- PCP - CORDIS...SMART@FIRE-PCP model Invitation to Tender 4 A Tenderer must have submitted a tender...

SMART@FIRE-PCP model Invitation to Tender

1

Deadline for receipt of the Offers Phase 1: 13 October 2014 at 12:00

- PCP Invitation to Tender


2

SMART@FIRE PCP INVITATION

TO TENDER CONTENTS AMENDMENT SHEET

Amend. No. Issue Date Amendments Initials Date

0 10 feb 2014

1 04 april 2014

2 04 June 2014

3 26 June 2014

4 11 July 2014


3

SMART@FIRE-PCP Invitation to Tender

This Invitation to Tender (ITT) should be read in conjunction with other documents associated

with this Pre-Commercial Procurement (PCP). A list of these documents is added at the end of

this Invitation to Tender (hereunder and in Section 9) and they can be requested on the following

e-mail address [email protected].

The tenderer is advised that the subject matter of this contract means that it is excluded from

the remit of Directive 2004/18/EC (by virtue of Article 16(f)) and Belgian Public Procurement

law (by virtue of Article 18 (4), Law of June 15th, 2006). The use of the Official Journal to publish

the contract notice is not to be taken as a waiver of this exclusion by the Lead Procurer. This

ITT (and any contract subsequently entered into with the preferred Tenderers) shall be governed

and construed in accordance with the laws of Belgium. By submitting a tender the Tenderer

agrees that the courts of Brussels, Belgium (Dutch speaking division) shall have exclusive

jurisdiction over any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with this ITT or that contract

or its subject matter or formation (including non-contractual disputes or claims).

Summary Interested legal entities are invited to tender for research and development (R&D) service

contracts, with the aim to develop new ICT-solutions. The priority challenge for the PCP tender

covers primarily a Personal Protective System - central nerve system (incl. standard turnout

gear ‘integrated’ with ICT subsystems covering system architecture, communication,

localization, visualization, interfaces, etc.) as outlined in the SMART@FIRE-PCP Challenge Brief.

The Challenge Brief also contains details on background, challenges and expected outcomes of

the projects.

The Agency of Innovation - Het Agentschap voor Innovatie door Wetenschap en Technologie1

(“IWT”) is the Lead Procurer, acting in its own name and on its own behalf as well as in the name

and on behalf of the following governmental entities (i) the Federale Overheidsdienst

Binnenlandse Zaken2 (“IBZ”) and (ii) the Service Départemental d’incendie et de secours des

Bouches du Rhone3 ‘(SDIS 13”). Both entities and IWT form the Group of Procurers.

When tendering, bear in mind that the tendered price should reflect the fact that intellectual

property rights created by the Contractor as a result of work done under the contract stay with

the Contractor as provided for in the framework agreement (see clause 17 and 18), subject to

the call-back provision set forth in clause 18.6 of the framework agreement.

The SMART@FIRE-PCP will use a phased approach:

• Phase 1: Solution Design: is intended to demonstrate feasibility.

• Phase 2: Prototyping and testing: is for the development and evaluation of prototypes

or demonstrators.

• Phase 3: First Batch Production and Testing: is intended for the original development

and testing of a limited volume of first products/ services (test series).

In each phase, Tenderers are competing with each other for assignments.

1 The Agency for Innovation through Science and Technology

2 The Federal Public Service Internal Affairs of Belgium

3 The French Fire Department SDIS 13 (Bouches-du-Rhone Fire Department)

Field Code Changed

mailto:[email protected]


4

A Tenderer must have submitted a tender for Phase 1 to be considered for Phase 2.

Time Frame and Budget

Tenderers should aim at a market introduction of their new solution a maximum 5 years after

the end of the PCP. In total, 450.000 € (exclusive of VAT) is reserved for the PCP contracts.

Priority of Tender Documents

In case of conflict between the following documents with regard to the same matter, the order

of priority and prevalence between the documents shall be as follows:

- The Invitation to Tender;

- The Challenge Brief (includes Functional Requirements);

- The Framework Agreement;

- The Work Orders;

- Other Tender Documents, if any,

and

- The Tender of the Contractor


5

Contents SMART@FIRE-PCP Invitation to Tender ............................................................................. 3

Summary ................................................................................................................ 3

Time Frame and Budget .............................................................................................. 4

Priority of Tender Documents ....................................................................................... 4

1 An introduction to Pre-Commercial Procurement ......................................................... 7

2 Brief description of the Scope of the PCP-Smart@Fire ................................................. 10

3 Contracting Authority: Lead Procurer – Group of procurers – Preferred Partners ................. 11

4 Description of the Tendering Procedure and related Framework agreement ...................... 12

4.1 Description of the Tendering Stage ..................................................................... 12

4.2 Description of the Execution Stage and successive phases: ........................................ 13

4.3 Number of contracts awarded in each phase. ........................................................ 15

4.4 Framework Agreement ................................................................................... 16

4.5 Budget ....................................................................................................... 16

4.6 The payment schedule .................................................................................... 17

4.7 Satisfactory completion of the phases ................................................................. 18

5 Submitting a tender .......................................................................................... 18

5.1 General administrative instructions .................................................................... 18

5.2 Indicative time schedule ................................................................................. 19

5.3 Submission of a tender for the successive phases .................................................... 20

5.3.1 Request to participate to Smart@Fire PCP ......................................................... 20

5.3.2 Submission of a tender in the Tendering Stage for Phase I ...................................... 20

5.4 Communication with the Lead Procurer ............................................................... 21

5.5 Consortium ................................................................................................. 22

5.6 Disclosure of information – Confidentiality ............................................................ 22

5.7 Conformance between the Framework Agreement and the call for tender documents in

general ...................................................................................................... 23

6 Legal provisions ............................................................................................... 23

6.1 Subcontractors ............................................................................................. 23

6.2 Disclaimer and Withdrawal of the PCP ................................................................. 24

6.3 Confidentiality, publicity and information about the award ....................................... 24

6.4 Distribution of IPR resulting from the project ........................................................ 25

6.5 Applicable law – Competent court –Remedies ........................................................ 26

7 Evaluation of the tender .................................................................................... 26

7.1 Exclusion criteria .......................................................................................... 26

7.2 Minimum requirements ................................................................................... 28

7.3 General assessment process ............................................................................. 29

7.4 Assessment criteria and Scoring ......................................................................... 30

8 Awarding criteria ............................................................................................. 31


6

9 List of documents ............................................................................................ 40

10 Appendix 1: Scoring model ................................................................................. 41

11 Appendix 2: Request Of the Tender Documents Form –Registration Form ....................... 4645

12 Appendix 3: Tender Query Form ........................................................................ 4746

12 Appendix 4: General Tender Submission Form ...................................................... 4847

13 Appendix 5: Exclusion Criteria .......................................................................... 5049

14 Appendix 6: Financial Information ..................................................................... 5352

15 Appendix 7: Technical Capacity ........................................................................ 5655

16 Appendix 8: Tender Form (Technical and Financial offer) ......................................... 5958

17 Appendix 9: Evaluation Process ......................................................................... 7170


7

1 An introduction to Pre-Commercial Procurement

1.1 Pre-Commercial Procurement (PCP) is a procurement method based on an open competition

which enables public sector bodies to engage with innovative businesses and other interested

organizations in research and development (R&D) projects, to arrive at innovative solutions

that address specific public sector challenges and needs for which there is no solution on

the market as yet. The new innovative solutions are developed through a phased

procurement of development contracts to reduce risk.

1.2 A PCP that is seeking to award contracts for R&D services falls outside the scope of the two

EU procurement directives; see Utilities Directive 2004/17/EC, Article 24 (e), and Public

Sector Directive 2004/18/EC, Article 16 (f). The R&D services will be financed at market

price, thus providing business with a transparent competitive and a reliable source of early-

stage budget, and the opportunity to establish an early customer, for a new solution. Since

PCP focus on specific identified needs, the chance of exploitation of developed solutions

increases.

1.3 The Belgian legal framework

For the procurement of the R&D services in the framework of Smart@Fire, one must

determine whether Belgian Public Procurement Law applies.

A procurement of R&D services falls within the scope of Belgian Public Procurement Law if:

1. The benefits accrue exclusively to the contracting authority;

AND

2. The entire contract is financed entirely by the contracting authority.

Both conditions have to be met in order that the Belgian Law and tendering procedures

apply.

In Smart@Fire the Pre-Commercial Procurement (art. 18, 4° Belgian Procurement Law of

15June 2006) is excluded from the scope of the Belgian Procurement Law because the

contracting authorities does not reserve the benefits of the procurement of the R&D-services

exclusively for themselves (in particular IPR ownership is assigned to the contractors) and in

return the price paid to the contractors includes a price reduction compared to exclusive

development.

As Belgian Public Procurement Law does not apply in the framework of Smart@Fire, tender

documents are drawn up which clearly indicate why this procurement of R&D services falls

outside the scope of legislation (see Challenge Brief).

On the basis of the final report of the innovation platform, the solution to be developed is

described in more detail and incorporated in these tender documents. The tender documents

contain information on the solution to be developed, its functional requirements, and also

the evaluation criteria on the basis of which the offers of the prospective contractors are

evaluated.

1.4 The PCP method is suited to Tenderers of all sizes, including small and medium-sized

enterprises (SME), as the contracts are of relatively small value and operate on short

timescales.


8

1.5 PCP General Principles:

The exemption for R&D services foreseen in the legislation allow a more flexible approach

in terms of tendering procedure, nevertheless the Fundamental Principles established in the

EU Directives and Treaty must be respected: the free movement of goods, services and

workers; the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital. As well as the

principles derived from the EU-treaty principles:

(1) Transparency & Openness

(2) Non-discrimination and Equal Treatment

The PCP procedure and the final procurement of the developed commercial solution must

be completely separated. The public procurers will always ensure EU wide publication in the

OJEC and National Official Bulletins, not only the PCP call for tender but all the related

decisions will be clearly motivated and communicated. The PCP contracts and the final

procurement shall always be awarded to the tenders offering Best Value for Money. Due to

this openness and transparency of the procedure, the PCP and final procurement are not

necessarily awarded to the same parties.

1.6 The Specific Pre-Commercial Procurement conditions

In addition to the basic principles some Specific Pre-Commercial Procurement conditions

have to be taken into account if the contracting authorities involved in the Smart@Fire

project want to apply the exemption for R&D-services. In the framework of the Smart@Fire

project the utmost care was taken in order to respect the conditions foreseen in the EC

Communication on Pre-Commercial procurement and its accompanying Staff Working

Document4. The conditions are5:

(1) The scope of Tender to be launched holds meanly R&D services6.

The R&D-services that have to be deployed accounts for more than 50% of the value of the

overall value. .

(2) PCP projects can never include commercial development activities.

The PCP ends with the production of a limited batch of products after having given the

opportunity to the contracting authorities to test the developed solution. The R&D-phase is

clearly separated from the final commercial tender. The contracting authorities cannot

4 COM/2007/799 and SEC/2007/1668

5 The specific conditions mentioned have been taken into account in the different Smart@Fire Tender Documents: the Challenge Brief, the Invitation to Tender, the framework agreement, etc.

6 According to the OECD Frascati Manual, “the term R&D covers three activities; basic research, applied research and experimental development […] Basic research is experimental or theoretical work undertaken primarily to acquire new knowledge of the underlying foundation of phenomena and observable facts, without any particular application or use in view. Applied research is also original investigation undertaken in order to acquire new knowledge. It is, however, directed primarily towards a specific practical aim or objective. Experimental development is systematic work, drawing on the existing knowledge gained from research and/or practical experience, which is directed to produce new materials, products or devices, to installing new processes, systems and services, or to improving substantially those already produces or installed. R&D covers both formal R&D in R&D units and informal or occasional R&D in other units”. For further discussion on the definition of R&D, see OECD’s Frascati Manual (latest edition: 2002: Frascati Manual, Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development).


9

purchase directly the developed solution in commercial volumes as part of the PCP tender.

Therefore it is crucial for the procurers to anticipate the conditions under which the

commercial procurement will take place, and secure themselves access to the developed

solution via user rights and licensing.

(3) Competitive Development in subsequent phases

The PCP-method used in Smart@Fire is a phased approach model according to the Working

Document of the EC. The innovative Personal Protective System (PPS) for fire fighters will

be deployed in three phase: Solution Design, Prototyping (and connected tests in the

premises of the Contractors) and the development of a limited amount of first products (and

connected tests, in the test facilities of the Departmental Fireschool of Marseille, France).

In addition, the contract in each phase must be awarded to multiple Tenderers. In the last

phase, if the quality of the offers allow it, at least 2 Contractors should be appointed in

order to avoid vendors lock-in.

(4) A Single framework Contract

To manage the PCP one single framework contract will be signed with each selected

supplier covering all the PCP phases. This framework contract will contain an agreement on

the future procedure for implementing the different phases (through specific contracts),

including the format of the intermediate evaluations after the solution design and prototype

development stages that progressively select economic operators with the best competing

solutions.

