, were in accordance with RFQ terms and consistent with fairness principles and practices, and were followed. Evaluation criteria, weightings, scores and pass marks were exactly as set out in the RFQ. The evaluation was carried out as described in the RFQ and the Evaluation Plan without deviation and bid scoring was done in strict adherence to the stated criteria. Consensus evaluation discussions were open, participated in by all evaluators and consensus was achieved on all criteria.

Fairness monitoring summary of findings on the Selection of invitees to tender / Request for qualifications process:

It is the opinion of the Fairness Monitor that the SOIT/RFQ activities observed for the Miramichi Project was conducted in a fair, open and transparent manner. In this context, fairness is understood to encompass the elements of openness, competitiveness, transparency and compliance.

4.3 Fairness monitoring activities and observations: Request for proposal (Phase 2)

The RFP was issued by invitation to the only successful proponent of the SOIT/RFQ phase via e-mail notification on July 24, 2013 and closed November 21, 2013.

Questions from the potential bidder were accepted and answers were addressed and distributed to the interested parties, as applicable, prior to the closing date. The FM reviewed all questions and answers provided during the RFP period to ensure fairness-related considerations were satisfactorily addressed.

A non-mandatory bidder's meeting was organized on September 5, 2013. Representatives from the potential bidder and the FM were present.

At the close of the RFP, thirteen (13) addendums were communicated as a result of questions from the potential proponent and required clarifications.

Observation:

Questions arising during the RFP phase and the Bidders' Meeting were handled in accordance with the terms of the RFP and responses were clear, understandable and communicated to the vendor in a timely fashion. All fairness considerations were satisfactorily addressed. Efforts were made not to communicate to the potential bidder that there were no other bidders.

Fairness monitoring summary of findings on the request for proposal:

It is the opinion of the Fairness Monitor that the RFP activities observed for the Miramichi Project were conducted in a fair and transparent manner. The RFQ process resulted in only one bidder being qualified and subsequently invited to submit a proposal. Although a single bidder submitted a proposal in the RFP phase, when considering the RFQ and RFP process as a whole, we have no concerns regarding the openness of process.  

4.4 Fairness monitoring activities and observations: Evaluation phase of request for proposal

The FM has reviewed the evaluation plan and framework, scorecards and summary consensus of the evaluators. The evaluation of bid in this phase consisted of the review of the documentation submitted by the bidder.

An information session for the technical evaluation team attended by the contracting authority was held on November 15, 2013. The evaluation of the technical bid began on November 15, 2013. The six technical evaluators attended the consensus meeting and so did the contracting authority and FM. The consensus meeting was completed December 3, 2013. However, due to certain issues resulting from the technical evaluation results, the evaluation phase was only completed on February 17, 2014, following consultation with contracting authority's legal counsel.

No bidders  obtain the minimum mandatory points necessary to advance to the contract award phase.

No contentious issues from a fairness point of view have been identified.

Observation:

The instructions and tools of the evaluators were complete, respected the terms of the RFP and were consistent with the principles and practices of fairness, and they were executed fairly. Evaluation criteria, weighting, points and passing notes complied fully with what had been established in the RFP. The evaluation was performed as described by the RFP, and there was no difference. The scoring was performed in strict accordance with the criteria. Consensus discussions were open, all evaluators were present, and a consensus was reached for all the criteria.

Summary of results of the fairness monitor on the evaluation process:

According to the Fairness Monitor, the proposal evaluation for the Miramichi Project was conducted in a fair manner. As previously noted, the RFQ process resulted in only one bidder being qualified and invited to submit a proposal. Although a single bidder submitted a proposal in the RFP phase, when considering the RFQ and RFP process as a whole, we have no concerns regarding the openness of process.

5. Reference documents

The following documents are referenced by number in this report and unless otherwise indicated, are available through PWGSC.

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.

	Document Tracking	Distribution	Date
1	SOIT notification published	MERXFootnote *	January 16, 2013
2	Bidders' Meeting	N/A	January 30, 2013
3	Addendum #1	MERXFootnote *	January 25, 2013
4	Addendum #2	MERXFootnote *	February 7, 2013
5	Addendum #3	MERXFootnote *	February 12, 2013
6	Addendum #4	MERXFootnote *	February 18, 2013
7	Addendum #5	MERXFootnote *	February 28, 2013
8	Addendum #6	MERXFootnote *	March 4, 2013
9	Addendum #7	MERXFootnote *	March 8, 2013
10	RFQ Bid Evaluation Plan	Internal	March 8, 2013
11	RFQ Technical Evaluation Worksheet	Internal	March 20, 2013
12	Final RFQ Technical Evaluation Worksheet	Internal	May 17, 2013
13	IOL Request	E-Mail	July 24, 2013
14	Addendum #8	E-Mail	October 24, 2013
15	Addendum #9	E-Mail	November 2, 2013
16	Addendum #10	E-Mail	November 2, 2013
17	Addendum #11	E-Mail	November 6, 2013
18	Addendum #12	E-Mail	November 7, 2013
19	Addendum #13	E-Mail	November 14, 2013
20	Technical Evaluation Worksheet - IOL	E-Mail	Submitted to the evaluation team on November 15, 2013
21	Technical Evaluation Report - IOL	E-Mail	Dated January 9, 2014