(5) The Risk-Benefit sharing-principle and related IPR-rights:

One of the main advantages of PCP is the sharing of both opportunities and risks by both the

public procurers and the private suppliers. This means the public purchaser will not keep

the outcome (in particular ownership rights of IPRs generated by contractors for remain with

the contractors) of the R&D completely for its own use in return for a price reduction on the

development cost and certain usage and licensing related rights. As the appointed

contractors retain IPR ownership rights and the associated commercialisation opportunities

of developed solutions to other markets, the contractors themselves will be required to

invest in the R&D-phase as the required budget can never be supplied by the public procurer

alone cover the expenses related to protection of and litigation on the IPRs. This way both

parties (contractors and procurers) share both potential benefits and and the risks of a

potential failure the development.

Tenderers are required to submit fixed price offers, meaning that Tenderers are responsible

to cover at their own expense any additional unforeseen development costs in their

individual solution approach that they may incur above the fixed price they have committed

to in their bid.

Innovations developed in the framework of this initiative will lead to the creation of

important IPR rights generated by the suppliers. IPRs arising from the R&D developments

will be vested as much as possible to the developing supplier(s). The Group of Procurers will

receive as a minimum User rights on the developments to ensure continuity of its internal

operations. The developing supplier(s) can be requested by the Group of Procurers to offer

licenses to third parties under fair and reasonable condition. All contracts will foresee a

call-back provision to ensure that IPRs allocated to companies that do not succeed to exploit

them, will return back to the Group of Procurers.

(6) Avoid Illegal State Aid: the R&D-activities should be performed at market

conditions


10

The payments done to the suppliers may not constitute state aid, therefore the whole PCP-

approach much be executed at market conditions. In Smart@Fire we ask the tendering

suppliers to provide a price reduction in return for the IPR benefits they get. A financial

expert could be appointed in the Evaluation Committee to evaluate the market conditions

in the sector and the offered price reduction.

(7) European Legislation and Standards

Smart@FireAs the primary goal of Smart@Fire is to better protect fire fighters and reduce

the risks involved in firefighting the Tenderer or consortium should take into account that

the final Smart PPS prototypes comply with the applicable European Legislation (and

Standards) as well as the specific requirements of the procurer. (see Challenge Brief)

1.7 In this PCP, tenders will be selected by an open procurement process and awarded research

and development contracts. Selected Contractors will retain intellectual property generated

from their projects (subject to the call-back provision set forth in clause 18.6 of the

Framework Agreement), with certain rights of use retained by the Group of Procurers.

2 Brief description of the Scope of the PCP-Smart@Fire

2.1 The scope of the PCP-tender is the development of a “PPS central nerve system: system architecture, communication, localization & interfaces”. (For more information and

details: see Challenge Brief and Functional Requirements)

This PPS covers multiple elements listed hereafter. For each element a number of insights

are described, reflecting the main sources of complexity.

The PPS central nerve system architecture:

Communication network with sufficient indoor penetration and near real-time

update rate towards the intervention coordinating officer

Balanced trade-offs between distributed and central processing, scalability of

system, local performance vs. remote responsiveness (online vs. offline operation),

interfaces, etc.

Limited integration with textile (underwear, turnout gear, or…):

Woven-in, layered-on ICT-textile integration comprises too many risks w.r.t

manufacturing costs, durability, etc.

Cabled and/or wireless. When cabled: easy mounting/replacing of

cables/connectors; durability of cables/connectors; dealing with different turnout

gear sizes; integrating UIs. When wireless: limiting interference; easy start-up and

self-assessment of correct operations via minimal # UI’s

Electromagnetic shielding of the different devices (sensors, processing unit,…),

without implementing military-grade measures.

Localization engine:

A hybrid localization system (preferentially GPS with inertial subsystem) with limited

indoor drift.

A relative track & trace map, enabling ‘meet point’ and ‘recovery path’ instructions.

Available Cartesian coordinated maps (e.g. Google maps) used as overlay.

Beacon-based solution instead of inertial at increased risk, principally fast &

accurate deployment and TCO.

Intuitive user feedback (restitution, visualization):

For the intervention coordinating officer: intuitive UI dashboard, conform way of

working.


11

For the firefighter: multimodal combination of audio, simple UI (button/lights) and

haptic belt. Risk reduction should focus on automated feedback modality selection

and ergonomic use.

Coupling via defined application interfaces (e.g. Bluetooth application profile) with

(Standalone) environmental temperature measurement device

Optional, when available: (standalone), cheap, simple and robust explosive gas

detector (e.g. indicating the presence of explosive gasses without measuring ppm

details)

2.2 The PCP-procedure is articulated in three phases:

Phase 1: Solution design

Phase 2: Prototyping

Phase 3: Testing of a first Batch of products

At this stage the Tenderers are requested to submit a tender for Phase 1 as well as the

applicable unit prices for phase 2 and 3.

3 Contracting Authority: Lead Procurer – Group of procurers –

Preferred Partners

3.1 The Agency for Innovation by Science and Technology of Flanders (“IWT”), who is

represented by the Project Director and Legal Procurement expert Mr. Christophe Veys, will

act as Lead Procurer in the framework of the SMART@FIRE-PCP, acting in its own name and

on its own behalf as well as in name and on behalf of the Buyers Group.

The Buyers Group consists of the following contracting authorities.

• the Federal Public Service Internal Affairs of Belgium (IBZ). The Federal Public Service

Internal Affairs of Belgium is responsible for the procurement of PPE’s for more than

18.000 Belgian fire fighters.

• the French Fire Department (SDIS 13) (Bouches-du-Rhone Fire Department). The French

Fire Department SDIS 13 (Bouches-du-Rhone Fire Department) encompassing 67 fire

stations and has around 4500 voluntary fire fighters, 1160 professional fire fighters and

379 administrative, technical, and specialized personnel of the French Civil Service with

a wide experience in many specialized types of interventions.

3.2 The Greater Manchester Fire & rescue Authority (GMFRS); the Stadt of Dortmund (FDDO) –

Het Nederlands Instituut Fysieke Veiligheid (IFV) - are not part of the consortium of

contracting Authorities but will have the status of Preferred Partner in this contract and

assume the rights as stated in clause 25 of the Framework Agreement.

Other Fire fighter brigades acting as contracting authorities from a variety of European

Countries have indicated an interest in the SMART@FIRE-PCP. They will be informed of the

progress and results, but will not acquire any IPR.

3.3 The consortium of partners and contracting authorities are supported in the SMART@FIRE-

PCP with external expertise from Addestino or other external advisers to be appointed.

They can provide expertise on the execution of the PCP and coordinate, the submission

and assessment of tenders.


12

3.4 IBZ, SDIS 13, and IWT will acquire the right to use the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)

developed in the SMART@FIRE-PCP by the companies, subject to a call-back provision. See

clause 6 for further information on the division of IPR as well as the relevant clauses in the

Framework Agreement (including clause 17 and 18).

4 Description of the Tendering Procedure and related

Framework agreement This PCP procedure is articulated in two stages:

- The “Tendering Stage” - Bid submission and admission based on participation

requirements and administrative documents (appendix 4,5,6,7), technical and

financial offer (appendix 8) ;

- The “Execution Stage” – this stage is divided in three different Phases:

• Phase I (solution design) (duration 4 months)

• Phase II (prototype development) (duration 8 months)

• Phase III (Pre-commercial small scale product/service development) (duration 6

months)

(here after each a “Phase”).

A general Framework Agreement for the provision of the R&D services required in the

Execution Stage, setting out the rights and obligations of the Contractors and the Lead

Procurer in the execution of all three Phases shall be entered into by all selected Tenderers

with the Lead Procurer.

4.1 Description of the Tendering Stage

The services procured under Smart@Fire fit in the list of exemptions to Directive

2004/18/EC, therefore there is no requirement to use one of the tendering procedures

defined in this Directive. Nevertheless in this PCP a procedure similar to the “open

procedure” as defined in this Directive shall be applied.

As in an “open procedure”, there is no "pre-qualification" phase in order to select

candidates for the tendering. Therefore, Tenderers are invited to check carefully the

requirements as to the contents of the "Administrative Documents" listed below under

section 5.3 (submission of a tender for successive phases), before starting to prepare

their technical and financial offers (Use the Tender Form Section 8).

A minimum aximum number of four (4) Tenderers will be asked to sign each a

Framework Agreement and will be awarded a Contract for Phase I.

A maximum budget of 60.000€ (excl. VAT) is available for the proposals admitted to

Phase I, and each Phase I Contract will be awarded a maximum of 15.000 € (excl. VAT).


13

4.2 Description of the Execution Stage and successive phases:

The Execution stage is divided into three separate research & development phases,

comprising, respectively and in that order:

4.2.1 Phase 1: The Solution Design Phase: is intended to demonstrate the feasibility of

proposed concepts for new solutions. We expect to award a minimum aximum of four (4)

tenders in this Phase 1. Phase 1 results in a detailed and accurate feasibility report. In

first instance the tenderer will have to provide the Lead Procurer a tender for this first

phase as well as the applicable unit prices for phase 2 and 3. Tenders for Phase 1 will be

evaluated and selected by the Evaluation Committee based on the evaluation criteria set

forth in appendix 1 (for more details see clause 7 below) and the submission of the

administrative forms (appendix 4,5,6,7) and a technical and financial offer (appendix 8).

A standstill period is foreseen of at least ten calendar days following the notification of

the selection decision, before the contract is signed with the successful Tenderer(s). Its

purpose is to allow Tenderers to challenge the decision before the framework agreement

is signed. The duration of Phase 1 is 4 months (fix term)

On the completion date of Phase 1, the contractors of phase 1 shall submit to the Lead

Procurer their end of phase reports for Phase 1 together with the deliverables (including

the Results) for phase 1, which shall be reviewed and assessed by the Evaluation Committee

in order to determine whether the respective contractors have unsatisfactorily,

satisfactorily or successfully completed phase 1. The evaluation committee intends to issue

its decision one month after the completion date of phase 1 (see clause 43 Framework

Agreement).

- “unsatisfactory completion of a phase” means that a contractor has not complied with

all the conditions for satisfactory completion its obligations set forth in the agreement

and the relevant work order and/or did not (timely) meet with all requirements for the

completion of the phase as set forth in the tender Documents (including the Challenge

Brief, the Functional Specifications Document and the relevant Work Order) and the

tender of that contractor.

- “satisfactory completion of a Phase” means that a contractor has carried out the work

proposed in the submitted tender, has allocated the funds to the planning objectives

and delivered the required reports/demonstrations for that phase on time and with

minimum reasonable qualitycomplied with all its obligations set forth in the agreement

and the relevant work order and that all requirements for the completion of that phase

as set forth in the tender documents (including the Challenge Brief, the Functional

Specifications Document and the relevant Work Order) and the tender (of that

contractor) have been timely met, but that the outcome of the phase (in particular the

design, prototype or test series of first end-products resulting from phase 1/2/3

respectively) does not meet the mandatory minimum functional requirements and/or

the design constraints such as the expected maximum price for the end-solution and

the health/safety constraints defined in the challenge brief and the functional

specifications is not considered feasible according to the assessment of the outcomes

of the phase by the evaluation committee, acting reasonably. For example: the

outcome of the feasibility study in Phase 1 could be that the innovation is not feasible.

- “successful completion of a phase” means that the contractor has satisfactorily

completed the phase (as defined above) and that the outcome of the phase is

considered promising (in particular the design, prototype or test series of first end-

products resulting from phase 1/2/3 respectively) meets all the mandatory minimum

functional requirements and all the design constraints such as the expected maximum

price for the end-solution and the health/safety constraints defined in the challenge

Formatted: Indent: Left: 1 cm, First line: 0 cm


14

brief and the functional specifications according to the assessment of the outcomes of

the phase) by the evaluation committee, acting reasonably.

Successful completion means: successful completion of all related milestones as

described in the contracted tender, and the deliverables (including the Results) of the

Phase are considered by the Evaluation Committee and the lead Procurer to be

promising.

Immediately after the issuance by the evaluation committee of its decision as to the

unsatisfactory, satisfactory or successful completion of Phase 1, the lead procurer will

issue a call for tenders among those contractors that successfully completed Phase 1 to

perform the services within the scope of Phase 2 (prototyping) of the project. Such

contractors shall be required to submit their tenders for phase 2 at the latest 6 weeks after

the issuance of the relevant call for tenders for Phase 2. The criteria and the method for

evaluating those tenders for phase 2 will be set out in the corresponding call for tenders

for Phase 2. The evaluation committee intends to issue its decision as to the award of the

work order phase 2 two (2) weeks after the final submission date for tenders for phase 2.

If a contractor is selected and awarded a work order for phase 2, the agreement shall

continue in effect for the duration of that phase and shall apply to that phase as well. In

addition, a separate work order for phase 2 shall be signed by the lead procurer and the

contractor upon the award.

If a contractor is not selected and not awarded a work order for phase 2, the agreement

shall not have any effect with regard to phase 2 or phase 3 but shall expire on the date of

the final award of phase 2 by the lead procurer (save for any survival clauses).

4.2.2 Phase 2: The Prototyping Phase: is intended to develop and evaluate prototypes or

demonstrators from the more promising concepts in Phase 1 and as such is dependent upon

successful completion of Phase 1. Continued assignment under the contract for Phase 2

may be awarded to selected Phase 1 Contractors that have successfully completed (as

detailed in clause 43 of the Framework Agreement) Phase 1 and that have been invited

and did submit the best ranking offers (as decided by the Evaluation Committee) to the

further competition for phase 2. We expect to award a minimum aximum of three (3)

projects for phase 2. Phase 2 results in the demonstration of a prototype and an end of

phase report. The demonstration (or tests) of the prototype will need to take place at the

vendor’s site. The vendor will cover the costs, the tested prototype will remain the

property of the supplier. The test procedures will be described in the corresponding call

for tender for Phase 2.

On the completion date of phase 2, the contractors shall submit to the Lead Procurer their

end of phase reports for phase 2 together with the deliverables (including the Results) for

Phase 2, which shall be reviewed and assessed by the evaluation committee in order to

determine whether the contractor have unsatisfactorily, satisfactorily or successfully

completed Phase 2. The evaluation committee intends to issue its decision one (1) month

after the completion date of Phase 2.

Immediately after the issuance by the evaluation committee of its decision as to the

unsatisfactory, satisfactory or successful completion of Phase 2, the Lead Procurer will

issue a call for tenders among those contractors that successfully completed Phase 2 to

perform the services within the scope of Phase 3 (pre-production testing) of the project.

Such contractors shall be required to submit their tenders for Phase 3 at the latest 6 weeks

after the issuance of the relevant call for tenders for Phase 3. The criteria and the method

for evaluating those Tenders for Phase 3 will be set out in the corresponding call for tenders

for Phase 3. The evaluation committee intends to issue its decision as to the award of the

Work Order Phase 3 two (2) weeks after the final submission date for Tenders for Phase 3.


15

If a contractor is selected and awarded a Work Order for Phase 3, the agreement shall

continue in effect for the duration of that Phase and shall apply to that Phase as well. In

addition, a separate Work Order for Phase 3, having the format set out in Section 6 of the

framework agreement, shall be signed by the Lead Procurer and the contractor upon the

award.

If the contractor is not selected and not awarded a Work Order for Phase 3, this agreement

shall not have any effect with regard to Phase 3 but shall expire on the date of the final

award of Phase 3 by the Lead Procurer (save for any survival clauses of the Agreement).

4.2.3 Phase 3 has to main objectives: 1/ the original development from prototype to first real

products and 2/ the testing of a limited volume of first products/ services (test series).

Continued assignment under the contract for Phase 3 may be awarded to selected Phase 2

Contractors that have successfully completed (as detailed in clause 2 and 43 of the

Framework Agreement) Phase 2 and that have been invited and did submit the best ranking

offers (as decided by the Evaluation Committee) to the further competition for phase 3.

We expect to award a maximum of two (2) projects for phase 3.

Pre-production testing (Phase 3) will be done in 1 SMART@FIRE based operational

environment (see Challenge Brief). SDIS13 testing site in the Departmental Fireschool of

Marseille is expected to be used for this. The testing will happen in parallel by two fire

fighters brigades. The costs for the testing site in Marseille will be at the expenses of the

SDIS 13. More formation on the test site will be made available in the corresponding call

for tender for phase 3. The groups of procurers reserves itself the right to add other test

sites in the countries of the group of procurers or preferred partners (e.g. in Belgium) for

Phase 3. Tenderers will be informed about the final set of test sites for phase 3 before

being requested to make offers for phase 3.

Phase 3 results in the demonstration of the prototype in an operational environment and

an end of phase report form.

4.2.4 Note that only the pre-production 'functional testing' needs to be done at the site of the

procurer(s). Evidently, the development work in phase 3 to move from phase 2 prototype

to phase 3 test product can be done at the vendors’ site.

On the completion date of Phase 3, the contractors shall submit to the Lead Procurer

their end of phase reports for Phase 3 together with the deliverables (including the

Results) for Phase 3, which shall be reviewed and assessed by the Evaluation Committee

in order to determine whether the contractors have unsatisfactorily, satisfactorily or

successfully completed Phase 3. The Evaluation Committee intends to issue its decision

one (1) month after the Completion Date of Phase 3.

For the avoidance of doubt, all timings referenced in this section are indicative and may

change.

4.3 Number of contracts awarded in each phase.

4.3.1 The Lead Procurer reserves the right to refrain from progressing into the next phase in

case there are no contractors reaching the required minimum points.

4.3.2 For Phase 1 a minimum aximum of 4 tenders will be awarded, for phase 2 a minimum

aximum of 3 contracts will be awarded. For Phase 3 a maximum of two tenders will be

awarded.


16

4.3.3 The number of Framework Agreements to be awarded depends on the number of contracts

for Phase 1 that can be let based on the budget listed below. The exact number depends

on the price of the submitted tenders.

4.3.4 The number of contracts placed is affected by the average tender price. The lower the

average price the more Framework Agreements and contracts will be awarded. For Phase

1 and 2 contracts are funded until the remaining budget is insufficient to fund the next

best tender (in that specific challenge). For Phase 3 a set number of two tenders will be

funded per Lot (assuming there are at least two tenders that meet the quality threshold).

The number of contracts placed could turn out to be lower if there are too few tenders

that meet the quality threshold.

4.4 Framework Agreement

4.4.1 The Framework Agreement sets out the framework conditions (rights and obligations

between the Lead Procurer and the Contractors) for the entire duration of the PCP covering

Phases 1, 2 and 3. The Framework Agreement remains binding for as long as (for the

duration of all those Phases for which) Contractors remain in the competition. Tenderers

should therefore in their offer for this Invitation to Tender not only state their detailed

offer for Phase 1, but also state their goals, and outline plans (incl. price conditions) for

Phases 2 and 3, as an explicit part of the path to full commercial implementation.

4.4.2 In the Tender Form the following sections require the tenderer to look ahead to Phase 2

and 3 (appendix 8, Criteria IX)

4.4.3 If a Contractor is awarded a Framework Agreement it is also awarded a work order for

Phase 1. Work orders for phase 2 and 3 may be awarded subsequently, (following further

competition at each phase). The submitted Tender Form will act as the description of the

work to be performed by the Contractor (Section 3 of the Framework Agreement).

4.5 Budget

4.5.1 Before each phase submitted tenders are assessed and the best tenders are given a

contract within the available budget per phase. The following amount of budget is

available per phase:

Amount (excl. VAT)

Phase 1 €60.000

Phase 2 €240.000-

Phase 3 €150.000

4.5.2 A maxinimum number of four (4) Tenderers will be asked to sign each a Framework

Agreement and will be awarded a Work Order for Phase I. A maximum budget of €60,000

(excl. VAT) is available for the proposals admitted to Phase I, and each Phase I Contract

will be awarded a maximum of €15,000 (excl. VAT).


17

4.5.3 A miniaximum number of three (3) Contractors will be selected for Phase II. It is

anticipated that the available total budget for Phase II will be €240,000 (excl. VAT).

However, the Procuring Entity may decide to allocate the remaining budget of Phase I (if

any) to Phase II. The maximum amount allocated to each selected Contractor in that

Phase shall equal the total budget of that Phase + the remaining budget of Phase I,

divided by the minimal number of selected Contractors required for this phase ( 80.000€

excl. VAT + remaining budget of Phase I/selected minimum Contractors for Phase II).

In summary: As the maximum budget and amount per bid is fixed, the budget will be

communicated to the Tenderers before the tendering phase II starts. It will be calculated

as follows: (budget for phase II + the remaining budget of Phase I divided by 3)

The selected Contractors will be awarded a Phase II Contract with a view to developing

an early prototype as well as undergoing a test phase at the Contractor’s premises.

Therefore, the Bid for Phase II shall be expected to build on the solution designed in

Phase

4.5.4 A maximum minimum number of two (2) Contractors will be selected for Phase III. It is

anticipated that the available budget for Phase III will be €150.000 (excl. VAT).

However, the Procuring Entity may decide to allocate the remaining budget of Phase II (if

any) to Phase III. The maximum amount allocated to each selected Contractor in that

Phase shall equal the total budget of that Phase + the remaining budget of Phase II,

divided by the minimal number of selected Contractors required for this phase (75.000€

excl. VAT+ remaining budget of Phase II/minimum Contractors for Phase III). The

maximum budget and amount per bid is fixed, the budget will be communicated to the

Tenderers before the tendering phase II starts. It will be calculated as follows: (budget

for phase III + the remaining budget of Phase II divided by the amount of selected

Contractors Phase III)

4.5.5 The selected contractors will be awarded a contract for Phase III with a view to

developing a Pre-Commercial small scale products and testing. Therefore, the Bid for

Phase III shall be expected to build on the solution designed in Phase I and the prototype

developed in Phase II.

4.6 The payment schedule

4.6.1 For each phase there is a fixed duration and maximum price per project (exclusive of

VAT), between each phase the Tenderers should keep in mind that a period will be

needed for the evaluation of the End of Phase Report and the selection of tenders for the

next phase:

4.6.2 The applicable payment schedule for a specific Phase will be indicated in the relevant

Work Order.

Maximum price per offer/project

(exclusive of VAT)

Fixed duration

Phase 1 € 15.000 4 calendar months




18

4.7 Satisfactory completion of the phases

4.7.1 What is considered unsatisfactorily, satisfactorily or successful completion is covered by

clause 2 and 43 of the SMART@FIRE-PCP Framework Agreement.

4.7.2 Successful completion of Phase 1 is a prerequisite to receiving an Invitation to Tender for

Phase 2. Successful completion of Phase 2 is a prerequisite to receiving an Invitation to

Tender for Phase 3 (see also clause 2 and 43 of the Framework Agreement).

5 Submitting a tender

5.1 General administrative instructions

5.1.1 Where it is stated that Tenderers are to comply with administrative instructions, those

that do not will be excluded from further participation in the PCP.

5.1.2 Only 1 tender from a tenderer as main contractor will be accepted. Nevertheless, an

economic operator may participate as subcontractor in other bidding consortia.

5.1.3 During the tendering period for each Phase contact must only be made through the e-mail

addresses provided [email protected] .

5.1.4 Tenderers should not disclose the fact that they have been invited to tender or release

details of the tender documents, other than on an "in confidence" basis to those who have

a legitimate need to know or whom they need to consult for the purpose of preparing the

tender. Tenderers should not release information concerning the Invitation to Tender

and/or the tender documents for publication in the press or on radio, television, screen or

any other medium.

5.1.5 All tenders must be made using the SMART@FIRE-PCP Tender Form which can be requested

along with all of the other competition documentation by following the instructions on the

competition registration web page. All tenders must be submitted in accordance with the

following rules:

Tenders and supporting documents must be written in English or a full English

translation provided at no cost to the Lead Procurer

Tenders must not be qualified or accompanied by statements or a covering letter that

might be construed as rendering the tender equivocal. Unauthorized alterations or

additions must not be made to any component of the tender documents.

The CA’s decision as to whether or not a tender complies with these instructions will

be final.

5.1.6 Tenders received after the closing date for the PCP will not be included in the evaluation

process.

5.1.7 Tenders must not exceed the page limits set out in the Tender Form.

Tenderers should print on A4 max. 35 pages

If the Tender exceeds the page limit then all words and / or pages in excess of the

specified limit will not be considered further.

5.1.8 Tenders shall be received at no later than the closing date for the PCP, insert 13th of

October 2014 at12:00(see clause 5.2 for an indicative time schedule for the PCP).

Field Code Changed



19

5.1.9 Tenderers have to request the tender documents by using the “Request for Tender

Documents Form (appendix 2). At the point of registration for this competition each

tender will be assigned a reference number. It should be noted that you will need it for

all subsequent enquiries. If your tender is successful, this reference number will stay with

the project for its duration.

5.1.10 For more information on how to tender, please see 5.3

5.1.11 Offers should remain open for acceptance for at least 180 working days from the tender

return date.

5.2 Time schedule

Phase 1 Solution Design

Date Activity

After the publication Tendering period opens

13 October 2014 at 12:00 Deadline for submitting tenders

14 October till 7th November 2014 Assessment by evaluation committee

7th of November Tenderers notified of decisions (Start standstill period)

24th of November Framework Agreement and Work Order Phase 1 sent and to be signed

24th of March February 2015 Expected completion of Phase 1

Phase 2 Prototyping

Phase 3 Testing

Date Activity

14th of April 2015 Request Call for tender Phase 2

26th of May 2015 Deadline for tenders

27th of May 2015 till 14th of June Assessment by evaluation committee

15th of June 2015 Tenderers notified of decisions

Work Order Phase 2 sent and to be signed

16th of February 2016 Expected completion of Phase 2

Date Activity

02 March 2016 RequestCall for tender Phase 3

13th of April 2016 Deadline for tenders

14Th till 29th of April 2016 Assessment by evaluation committee

30th of April 2016 Tenderers notified of decisions

Work Order Phase 3 sent and to be signed

30th Of October 2016 Expected completion of Phase 3


20

The Lead Procurer reserves the right to adjust the time schedule if necessary. This will be

communicated in a timely manner to all Tenderers. The dates for Phase 2 and Phase 3 are

indicative as this stage and could be subject to change.

5.3 Submission of a tender for the successive phases

5.3.1 Request to participate to Smart@Fire PCP

In order to obtain the tender documents it is compulsory to use the Request for Tender

Documents (appendix 2)

5.3.2 Submission of a tender in the Tendering Stage for Phase I

At this stage the Tenderers are requested to submit a tender for Phase 1 as well as the

applicable unit prices for phase 2 and 3 (see Tender Form appendix.

A. In order to participate to the PCP the Tenderers shall submit in the Tendering Stage

the administrative documents (appendix 4,5,6,7) as listed below. The use of the

forms is compulsory:

- Appendix 4: Bid Submission Form (In case of Consortia the Statement in appendix

should be signed by each consortium member)

- Appendix 5 (Form A) related to the Exclusion Criteria (In case of Consortia the

appendix should be submit by each consortium member)

- Appendix 6 (Form B) related to the Financial information (In case of Consortia the

Statement should be signed and submit by the Leading Tenderer)

- Appendix 7 (Form C) related to the Technical Capacity (In case of Consortia the

appendix should be submit by each consortium member)

B. In addition the Tenderers will submit a technical and financial offer by answering

the questions listed in the Tender Form. (see appendix 8).

B.1 For the Technical Offer (appendix 8 Criteria I till VIII). Answer the questions listed

in the Tender Form. Max total amount of pages 35 (Tenderers should print on A4 max.

35 pages). If the Tender exceeds the page limit then all words and / or pages in excess

of the specified limit will not be considered further.

B.2 For the Financial Offer: (appendix 8 Criteria IX). The Tenderers must quote

binding unit prices/hourly rates for each category of R&D resources (e.g. junior,

senior researchers, developers, etc.) and specify other costs. The Tenderers must also

quote binding unit prices for their own resources for Phases II and III that are not

expected to be used in Phase I and quote estimated unit costs for resources of third

parties to be used in Phases II and III.

In the Bids for Phases II and III the Contractors must also provide a breakdown of the

Actual Price as in Phase I. In these Bids, the Contractor may adjust the unit prices

already quoted in Phase I by a percentage that is not higher than the inflation rate

calculated by the EU (the Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices – HICP – inflation

rate/EU27).

The list of unit prices quoted in the Bid for Phase I should as far as possible cover all

types of resources foreseen to be needed to carry out the work in Phase I, II and III, and

all unit prices for the Tenderer’s own resources quoted will be binding throughout the

entire Framework Agreement. For unit prices/ unit costs that are only relevant to Phase


21

II and III, the Tenderer should insert “0” as quantity. If work is intended to be carried

out by subcontractor(s), please indicate this in the first column.

It is also important that Tenderers fully value the Project Intellectual Property

Rights resulting from the PCP. To make sure a fair market price is offered in their bid,

the Procuring Entity requires Tenderers to state two prices:

- The price that they would have quoted if Project Intellectual Property

Rights was fully retained by the Procuring Entity and Tenderers did not have the

possibility to exploit developed knowledge (the “Virtual Price”).

- The price that Tenderers quote considering that they retain Project

Intellectual Property Rights in accordance with the provisions of the contract

and that they can exploit developed project knowledge (the “Actual Price”).

5.3.3 Tenderers willing to submit a Bid shall submit an envelope containing the documents as

listed in 5.3.2 which must be delivered and reach the Lead Procurer not later than

12:00 (CET) on October 13, 2014 to the following address:

IWT, Koning Albert II-laan 35, bus 16, 1030 Brussels, Belgium (to the attention of

Christophe Veys, Project Director Smart@Fire).

5.3.4 The envelopes received after the deadline will not under any circumstances be

admitted to the tendering procedure even if shipped before the expiry of the term. This

also applies to envelopes sent by registered mail with notification of reception: the

shipping date resulting from the stamp will not be taken into account; these envelopes

will not be opened and will be considered as undelivered.

5.3.5 By the submission of the Bid, the Tenderer marks its unreserved acceptance to all terms

and conditions contained in the Tender Documents. The Bid may not, under penalty of

exclusion, contain any reservation in relation to any conditions of any of the Tender

Documents.

5.4 Communication with the Lead Procurer

5.4.1 Tenderers requesting the Tender Documents are obliged to use the Request for Tender

Documents (appendix 2)

5.4.2 Tenderers may ask questions about the tender documents. Questions or requests for

clarification concerning the Tender documents must have been received no later than

Friday 27th of June at 14PM. These questions must be addressed to [email protected]

and submitted on the form supplied in Appendix 3 (Tender Query Form). All questions

received will be dealt with and answered during an information session held in Brussels

on the 1st of July, 13h30 – 16u30 at the Ferraris Building, Koning Albert II laan 20, in the

Auditorium.

After the information session, no additional questions will be allowed nor answered!

Field Code Changed



22

A summary of all the questions and answers will be sent to all Tenderers that have

requested the Tender documents.

5.4.3 All questions can only be sent by e-mail.

5.4.4 Please quote your reference number when contacting us to help us answer the query.

5.4.5 A summary of questions and answers addressed will be added to the Questions & Answers

Document (Q&A). The updated Q&A will also be distributed to all those who have

registered for the competition. The identity of the questioner will not be disclosed.

5.4.6 During the tendering period for each Phase contact must only be made through the e-

mail addresses provided [email protected]

5.5 Consortium

5.5.1 If a tender is submitted by a consortium that does not in itself constitute a legal entity,

for example as an unincorporated joint venture or an unincorporated body, all consortia

members shall sign the tender and, if applicable, the contract, making them jointly and

severally liable.

5.5.2 A Tender from consortiums of companies or groups of service providers, suppliers must

specify the role, qualification and experience of each member of the group. If two or

more Tenderers submit a joint bid, one must be designated as the Leading partner and

will be responsible for all the aspects of the contract.

5.5.3 If the tenderer is a joint venture or a consortium of two or more entities, all such entities

shall be jointly and severally bound to fulfill the terms of the contract. The person

designated by the consortium to act on its behalf for the purposes of the contract shall

have the authority to bind the consortium and is the sole interlocutor for all contractual

and financial aspects. The composition or the constitution of the joint venture or

consortium shall not be altered without the prior consent of the Lead Procurer. Any

alteration of the composition of the consortium without the prior consent of the Lead

Procurer may result in the termination of the contract.

5.6 Disclosure of information – Confidentiality

5.6.1 Tenderers are invited to request that certain information is not disclosed or published if

to do so would prejudice their commercial interests or is otherwise exempt from

disclosure under the Freedom of Information Laws (FOIL) (see the relevant clauses in the

Framework Agreement, including clause 10 and 32). Details should be provided in the

Professional Secrecy Section of the Tender Form. Requests for nondisclosure under the

FOIL7 and/or the EIR8 must accompany the Tender and include clear and substantive

justification and a time limit when any such information could be disclosed. The terms

of any confidentiality agreement would, if requested, be available for disclosure. Any

request by any Tenderer under this paragraph shall not be binding on the Lead Procurer

7 Freedom of Information Laws – see definition in Section 2 of the Framework Agreement.

8 The Enviromental Information Act dated August 5, 2006

Field Code Changed



23

or any member of the Group of Procurers and shall be treated as being for informational

purposes only and will not be taken into account in the Tender assessment process, nor

will any such request form part of the proposed contract.

5.6.2 Under the Freedom of Information Laws (or FOIL) and the Environmental Information Act

dated August 5, 2006 (EIR) the Lead Procurer (or any member of the Group of Procurers)

may be obliged to disclose information relating to responses to this tender.

5.6.3 At the point of registration for this competition, each tender will be assigned a reference

number. It should be noted that you will need it for all subsequent enquiries. If your

tender is successful, this reference number will stay with the project for its duration.

5.7 Conformance between the Framework Agreement and the call for

tender documents in general

5.7.1 An agreement will be entered into only by means of the Form of Agreement Section 1

Framework Agreement, signed by both parties.

5.7.2 By submitting a tender, the tenderer accepts to be bound by the undertakings and

conditions of the SMART@FIRE-PCP Framework Agreement.

5.7.3 The tender may not contain any reservation in relation to the conditions of the

Framework Agreement. Tenders shall be based on the conditions as set out in the

Framework Agreement and the other call for tender documents.

5.7.4 By the submission of a tender or offer, the Tenderer marks its unreserved acceptance of

all terms and conditions as set forth in the call for tender documents. The tender or offer

may not, under penalty of exclusion, contain any reservation in relation to any conditions

of any of the call for tender documents.

6 Legal provisions

6.1 Subcontractors

6.1.1 The tenderer shall state in the Tender Form which part of the SMART@FIRE-PCP

challenges, if any, is intended to be subcontracted to other suppliers or Contractors.

6.1.2 A tenderer that wishes to rely on the resources of any subcontractor for the fulfilment of

the requirements for participation in the PCP (and, where, applicable, an awarded

contract), will, upon the request of the Lead Procurer, in a satisfactorily manner

demonstrate that these resources will be available to him. One way of demonstrating this

is to submit a written commitment from such subcontractor showing that the resources

required of the subcontractor will be at the Tenderers disposal for the full duration of

the contract.

6.1.3 If the tenderer needs to change subcontractors, these new partners will have to prove

that they have at least the same competences as the subcontractors or partners they will


24

replace and that they comply with all the other contractual conditions, rights and

obligations that are in the Framework Agreement and specific contracts: e.g. complying

with the place of performance conditions, respecting the same IPR conditions and the

binding unit prices. If the tenderer enters into a subcontract, or change of subcontractors

or partners during the execution of the contract, the tenderer will notify promptly the

Lead Procurer. The service called for cannot be subcontracted to a third party without

prior agreement of the Lead Procurer.

6.2 Disclaimer and Withdrawal of the PCP

6.2.1 While the information contained in this ITT and the Call for Tenders documents is

believed to be correct at the time of issue, the Lead Procurer (including the Group of

Procurers) will not accept any liability for its accuracy, adequacy or completeness, nor

will any express or implied warranty be given. This exclusion extends to liability in

relation to any statement, opinion or conclusion contained in or any omission from, this

ITT and Call for Tenders documents and in respect of any other written or oral

communication transmitted (or otherwise made available) to any tenderer.

6.2.2 If a tenderer proposes to enter into a contract with the Lead Procurer, it must rely on its

own enquiries and on the terms and conditions set out in the contract(s) (as and when

finally executed), subject to the limitations and restrictions specified in it.

6.2.3 Neither the issue of this ITT, the other Call for Tender documents nor any of the

information presented in it, should be regarded as a commitment or representation on

the part of the Lead Procurer, the Group of Procurers (or any other person or entity) to

enter into a contractual arrangement.

6.2.4 The Lead Procurer and the Group of Procurers reserve the right:

not to award contract for Phases for which it has not received any offer or suitable

offer in relation to the Project;

to stop, cancel, revoke, re-issue the PCP or not to award any Work Order/Phase for

objective reasons (e.g. if prices submitted in the Tenders exceed allocated budgets

or if prices are clearly disproportionate).

6.2.5 The Group of Procurers and the Lead Procurer assume no obligation whatsoever to

compensate or indemnify the Tenders or Contractors for any expense or loss they may

incur in the preparation of their tenders/offers.

6.3 Confidentiality, publicity and information about the award

6.3.1 The principle of public access to official documents means that public documents and

records, with a few exceptions, should be made available to whoever asks for them.

6.3.2 Clause 5.5 of this Invitation to Tender and clause 32 of the Framework Agreement

describe how the obligations of the Freedom of Information Laws are handled in the

SMART@FIRE-PCP.

6.3.3 Assessors, employees and advisors of the Lead Procurer/Group of Procurers and other

persons contracted to aid in the tendering and award process will handle confidential

information confidentially in accordance to above. Assessors with a conflict of interest


25

with one or more of the tenders will not assess these tenders. All assessors will sign a

non-disclosure agreement and a conflict of interest form prior to assessing the tenders.

6.3.4 Information from the tenders is confidential in accordance to above. However, the Lead

Procurer will distribute and publish the following information about the tenders that are

awarded with contracts:

The name of the organisation

Their location

The title of the project

A short summary of the project

Contract value

The aforesaid award information will be sent to the contact stated in the contact details

of the Tender Form.

6.3.5 Tenderers should be aware that the IWT, IBZ and SDIS 13 reserves the right to publish,

disclose or otherwise make public the results of the PCP project (Phase 1, 2 and 3),

including –but not limited to- information of the key R&D results attained and lessons

learned. Publication or disclosure of results will only take place after consultation with

the affected Tenderers. Details will not be disclosed that would hinder application of the

law, would be contrary to the public interest, would harm legitimate business interests

of the companies involved in the PCP or could distort fair completion between the

participating companies or others on the market.

6.4 Distribution of IPR resulting from the project

6.4.1 R&D risks and benefits will be shared between Contractors and IWT, IBZ, SDIS 13 who will

be granted a license in such a way that all parties have an incentive to pursue wide

commercialization and take up of the new solutions. Therefore, ownership rights of IPRs

generated by a contractor during the PCP contract will be assigned to that Contractor,

subject to the call-back provision (see below as well as the relevant clauses in the

Framework Agreement, including clause 17 and 18).

6.4.2 Each of IWT, IBZ, SDIS 13 will be granted an irrevocable, free, worldwide, royal-free,

non-exclusive license until the expiry of the respective Intellectual Property Rights to use

the R&D results for internal use (as they in their absolute discretion seem fit). As far as

it is related to software, the above license shall also include a right to access and modify

the source code strictly for internal purposes (such as – but not limited to- maintenance).

6.4.3 A call-back provision will ensure that IPRs that are not exploited or that are used to the

detriment of the public interest, will be assigned to IWT, IBZ and SDIS 13 at no cost to

IWT, IBZ and/or SDIS 13. More information can be found in the Framework Agreement,

including clause 18.6.

6.4.4 The Contractor can be requested to offer licenses to third parties under fair and

reasonable conditions.

6.4.5 Note that if IBZ, IWT and/or SDIS 13 subsequently purchases products from a Contractor

which includes Foreground Intellectual Property, the Contractor may not charge


26

such entity for the license to that Foreground Intellectual Property Rights as this has

already been licensed for free to that entity.

6.4.6 For specific information about IPR rights and obligations please see the SMART@FIRE-PCP

Framework Agreement (including – but not limited to- clause 17 and 18).

6.5 Applicable law – Competent court –Remedies

6.5.1 The Invitation to Tender (IIT) and tendering procedure (and any contract subsequently

entered into with the preferred Tenderers) are governed and construed in accordance

with the Belgian laws.

6.5.2 By submitting a tender the tenderer(s) agree(s) that any legal claim, petition or

application for judicial review, whether before civil Law courts or administrative courts,

shall only be made in Belgium (Brussels Courts- Dutch speaking division).

6.5.3 For appeal and/or redress procedures, the exclusive competent jurisdiction are,

depending on the raised dispute:

1 ° the Council of State (Raad van State) for administrative decisions taken within the

Tendering Procedure and different stages.

2 ° the ordinary Courts of Brussels (Dutch speaking division) for any dispute or claim

arising out of or in connection with the execution of the contract

7 Evaluation of the tender

7.1 Exclusion criteria

7.1.1 The Tenderer and sub-contractors who does not fulfill the exclusion criteria, as provided

for in Article 20 of the Belgian Procurement Law (15 June 2006) and the Royal Decree of

11 July 2011 on the awarding public contracts will be excluded from further

consideration. Implicit solemn declaration on exclusion criteria (Circular 23/4/07

Administrative simplification (BS 27/4/07)) (use appendix 5). By taking part in this

procedure, the candidate declares that it does not fall under any of the cases of exclusion

cited in Article 61 till 66 of the Royal Decree of 11 July 2011. Submitting untrue

declarations will lead to the exclusion of the Tenderer and may result in criminal

prosecution. Prior to making the award decision, the Lead Procurer could verify the

accuracy of the solemn declaration in respect of the company or members of the

consortium. To this end, it shall ask the given tenderer, using the fastest means possible

and within the set deadline, to provide the information or documents that enable its

personal situation to be checked. A Tenderer or sub-contractor will be excluded from

participation in a contract if a review reveals that the solemn declaration does not

correspond to its personal situation on the deadline for receipt of applications for

participation. Ex post facto regularization is not possible. Such exclusion is also possible

if, during the course of the procedure, it is revealed that the personal situation of the

candidate or Contractor no longer corresponds to the solemn declaration.

7.1.2 First exclusion criterion


27

The Lead Procurer will exclude from participation in the contract award procedure those

economic operators that have been convicted by final judgment for one of more of the

following criminal activities (arts. 61 till 66 of the RD of 13/07/2011):

Participation in criminal activities

Corruption

Fraud

Money-laundering

7.1.3 Second exclusion criterion (article 62)

A. The Belgian candidate, who employs staff subject to the law of 27 June 1969 reviewing

the decree-law of 28 December 1944 relating to employees’ social security, must be in

order with regard to its obligations towards the National Social Security Authorities. It

shall be deemed to comply with the aforementioned obligations if at the latest on the

day prior to the deadline for receiving proposals:

1° it has submitted all returns to the National Social Security Authorities required on this

date, including those relating to the penultimate calendar quarter in relation to the

deadline for receiving proposals, and

2° it does not owe more than €3.000 in contributions in relation to these returns, unless

it has been granted payment terms for such outstanding amount which it strictly com-

plies with. However, even if the outstanding amount exceeds €3.000, the candidate shall

be considered to be in order if it establishes, prior to the decision to award the contract,

that it holds, at the latest on the day before the deadline for receiving proposals, towards

an awarding authority within the meaning of Article 2,Law on state-owned company, or

a state-owned company within the meaning of Article 2,2° of the same law, one or more

certain, due accounts receivables free from any undertakings towards a third party

amounting to at least, to the nearest €2,500, the amount of its contributions for which

payment is late.

B. A foreigner Candidate at the latest on the day before the deadline for receiving the

proposals:

1° complies with its obligations relating to paying social security contributions in

accordance with statutory provisions in the country where it is established.

2° complies with the provisions of paragraph 1, if it employs staff subject to the law of

27 June 1969 reviewing the decree-law of 28 December 1944 relating to employees’ social

security contributions.

C. At any stage of the proceedings, the Lead Procurer may obtain information, using any

means that it deems appropriate, regarding any Contractor’ status with regard to the

payment of social security contributions.

7.1.4 Third exclusion criterion

A Candidate will be excluded from participation if he:

(a) is bankrupt or is being wound up, whose affairs are being administered by the court,

he has entered into an arrangement with creditors or is in any analogous situation arising

from a similar procedure under national laws and regulations;

(b) is the subject of proceedings for a declaration of bankruptcy, for an order for

compulsory winding-up or administration by the court or for an arrangement with

creditors or any other similar proceedings under national laws or regulations;


28

(c) has been convicted of an offence concerning his professional conduct by a judgment

which has the force of res judicata;

(d) has not fulfilled obligations relating to the payment of social security contributions in

accordance with the legal provisions of Belgium or the country in which he is established;

(e) has not fulfilled obligations relating to the payment of taxes in accordance with

Belgian legislation or with the legal provisions of the country where he is established;

(f) has been found guilty of grave professional misconduct proven by any means which

the contracting authorities can justify;

(g) is guilty of serious misrepresentation in supplying or failing to supply the information

required under the provisions of this tender on the criteria for qualitative selection

Personal situation of the economic operator. This will be assessed based on the exclusion

criteria (Please fill Appendix n°4 ). Responses to these questions will be assessed as PASS

/ FAIL. Only those applications achieving a PASS will be put forward for further

evaluation.

7.2 Minimum requirements

7.2.1 The Lead Procurer requires that the tenders meet certain minimum requirements as listed

below. By signing the Declaration on the Tender Form the tenderer confirms that the

services offered meet these minimum requirements. Failure to sign the Declaration will

result in the tender being excluded from further participation in the PCP.

7.2.2 This procurement is carried out under the explicit exemption for R&D services set out in

the EU directive 2004/18/EU. Tenderers are asked to observe that the object of the

procurement is restricted to cover research and development services, and not products

or other supplies, or commercial development activities. For further information about

what is considered to be exempted services, refer to the Frascati Manual, Proposed

Standard Practice for Surveys on research and Experimental Development (OECD, latest

edition 2002). All cost, be they personnel cost, material cost, cost of facilities, overhead

cost, travel cost, accommodation cost or cost of subcontracting, need to be directly

linked to the provision of R&D services and must be included in the Price for the service.

The R&D activities that have to be deployed will account for more than 50% of the value

of the overall budget.

7.2.3 It is an absolute requirement that the services offered by the tenderer are within the

scope of the above definition of R&D services. The tenderer accepts, upon request from

the Lead Procurer, to provide complete and clear information about the allocation of

monies paid by the Lead Procurer, in order to allow control of this requirement being

fulfilled, whether during the procurement period or during the contractual period. This

requirement and these obligations on the part of the tenderer apply also, where

applicable, for Phase 2 and Phase 3.

7.2.4 Tenders must not exceed the maximum price and maximum duration for the Phase they

are submitting a tender for as stated in clause 4.5.

7.2.5 Tenders must address the challenge as stated in the SMART@FIRE-PCP Challenge Brief.


29

7.2.6 The Lead Procurer will determine if a tender meets the minimum requirements. This can

be done both during the procurement and during the contract Phase. To assess if a tender

meets the requirement of clause 7.2.2., the cost breakdown in the tender form and the

final report are used.

7.2.7 Place of performance conditions: For each phase at least 50% of the R&D services needs

to be performed within the EU Member States, or a country that is associated to the

Seventh Framework Programme (“FP7”). Except for testing that according to the

contractual conditions needs to take place at the group of procurer’s premises, Tenderers

can perform the percentage of R&D services that is subject to the place of performance

condition at any location of the tenderer’s choice within the EU Member States or a

country that is associated to the FP7.By submitting a proposal in response to this

Invitation to Tender, the Tenderer confirms that this requirement will be fulfilled.

7.2.8 Tenderers are requested to declare other sources of public financing received in areas of

work related to the scope of the SMART@FIRE-PCP. In case Tenderers have received or

are receiving public financing that is subject to the State aid rules, offers shall be

excluded where award of a PCP contract would result in double public financing or

accumulation of different types of public financing that is not permitted by the EU State

aid rules.

7.2.9 Tender prices shall be stated in Euros, exclusive of VAT and between brackets inclusive

of VAT. If any duties, custom fees, taxes or other charges are applicable then these should

be included in the tender price.

7.2.10 It is incumbent upon the tenderer to supply all of the information requested on the

SMART@FIRE-PCP Tender Form which enables the scoring of the tender.

7.3 General assessment process

7.3.1 A flow chart of the evaluation process is set out in Appendix 9. The evaluation process is

handled in two phases: the first phase the evaluation is undertaken remotely, ie at the

evaluator’s office or home. Each offer is assigned to 5 evaluators who will independently

assess the received offers. In the second phase the evaluators are assembled in Brussels

where the marks and comments are compiled. The goal is to reach a consensus between

the evaluators.

7.3.2 The tenders will be evaluated as set forth below only if they fulfill the requirements in

the administrative instructions and only if the tenderer is not subject to any of the

exclusion criteria.

7.3.3 The assessment of tenders will be carried out in stages. In the first stage (the Tendering

Stage), the tender will be checked to assess the administrative compliance of the

delivered documents. If the requested documents were not submitted, the tender will

be excluded and will not be assessed. In the second stage the tenders will be assessed on

the evaluation criteria as foreseen in appendix 1 (technical and financial evaluation).

7.3.4 Tenders will be initially reviewed by the Evaluation Committee. Each tender will be

evaluated, individually, by 5 experts/evaluators or partnering contracting authorities

with knowledge of the fire and rescue industry, technology and/or general business


30

knowledge. Three experts will be representatives of IWT, IBZ and SDIS 13. At least 2

external independent experts will be appointed by the Lead Procurer.

7.3.5 The evaluators assess the tenders individually based on the evaluation criteria as detailed

in table 1. The more points a tender scores in total the higher it is ranked. The highest

ranked tenders will be contracted.

7.3.6 Based on the evaluators’ assessments, a preliminary ranking of the tenders will be made.

Large differences in assessment by the evaluators could be identified. If the reasoning

given by the evaluators requires further clarification, this is provided by the evaluators.

The preliminary ranking will subsequently be inspected and reviewed by a consensus

panel consisting of all the appointed evaluators. The consensus panel will monitor and

safeguard that the assessment of all tenders are consistent and equal, and will have the

authority to adjust or override the preliminary ranking and assessment. The consensus

panel will unanimously (unanimous decision) make the final recommendations for award.

Within a reasonable period after the final date for receipt of tenders, an award decision

will be sent to Tenderers. A Framework Agreement and Work Order for Phase 1 will be

sent shortly thereafter.

Appeals against the decisions taken in the Tendering Stage and with regard to the

selection of Tenderers in between the different phases of the Execution Stage may be

lodged with the Council of State (Raad van State)

7.3.7 The criteria and the method for evaluating the tenders in Phase 2 and 3 will be the same

as the criteria and the method used in evaluating the original tenders as set out below,

but may be elaborated or developed in further detail within those frames. The weights

per criterion differ as indicated below.

7.3.8 As soon as possible once the award decision has been made, the unsuccessful Tenderers

will be informed of the Lead Procurer’s decision. Tenderers can receive feedback on their

tender.

7.4 Assessment criteria and Scoring

7.4.1 Only tenders with the following minimum scores are eligible for consideration for a

contract:

60% of the maximum number of points for each of the categories:

o Impact (54 points from a maximum 90 available for Phase 1).

o Quality of the tender (66 points from a maximum 110 available for Phase 1).

60% of the maximum number of points for the combined Impact, Quality and Finance

scores (138 points from a maximum 230 available for Phase 1)

Failure to achieve the minimum score at any of the stages will result in the tender being

excluded from further participation in the PCP.

7.4.2 The assessment criteria, weighting and the maximum points available are listed below.

The full scoring model is found in appendix 1 at the end of this document:


31

7.4.3 The scoring will be made according to an absolute scale, meaning that several Tenderers

can receive the same score and that the point a particular tenderer receives is not

affected by the points other Tenderers have received.

7.4.4 Successful Tenderers will be informed about their scoring and will are, if awarded a

contract, required to finalize and submit their deliverables on time as described in the

framework agreement clause 2.

7.4.5 The criteria and evaluation method will also subsequently be used by the Lead Procurer

in selecting Contractors (among those awarded Framework Agreements) for continued

assignment for Phase 2, and, subsequently, among those, Contractors for continued

assignment for Phase 3 – all as provided for in the Framework Agreement.

7.4.6 For Phase 2 – Prototype Development the quality of the end of Phase report of Phase 1 –

Solution Exploration is assessed. For Phase 3 – First Batch Production the quality of the

end of Phase report of Phase 2 – Prototype Development is assessed. This end of Phase

report elaborates on the awarding criteria and incrementally improves the first tender

proposal for Phase 1 – Solution Exploration.

8 Awarding criteria

Criteria I. Describe the proposed idea/solution/technology and how this addresses Challenge 1: PPS central nerve system, functional modules and sources of complexity/risk. Max 12 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Work in 2 sections:

A. Overall overview of the proposed idea/solution/technology and system architecture B. Zoom-in on key technological aspects (the sources of complexity/risk) as listed

hereafter Note that all these elements have been discussed throughout the innovation platform sessions of which the results have been presented in the final report, available on the Smart@Fire website. W.r.t. overall system architecture:

- Describe the approach and choices made in setting up the right architecture optimally balancing trade-offs of distributed vs. central processing, local performance vs. remote responsiveness (online vs. offline), scalability/flexibility/modularity of the system, interfaces for escalation and aggregation, etc.

W.r.t. data transfer between firefighters

- Which connectivity architecture is chosen (infrastructure-based PMR, MANET, Point-to-Point,…)?

- Explain the implications of the underlying architecture on indoor penetration performance and data rate (bandwidth)? Which optimization measures are considered for further solution exploration?

- The update rate of logging the network data to the remote intervention coordinating officer should approach near real-time (~1Hz). Elaborate on optimizing the scalability


32

trade-off of deployed network nodes vs. update rate, preprocessing mechanisms of data, etc.

W.r.t. data connectivity on the firefighter’s body:

- Is a cabled or wireless approach envisaged? Which technology/protocol is adopted? - Which interference counteracting measures are envisaged? Explain their impact on the

interference problem. W.r.t. ICT-textile integration aspects:

- Note: preferentially, limited integration with PPE textile is envisaged, due to both technological and standardization related constraints.

- Note: some integration with the PPE is obliged, due to the nature of the procurement. - Which integrative measures are taken in the proposed solution/system (e.g. Velcro,

pockets, clips, etc.)? - If a cabled approach is selected: how are easy mounting/replacing of cables/connectors;

durability of cables/connectors and dealing with different turnout gear sizes dealt with? - If a wireless set-up is chosen: which interference measure are undertaken? How can the

system be intuitively launched, assuring correct operations via minimal amount of UI’s? - Which electromagnetic shielding measures are foreseen?

W.r.t. user restitution, visualization

- The intervention coordinating officer should be provided an intuitive UI dashboard, which is aligned with way of working. Describe the approach to safeguard this alignment.

- Which modalities are selected to provide feedback to the firefighter in the field (e.g. audio, simple UI/buttons/lights, haptic belt)?

- How will ergonomic use of the feedback system be ensured? - How will automatic modality selection be achieved?

W.r.t. localization:

- Which technological type of localization system, hybrid (GPS + inertia), hybrid (GPS + …), beacon-based,… is chosen?

- In case hybrid: how will indoor drift be limited? Please provide an indication of currently achieved performance w.r.t. indoor drift with the proposed hybrid localization system. Shortly describe the experimental set-up.

- In case a beacon-based approach is considered, how is fast deployment assured without losing accuracy? Please also provide insight in estimation of TCO for 1 firefighter brigade. Make assumptions on #interventions, #trucks, #firefighters, …

- Regarding determination of distance between firefighters of the same team, of different teams: is relay over the intervention coordinating officer considered an option? Is it determined directly between firefighters?

- How is the concept of a “MAP” integrated in the proposed solution? Are ‘track & trace’, ‘meet point’ and ‘recovery path’ instructions considered? Can Cartesian coordinated maps be integrated as overlay?

W.r.t. sensors

- Which known standard interfacing protocol and application profile are chosen to interconnect the central nerve system with peripheral wireless devices (e.g. temperature measurement, explosive gas detection)?

- Note that the goal is not to develop new sensors, but merely interface with existing cost-effective solutions.


33

Criteria II. Describe the impact of using the envisaged PPS prototype on the day-to-day operational processes. What are the main benefits for the fire brigade? Max 2 page A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Criteria III. What is the total market potential of the proposed smart PPS system? Max 2 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Provide a brief description of underlying assumptions, further/wider market potential, of key technological modules, of the proposed smart PPS system as described in the tender documents.

Criteria IV. Describe the commercialization approach. Elaborate on the tenderer’s vision regarding smart PPS for Fire and Rescue applications. Max 2 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Estimate the time to market of the PPS prototype. Explain the underlying reasoning and major phases. Start from the internal product/system lifecycle management processes, and distill the impact on commercialization of the PPS prototype. What will be the preferred business model for the tenderer: one-off capex investment vs. lease and buy-back programs vs. …? Are there any license fees to be paid? Which options will be available w.r.t. maintenance and service contract? Please elaborate on inspections procedures, on call repair and support, training and certification programs,… What is the vision of the tenderer regarding market evolutions and how does this affect the internal fire and rescue product/system development roadmap? Please provide insight in the short-term close-to-market releases/launches and longer term development concepts.

Criteria V. Describe the standardization and testing approach.


34

Max 3 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Which process, parties involved, recommended testing, certification and conformity assessment procedures are adopted? Describe performed or planned testing on the PPS prototype, developed during Phase 2. Elaborate on measures taken, tests/experiments performed, certificates issued, etc. As such the procurers gain insight on the maturity of prototype testing, the test results and outcomes, in view of the functional field tests to be performed in Phase 3 with the first production batch.

Criteria VI. Describe the methodology applied during subsequent solution exploration and prototype development phases. How will the suggested approach reduce gradually the risk of the technological facets as referred to in question 1? Max 2 page A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Criteria VII. Overall project plan: Solution Exploration (Phase 1), Prototype Development (Phase 2), First Batch Production (Phase 3) Max 2 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Describe the project plan and detail the key project milestones. Highlight what resources will be required to address the technical challenges and what the key success criteria would be. Provide detailed timing on solution exploration phase, describe associated timings of prototype development and first batch production phases. Focus on consultation moments with the end-users.

Criteria VIII. Who are the Tenderers? Resources. Max 4 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Specify the configuration (e.g. consortium) and role of each partner (e.g. system integrator). Which party will take-up the role of prime tenderer?


35

Describe the profile and expertise of the project manager and project team serving as main point of contact and consultation with the public procurers. Include project staffing details. Also include the expertise of any subcontractors involved in the project, if applicable. Provide proof of at least 3 relevant similar projects, where innovative systems have been developed in close collaboration with end-users of a customer. Elaborate on scope, approach, timing, total budget, project reference contact, size of the project team, adopted technologies,… In addition, focus on setting up user acceptance testing. Which criteria have been applied? Which part of the contract you intend to subcontract? Give an overview of the subcontractors you’ll work with in the execution of the Contract and explain why you need a subcontractor?

Criteria IX. Financial offer - Total Cost of ownership (TCO) cost breakdown Max 5 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

1. Make a financial proposal for the execution of Phase I: Solution Design. Detail the total quoted amount price in all its components. The quoted amount refers to development price, including supplier margin) 2. Give an estimation of the price for the development of a prototype (Phase 2). Detail the price

in all its components. Development price include supplier margin. 3. Give an estimation of the price for the execution of the price (phase 3 First Batch of products

and testing). Development price includes supplier margin. Detail the price in all its components 4. What is the total (1-off) price cost to equip with a fully functional solution of smart PPS. Price

refers to list price, to be paid by the procurer to the supplier when purchasing the final productized solution. A fully functional solution of smart PSS for 1 team holds:

Turnout gears, for 10 firefighters

Technological components loosely attached to the turnout gear, for 10 firefighters

Equipment for 1 intervention coordinating officer

Any additional equipment: e.g. local mobile antenna’s, antenna’s fixed on the truck, data aggregation infrastructure on the truck or in the cloud, etc.

5. Provide a detailed Include in the price breakdown a detailed overview of the total maintenance cost over a lifecycle of 3 years. Cost as seen from a procurer’s perspective, to be paid to the (servicing) supplier’s. Take realistic assumptions. Explain all assumptions taken. 6. Explain how this cost model will scale of e.g. to equip 3 teams as described above; to equip 10 teams as described above. (Cost is again as seen from a procurer’s perspective). A complete answer provides the procurers insight in all 6 questions. Note: the procurer’s are aiming for qualitative solution with minimal TCO


36

Criteria Question Assessment Maximum Points

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

Impact Score Weight Total Score Weight Total Score Weight Total

I A. Describe the proposed idea/solution/technology and how this addresses Challenge 1: PPS central nerve system, functional modules and sources of complexity/risk.

The panel assesses how well the proposed idea/ solution/ technology addresses the PPS central nerve system needs & requirements as put forward in the tender documents

10 4 40 10 4 40 10 4 40

II Describe the impact on the day-to-day operational processes of the suggested PPS prototype. What are the main benefits?

The panel assesses to what extent the tenderer grasps the day-to-day context of the end-user.

10 1 10 10 2 20 10 2 20

III What is the total market potential of the proposed smart PPS system?

The panel assesses to what extent the tenderer envisions the potential to address future/wider challenges in the market with the proposed solution and under which assumptions.

10 2 20 10 3 30 10 3 30

IV Describe the commercialization approach. Elaborate on the tenderer’s ideas regarding business models when commercializing the PPS prototype.

The panel assesses to what extent the approach demonstrates commercial feasibility. Is there a realistic commercialisation plan / route to market? The panel assesses the validity of the proposed business model.

10 1 10 10 2 20 10 4 40


37

V Describe the approach for testing, certification and conformity assessment standardization/certification approach.

The panel assesses to what extent the approach demonstrates demonstrates conformity with EU law. standardization feasibility. In addition for Phase 3, the panel assesses how effectively the tenderer has already tested the developed prototype during Phase 2. The tenderer should describe measures taken, tests performed, certificates issued, etc. As such the procurers gain insight on the maturity of prototype testing, the test results and outcomes, in view of the functional field tests to be performed in Phase 3 with the first production batch.

10 1 10 10 2 20 10 6 60

Quality

I B. Zoom-in on key technical challenges of the PPS central nerve system, functional modules and sources of complexity/risk.

The panel assesses the validity of the technical approach and choices that will be adopted.

10 4 40 10 4 40 10 4 40


38

VI Describe the methodology applied during subsequent solution exploration and prototype development phases. How will the suggested approach reduce gradually the risk of the technological facets as referred to in question 1?

The panel assesses to what extent risk reduction principles are embedded in the proposed methodology and their effectiveness (e.g. embedded user-testing from the beginning on).

10 3 30 10 2 20 10 1 10

VII Overall project plan: Solution Exploration, Prototype Development, First Batch Production

The panel assesses to what extent the tender shows a clear plan for the development of a working solution. Is it a reasonable plan to finish the project in time?

10 1 10 10 1 10 10 1 10

VIII Who are the Tenderers? Project management, resources, staffing, expertise,…

The panel assesses how effectively the project will be managed, the quality of the proposed project team, realistic staffing, relevant expertise. The panel assesses based on own project management expertise. (PMI, Prince2 or equivalent certificates are an asset, but no prerequisite)

10 3 30 10 3 30 10 3 30


39

Price

IX Financial Offer (price) - Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)

For Phase 1: The price of the tender (exclusive of VAT) determines the points awarded (see scoring model, appendix 1). Max. price for an offer is 15.000€. For Phase 2 & 3, the price criterion will refer to TCO to be calculated as will described in the tender docs for Phase 2 & 3.

10 3 30 10 4 40 10 10 100

TOTAL 230 270 380


40

9 List of documents

The Invitation to Tender documents consists of the following documents:

1. SMART@FIRE-PCP Invitation to Tender (this document) and its appendixes:

o Scoring Model

o Request for Tender Documents

o Tender Query Form

o General Tender Submission Form

o Form A Exclusion Criteria

o Form B Financial Information

o Form C Technical Capacity

o Tender Form (Technical and Financial Offer)

o Tender Evaluation Process

2. SMART@FIRE-PCP Challenge Brief and its appendixes:

o Functional Requirements

3. SMART@FIRE-PCP Framework Agreement and its appendixes

The following documents are to be submitted by Tenderers:

Appendix 4 to 8 SMART@FIRE-PCP Tender Form


41

10 Appendix 1: Scoring model

Impact on Challenge

I. The extent of how well the proposed idea/ solution/ technology meets the challenge as detailed in the Challenge Brief.

Scoring Guide

1 There is no indication that the tender will meet the challenge.

2

There is very little indication that the tender is likely to meet the challenge.

4

There is little indication that the tender is likely to meet the challenge.

6

There is some indication that the tender is likely to meet the challenge.

8

There is indication that the tender will meet the challenge.

10

There is clear indication that the tender will meet the challenge.

The tenders response to this criteria is Out of Scope, give the minimum score of 1

II.

The extent of which the tenderer grasps the day-to-day context of the end-user.

Scoring Guide

1

There is no indication that the tenderer will grasp the day-to-day context of the end-user.

2

There is very little indication that the tenderer is likely to grasp the day-to-day context of the end-user.

4

There is little indication that the tenderer is likely to grasp the day-to-day context of the end-user.

6

There is some indication that the tenderer is likely to grasp the day-to-day context of the end-user.

8

There is indication that the tenderer will grasp the day-to-day context of the end-user.

10

There is clear indication that the tenderer will grasp the day-to-day context of the end-user.


III.

Potential of the tender to address future/ wider challenges in the market with the proposed solution and under which assumptions.

Scoring Guide

1

The project shows no potential to address future/ wider challenges in the area.

2

The project shows little potential to address future/ wider challenges in the area.

4

The project shows some but limited potential to address future/ wider challenges in the area.

6

The project shows potential to address future/ wider challenges in the area (including in particular novel, innovative approaches).


42

8

The project shows high potential to address future/ wider challenges in the area (including in particular promising new concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools or technologies).

10

The project shows very high potential to address future/ wider challenges in the area (including in particular innovative, showing use of novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools or technologies).


IV. The extent of which the approach demonstrate commercial feasibility, and whether it is a realistic commercialization plan / route to market

Scoring Guide

1

The tender gives no indication that the solution will be commercially feasible.

2

The tender gives little or no confidence that the solution will be commercially feasible.

4

The tender gives some indication that the solution may be commercially feasible; however there is little confidence in the approach.

6

The tender gives some indication that the solution will be commercially feasible.

8

The tender gives indication and confidence that the solution will be commercially feasible.

10

As described, the proposed outcome shows strong promise of commercial feasibility.


V. The extent of which the approach demonstrates standardization feasibility and prototype testing maturity (performed and planned tests) and feasibility for demonstrating conformity with EU law

Scoring Guide

1

There is no indication that the tender will demonstrate standardization feasibility an d prototype testing maturity (performed and planned tests) and feasibility for

demonstrating conformity to EC law. prototype testing maturity (performed and planned tests).

2

There is very little indication that the tender is likely to demonstrate standardization feasibility prototype testing maturity (performed and planned tests) and feasibility for demonstrating conformity to EC law. and prototype testing maturity (of performed and planned tests).

4

There is little indication that the tender is likely to demonstrate standardization feasibility prototype testing maturity (performed and planned tests) and feasibility for demonstrating

conformity to EC law.

6

There is some indication that the tender is likely to demonstrate standardization feasibility and prototype testing maturity (performed and planned tests) and feasibility for demonstrating conformity to EC law.

8

There is indication that the tender will demonstrate standardization feasibility prototype testing maturity (performed and planned tests) and feasibility for demonstrating conformity to EC law.

Formatted Table

Formatted Table


43

10

There is clear indication that the tender will demonstrate standardization feasibility and prototype testing maturity (performed and planned tests) and feasibility for demonstrating conformity to EC law.


Quality of the Tender

I B. Validity of the technical approach that will be adopted

Scoring Guide

1 There is no information given on the technical approach.

2 The technical approach is poorly described.

4 The technical approach described is unlikely to be valid for this challenge.

6 The technical approach is valid but may not be sufficient to meet the challenge.

8 The technical approach described is valid and is likely to meet the challenge.

10 The technical approach described is highly valid and shows a strong likelihood to meet the challenge.


VI The extent of which risk reduction principles (technical, commercial and other) are embedded in the proposed methodology and their effectiveness

Scoring Guide

1 The tender does not mention risks or how the tenderer intends to manage these.

2 Management of risk is ill-defined and inappropriate.

4 Management of risk is defined but is inadequate for this project.

6 Risk is clearly considered and proposed management of it is appropriate.

8 Risk is well defined and will be well managed.

10 Risks are well understood and articulated in the tender and will be managed appropriately.


VII The extent of which the tender shows a clear plan for the development of a working solution, and whether it is a reasonable to finish the project in time

Scoring Guide


44

1 The tender does not contain a plan or milestones for the development of a working solution.

2 The tender goes some way to describe a plan for the development of a working solution.

4 The tender contains a brief plan for the development of a working solution.

6 The tender contains a reasonably clear plan for the development of a working solution.

8 The tender contains a clear plan for the development of a working solution.

10 The tender contains a very clear plan for the development of a working solution.


VIII.

Effectiveness of the project management (quality of the proposed project team, realistic staffing, relevant expertise).

Scoring Guide

1

There is no information on the quality of the proposed project team, realistic staffing, relevant expertise.

2

The information provided on proposed project team, realistic staffing, relevant expertise raises disbelief on quality for success

4

The information provided on proposed project team, realistic staffing, relevant expertise raises some doubts on quality for success

6

The information provided on proposed project team, realistic staffing, relevant expertise indicates some quality for success

8

The information provided on proposed project team, realistic staffing, relevant expertise indicates quality for success

10

The information provided on proposed project team, realistic staffing, relevant expertise indicated significant quality for success


Price

IX Pricing - Total cost of ownership

Points awarded = ( 1 - (tender price / maximum price) )* maximum points


45


46

11 Appendix 2: Request Of the Tender Documents Form –

Registration Form

Request of the tender documents Smart@Fire

Company

Sector

Contact Person

E-mail

Phone

Country

Attended the

Market

Consultations?

Yes / No

Documents for

consortium or own

company? If yes,

please list

companies.

Yes / No

www.smartatfire.eu [email protected]

Field Code Changed

http://www.smartatfire.eu/


47

12 Appendix 3: Tender Query Form

Tender Query Form

Tender queries and questions related to the tender documents are to be entered by e-mail using

this format below and sent to [email protected]. All details are to be included on this form, and

no further attachments are to be sent. One question should be asked for each row; insert

additional rows if necessary.

TENDER QUERIES SUBMISSION SHEET

Tenderer to submit sheet to: [email protected]

For SMART@FIRE PCP

Submitted by:

Reference Number Date

Query

No.

Document reference

(challenge brief – ITT

– Framework

Agreement)

Page

Number

of

document

Questions

1

2

3


48

12 Appendix 4: General Tender Submission Form

TENDER SUBMISSION FORM

Smart@Fire PCP Tender

1. SUBMITTED by (i.e. the identity of the Tenderer and Consortium members and Sub-contractors)

Name(s) of legal entity or entities submitting this tender

Role of the member in the Consortium

VAT -number

Contact person

e-mail Nationality9

Leading Tenderer

Consortium member 2

Consortium member 3 (etc)

Sub-Contractor 1 (etc.)

Add rows if needed

2. CONTACT PERSON for this tender (to act as focal point for all communication which may

take place between Smart@Fire and the Tenderer)

Name

Organisation

Address

Telephone

e-mail

9 Country in which the legal entity is registered.


49

e-mail

3. STATEMENT

In case of Consortium each Consortium member should sign this Statement!

I, the undersigned, being the authorised signatory of the above Tenderer (including all

consortium members, in the case of a consortium), hereby declare that we have examined and

accept without reserve or restriction the entire contents of the PCP tender documents for the

tender procedure referred to above. We undertake to guarantee the eligibility of the sub-

contractor(s) for the parts of the services for which we have stated our intention to sub-contract

in the Technical Proposal.

We are fully aware that, in the case of a consortium, the composition of the consortium cannot

be modified in the course of the tender procedure except with the prior written authorisation of

the Lead Procurer (IWT).

We are also aware that the consortium members would have joint and several liability towards

the concerning participation in both the above procedure and any contract awarded to us as a

result of it.

We hereby fully accept to submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Belgium (Dutch

division)

Name

Leading Tenderer

Signature

Date

Stamp if available

Name

Consortium

member 1

Signature

Date


50

13 Appendix 5: Exclusion Criteria

In case of Consortium, each member and sub-contractors should submit this tender form!

FORM A.1 – Exclusion Criteria Mandatory Pass

A1 Has your organisation or any of its directors or any other person who has powers of

representation, decision or control of the organisation been convicted of any of the

following offences: (please see description given in the section 7)

NOTE: Responses to these questions will be assessed as PASS / FAIL. Only

those applications achieving a PASS will be put forward for further

evaluation.

NAME OF THE LEADING TENDERER/ CONSORTIUM MEMBER:

…………………………………………………………..

Reference number provided by Smart@Fire:

A1.1 Conspiracy Yes / No

A1.2 Corruption Yes / No

A1.3 Bribery Yes / No

A1.4 Fraud

(i) The offence of cheating the Revenue Yes / No

(ii) The offence of conspiracy to defraud Yes / No

(iii) Fraud or theft Yes / No

(iv) Fraudulent trading Yes / No

(v) Defrauding HM Revenue & Customs Yes / No

(vi) An offence in connection with taxation in the European

community

Yes / No

(vii) Destroying defacing or concealing of documents or procuring

the extension of a valuable security

Yes / No

(viii) Money laundering Yes / No

(ix) Any other offence Yes / No

PART A.2 –Exclusion criteria

A.2 Do any of the following apply to your organisation, or to (any of) the director(s) / partners

/consortium partners/ proprietor(s)?


51

* Where a ‘Yes’ response has been given to any question, clearly indicate the problem has been

resolved and that steps have been taken to prevent its recurrence or that propriety can be maintained.

I, the undersigned, being the authorised signatory of the above tenderer (for

consortiums, this must include all consortium members), hereby declare that

NOTE: Responses to these questions will be assessed as PASS / FAIL. Only those

applications achieving a PASS will be put forward for further evaluation.

A2.1 Bankruptcy, insolvency, compulsory winding up, receivership,

composition with creditors, or subject to relevant proceedings

Yes / No

A2.2 A conviction (or convictions) for a criminal offence related to business

or professional conduct

Yes / No

A2.3 Legal or administrative finding of a commission of an act of grave

misconduct in the course of business

Yes / No

A2.4 Failure to fulfil obligations related to payment of social security

contributions

Yes / No

A2.5 Failure to fulfil obligations related to the payment of taxes Yes / No

A2.6 Failure to provide information required or providing inaccurate /

misleading information when participating in a procurement exercise

Yes / No

A2.7 Failure to obtain and maintain relevant licences or membership of an

appropriate trading or professional organisation where required by law

Yes / No

A2.8 Has personal or financial connection with an elected member or senior

officer of the authority

Yes / No

A2.9 If the answer to any of these is “Yes” please give brief details below, including what has

been done to put things right.


52

I, or my company, am (is) not falling in one of the situations described in the

exclusion criteria or here above.

Name

Signature

Date


53

14 Appendix 6: Financial Information

In case of Consortium, only the Lead Tenderer should submit this form.

FORM B 1 – Financial Information

NAME OF THE COMPANY: …………………………………………………………..

Reference number provided by Smart@Fire: ………… .

B1 Are you registered for VAT?

VAT rate applicable in your country?

If so, please provide Registration

number:

B2 What are your current liabilities (including bank overdraft)? (If

you are a consortium please state aggregated value)

€

B3 What is the value of your current assets? (If you are a

consortium please state aggregated value)

€

B4 What is the value of your Stock / Inventory? (If you are a


€……… for year ended --

/--/----

B5 What is the value of your current Interest / Finance Charges?

(If you are a consortium please state aggregated value)

€

B6 What was your Operating Profit in

the last two financial years? (If you

are a consortium please state

aggregated value)


/--/----


/--/----

B7 What was your turnover in each of

the last two financial years? (If you

are a consortium please state

aggregated value)

€………… for year ended -

-/--/--


/--/----

B8 What is the value of your current Reserves? (If you are a


€

B9 What is the value of your available cash / credit? (If you are a


€

B10

Please indicate if you are able to provide any of the following should they be required

A copy of your audited accounts for the most recent two years (if this

applies)

Yes / No

A statement of your turnover, profit & loss account and cash flow for

the most recent year of trading

Yes / No


54

A statement of your cash flow forecast for the current year and a bank

letter outlining the current cash and credit position

Yes / No

Interim accounts showing your current financial position Yes / No

Alternative means of demonstrating financial status if trading for less

than a year

Yes / No

If “No” please state the reason why not in no more than 100 words

B11 Are your accounts externally audited? Yes / No

If “No” please state the reason why in no more than 100 words.

B12 Has your organisation met the terms of its banking facilities and loan

agreements (if any) during the past year?

Yes / No

If “No” what were the reasons, and what has been done to put things right in no more

than 150 words?

B13 Has your organisation met all its obligations to pay its creditors and staff

during the past year?

Yes / No

If “No” please explain why not in no more than 100 words:

B14 If requested, would you be able to provide a banker’s reference? Yes / No

We may require a reference from your bankers as to your suitability to undertake a contract of this

size and nature.

B15

What is the name and branch of

your bankers (who could provide

a reference)?

Name:

Branch:

Contact details:

FORM B2 – Insurance

B16 Please provide details of your current insurance cover Value

Employer’s Liability (except for sole traders) €

Public Liability €


55

Professional Indemnity (if applicable) €

Product Liability (if applicable) €

Other €

B17

Please confirm whether you would be willing to take out the appropriate

level of insurance cover as set out in the Statement of Requirement if you

are successful in winning the contract?

Yes/No

I, the undersigned, being the authorised signatory of the above tenderer

(for consortiums, this must include all consortium members), hereby

declare that I, or my company, provide accurate financial information as

stated above. A Tenderer will be excluded from participation in a

contract if a review reveals that the provided information does not

correspond to its personal situation

Name authorised

signatory

Signature

Date


56

15 Appendix 7: Technical Capacity

In case of Consortium each member should submit this form!

FORM C 1 – Experience of the Company and References

NAME OF THE COMPANY: ………………………………………………………….

Reference number provided by Smart@Fire: ……………….

C1 What are the main business activities of your organisation? (max 100 words)

C2 Please provide brief details of your company’s previous experience in delivering the type of

services required under this contract.

C3 Please provide an overview of the range of services that the company supports that

demonstrate your ability to deliver the contract requirements.

C4 Please detail your company and management structure.

C5 How many staff does your organisation employ (including consortia members or sub-

contractors where appropriate) in total and how many work in areas relevant to delivery of

this contract?

C6 Please provide details of up to three contracts with either the public or private sector that

your organisation has held in the last three years that are relevant to the contracting

authority’s requirement. Please ensure the email address or contact details are provided,

as references could be requested electronically

Contract 1

Customer Organisation

(name):

Website (if available):

Customer contact name,

phone number and email

Date contract awarded:


57

Date contract completed:

Brief description of contract

(max 100 words)

Value:

If you cannot provide at least one reference, please briefly explain why (100 words max)

FORM C2 – Contract Performance

C7 In the last three years, have you had any contracts:

Terminated for poor performance? Yes / No

That has incurred contract penalties, default notices or payment of

liquidated damages?

Yes / No

Terminated by the client earlier than the originally intended date? Yes / No

That you have withdrawn from after award, either before or after the

commencement of the contract?

Yes / No

If “Yes” please explain in no more than 150 words why.

FORM C3 – Business Continuity / Risk Management / Disaster Recovery

C8 Does your organisation have a Business Continuity / Disaster Recovery / Risk

Management plan that ensures that the described services are delivered in

the event of a disruption affecting your business and ensures continuity of

supply / service from your critical suppliers?

Yes / No

If “Yes” please describe its main aims and characteristics in no more than 250 words

If “No” please give reasons in no more than 100 words

C9 Have there been any occasions when your business operation has been

disrupted within the last 3 years?

Yes / No

If “Yes” what were the circumstances, what was the effect on your customers and how did

you overcome it in no more than 250 words?


58

I, the undersigned, being the authorised signatory of the above Tenderer

(for consortiums, this must include all consortium members), hereby

declare that I, or my company, provide accurate information. A

Tenderer will be excluded from participation in a contract if a review

reveals that the provided information does not correspond to its personal

situation

Name authorised

signatory

Signature

Date


59

16 Appendix 8: Tender Form (Technical and

Financial offer) Max total amount of pages 35 (Tenderers should print on A4 max. 35 pages).

If the Tender exceeds the page limit then all words and / or pages in excess of the

specified limit will not be considered further.

For consortiums, this Tender Form should be signed by each of the consortium

members!

Submitted

by:

Reference Number Date

Criteria I. Describe the proposed idea/solution/technology and how this addresses Challenge 1: PPS central nerve system, functional modules and sources of complexity/risk. Max 12 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Work in 2 sections:

A. Overall overview of the proposed idea/solution/technology and system architecture B. Zoom-in on key technological aspects (the sources of complexity/risk) as listed hereafter

Note that all these elements have been discussed throughout the innovation platform sessions of which the results have been presented in the final report, available on the Smart@Fire website. W.r.t. overall system architecture:

- Describe the approach and choices made in setting up the right architecture optimally balancing trade-offs of distributed vs. central processing, local performance vs. remote responsiveness (online vs. offline), scalability/flexibility/modularity of the system, interfaces for escalation and aggregation, etc.

- Describe why the proposed solution goes beyond the state-of-the-art. W.r.t. data transfer between firefighters

- Which connectivity architecture is chosen (infrastructure-based PMR, MANET, Point-to-Point,…)?

- Explain the implications of the underlying architecture on indoor penetration performance and data rate (bandwidth)? Which optimization measures are considered for further solution exploration?

Formatted: List Paragraph, Add space between

paragraphs of the same style, Bulleted + Level: 1 +

Aligned at: 0,63 cm + Indent at: 1,27 cm

Formatted: Font: (Default) Calibri, 11 pt


60

- The update rate of logging the network data to the remote intervention coordinating officer should approach near real-time (~1Hz). Elaborate on optimizing the scalability trade-off of deployed network nodes vs. update rate, preprocessing mechanisms of data, etc.

W.r.t. data connectivity on the firefighter’s body:

- Is a cabled or wireless approach envisaged? Which technology/protocol is adopted?

- Which interference counteracting measures are envisaged? Explain their impact on the interference problem. W.r.t. ICT-textile integration aspects:

- Note: preferentially, limited integration with PPE textile is envisaged, due to both technological and standardization related constraints.

- Note: some integration with the PPE is obliged, due to the nature of the procurement.

- Which integrative measures are taken in the proposed solution/system (e.g. Velcro, pockets, clips, etc.)?

- If a cabled approach is selected: how are easy mounting/replacing of cables/connectors; durability of cables/connectors and dealing with different turnout gear sizes dealt with?

- If a wireless set-up is chosen: which interference measure are undertaken? How can the system be intuitively launched, assuring correct operations via minimal amount of UI’s?

- Which electromagnetic shielding measures are foreseen?


61

W.r.t. user restitution, visualization

- The intervention coordinating officer should be provided an intuitive UI dashboard, which is aligned with way of working. Describe the approach to safeguard this alignment.

- Which modalities are selected to provide feedback to the firefighter in the field (e.g. audio, simple UI/buttons/lights, haptic belt)?

- How will ergonomic use of the feedback system be ensured?

- How will automatic modality selection be achieved? W.r.t. localization:

- Which technological type of localization system, hybrid (GPS + inertia), hybrid (GPS + …), beacon-based,… is chosen?

- In case hybrid: how will indoor drift be limited? Please provide an indication of currently achieved performance w.r.t. indoor drift with the proposed hybrid localization system. Shortly describe the experimental set-up.


62

- In case a beacon-based approach is considered, how is fast deployment assured without losing accuracy? Please also provide insight in estimation of TCO for 1 firefighter brigade. Make assumptions on #interventions, #trucks, #firefighters, …

- Regarding determination of distance between firefighters of the same team, of different teams: is relay over the intervention coordinating officer considered an option? Is it determined directly between firefighters?

- How is the concept of a “MAP” integrated in the proposed solution? Are ‘track & trace’, ‘meet point’ and ‘recovery path’ instructions considered? Can Cartesian coordinated maps be integrated as overlay?

W.r.t. sensors

- Which known standard interfacing protocol and application profile are chosen to interconnect the central nerve system with peripheral wireless devices (e.g. temperature measurement, explosive gas detection)?

- Note that the goal is not to develop new sensors, but merely interface with existing cost-effective solutions.

Criteria II. Describe the impact of using the envisaged PPS prototype on the day-to-day operational processes. What are the main benefits for the fire brigade? Max 2 page A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.


63

Criteria III. What is the total market potential of the proposed smart PPS system? Max 2 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Provide a brief description of underlying assumptions, further/wider market potential, of key technological modules, of the proposed smart PPS system as described in the tender documents.


64

Criteria IV. Describe the commercialization approach. Elaborate on the tenderer’s vision regarding smart PPS for Fire and Rescue applications. Max 2 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Estimate the time to market of the PPS prototype. Explain the underlying reasoning and major phases. Start from the internal product/system lifecycle management processes, and distill the impact on commercialization of the PPS prototype. What will be the preferred business model for the tenderer: one-off capex investment vs. lease and buy-back programs vs. …? Are there any license fees to be paid? Which options will be available w.r.t. maintenance and service contract? Please elaborate on inspections procedures, on call repair and support, training and certification programs,… What is the vision of the tenderer regarding market evolutions and how does this affect the internal fire and rescue product/system development roadmap? Please provide insight in the short-term close-to-market releases/launches and longer term development concepts.


65

Criteria V. Describe the standardization and testing approach. Describe the approach towards testing, certification and conformity assessment with EU law Max 3 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Which process, parties involved, recommended certification procedures are adopted? Describe performed or planned testing on the PPS prototype, developed during Phase 2. Elaborate on measures taken, tests/experiments performed, certificates issued, etc. As such the procurers gain insight on the maturity of prototype testing, the test results and outcomes, in view of the functional field tests to be performed in Phase 3 with the first production batch.

Criteria VI. Describe the methodology applied during subsequent solution exploration and prototype development phases. How will the suggested approach reduce gradually the risk of the technological facets as referred to in question 1? Max 2 page A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.


66

Criteria VII. Overall project plan: Solution Exploration (Phase 1), Prototype Development (Phase 2), First Batch Production (Phase 3) Max 2 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Describe the project plan and detail the key project milestones. Highlight what resources will be required to address the technical challenges and what the key success criteria would be. Provide detailed timing on solution exploration phase, describe associated timings of prototype development and first batch production phases. Focus on consultation moments with the end-users.

Criteria VIII. Who are the Tenderers? Resources. Max 4 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

Specify the configuration (e.g. consortium) and role of each partner (e.g. system integrator). Which party will take-up the role of prime tenderer?


67

Describe the profile and expertise of the project manager and project team serving as main point of contact and consultation with the public procurers. Include project staffing details. Also include the expertise of any subcontractors involved in the project, if applicable. Provide proof of at least 3 relevant similar projects, where innovative systems have been developed in close collaboration with end-users of a customer. Elaborate on scope, approach, timing, total budget, project reference contact, size of the project team, adopted technologies,… In addition, focus on setting up user acceptance testing. Which criteria have been applied? Which part of the contract you intend to subcontract? Give an overview of the subcontractors you’ll work with in the execution of the Contract and explain why you need a subcontractor? Provide a complete and accurate list of all Background Intellectual Property the Contractor (see art. 17.2 framework agreement)


68

Criteria IX. Financial offer - Total Cost of ownership (TCO) cost breakdown Max 5 pages A4, font Calibri 11 or equal. Images can be attached separately.

1./ Make a financial proposal for the execution of Phase I: Solution Design. (Read carefully ‘Invitation to tender’ 5.3.2 (B2)).

Give the Total Actual Price for Phase I (in numbers and letters) (with and without VAT) (maximum is 15.000 €)

Give the Total Virtual Price for Phase I (in numbers and letters) (with a and without VAT) Give a breakdown into cost categories and unit prices for each cost category (such unit prices will also be binding for later Phases) of the Actual Price for Phase I: Make a financial proposal for the execution of Phase I: Solution Design. Detail the total quoted amount in all its components. (The quoted amount refers to development price, including supplier margin).

CATEGORY UNIT

PRICE

(numbers and letter)

QUANTITY TOTAL PRICE (€)

Labour price:

1/ Junior researcher

2/ Senior researcher

3/ Developers

4/ ……

5/ ……

Materials

Capital equipment

Subcontract

Travel and

accommodation

Other (specify)

TOTAL PRICE (EXCL.

VAT)

Total PRICE (INCL.

VAT) (give VAT rate)

2. Give an estimation of the financial offer price for the development of a prototype and testing in the vendor’s site

(Phase 2). Detail the price in all its components. . Development price includes supplier margin Give a breakdown into cost categories and unit prices for each cost category (Thesuch unit prices are the same as for Phase I , eventual adjustment with inflation rate ) of the Actual Price for Phase II:

3. Give an estimation of the price for the execution of phase 3price (phase 3 First Batch of products and testing). Detail the price in all its components ). Development price includes supplier margin


69

I, the undersigned, being the authorised signatory of the above

Tenderer (for consortiums, this Tender Form should be signed by each

of the consortium members), hereby declare that I, or my company,

provide accurate information.

Name authorised signatory

Name of the Company

Signature

Give a breakdown into cost categories and unit prices for each cost category (such unit prices are the same as for Phase I , eventual adjustment with inflation ) of the Actual Price for Phase III:

4. What is the total (1-off) price to equip with a fully functional solution of smart PPS. Price refers to list price, to be paid by the procurer to the supplier when purchasing the final productized solution. A fully functional solution of smart PSS for 1 team holds:

Turnout gears, for 10 firefighters

Technological components loosely attached to the turnout gear, for 10 firefighters

Equipment for 1 intervention coordinating officer

Any additional equipment: e.g. local mobile antenna’s, antenna’s fixed on the truck, data aggregation infrastructure on the truck or in the cloud, etc.

5. Provide a detailed breakdown overview of the total maintenance cost over a lifecycle of 3 years. Cost as seen from a

procurer’s perspective, to be paid to the (servicing) supplier’s. Take realistic assumptions. Explain all assumptions taken.

6. Explain how this cost model will scale of e.g. to equip 3 teams as described above; to equip 10 teams as described above.. (Cost is again as seen from a procurer’s perspective) A complete answer provides the procurers insight in all 6 questions. Note: the procurer’s are aiming for qualitative solution with minimal TCO


70

Date


71

17 Appendix 9: Evaluation Process

Receipt of bids &

check for compliance

Experts score Impact

& Quality statements

& Price

Consensus panel

checks consistency of

evaluation process &

makes award

recommendations

CA confirms contract

awards

Date post:	24-Feb-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times