1

European Commission, Brussels, 27.03.2019

DG Internal Market, Industry,

Entrepreneurship and SMEs

Directorate R, Unit R2 Single Market Service Centre

REQUEST FOR SERVICES FOR

STUDY TO DEVELOP AN UPGRADED SINGLE MARKET SCOREBOARD AS A GOVERNANCE TOOL FOR THE

SINGLE MARKET - 765/PP/GRO/IMA/19

IMPLEMENTING FRAMEWORK CONTRACT 575/PP/2016/FC

1. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

1.1. Overall purpose and justification

The Single Market is one of the greatest achievements of the European project. Over the last 25

years, it has been instrumental in increasing the prosperity and wealth of the citizens of the

European Union. While the achievements are significant, the Single Market requires, and always

will, efforts to maintain and improve it. For the Single Market to remain a source of growth and

opportunities for citizens and businesses, it must continue to adapt to new developments and

challenges. Globalisation and new technologies bring enormous opportunities but also raise

essential questions of whether, when, what and how to regulate. Inconsistent or weak

enforcement of common rules remains a challenge, and ensuring that these rules remain fit for

purpose in a rapidly changing environment requires constant effort.

Above all perhaps, the further integration advances, the more politically challenging every

"extra mile" becomes as we touch on increasingly sensitive economic and social issues. It is

proving difficult, for example, to push integration forward in areas such as services which would

provide a significant boost to productivity and growth. The same applies to the social dimension

of the Single Market where progress is essential to allow all citizens to benefit fully from

integration.

As a result of these challenges, deeper integration today requires more political will and

determination than 25 years ago, and greater efforts than ever to close the gap between rhetoric

and delivery. We are too often confronted with a situation where the consensus which appears to

exist at the highest level on the need to deepen the Single Market is not matched by a political

willingness to adopt the concrete measures that the Commission proposes and that would make a

difference, or to transpose and implement measures which have already been agreed.

In March 2018, the European Council asked the Commission to assess the state of play of the

Single Market regarding the implementation, application and enforcement of existing legislation

that is key for the functioning of the Single Market, as well as the remaining barriers and

opportunities for a fully functioning Single Market.

The European Commission adopted on 22 November 2018 its communication on “The Single

Market: Europe’s best asset in a changing world”, highlighting in particular the need to ensure

that the rules deliver in practice: citizens and businesses can only enjoy the many benefits of the

Single Market if the rules that have been jointly agreed actually work on the ground.

2

To address the request to assess the state of play of the Single Market the Commission needs

adequate governance tools and the Single Market Scoreboard is the prime instrument for this

purpose. In order to give a complete picture, the scoreboard needs to be upgraded to cover more

policy areas and include indicators that take stock of the situation for users in the Single Market.

1.2. Policy context

The Single Market is based on a large body of EU law, accompanied by national transposition

measures. However, it is essential to ensure that the Single Market does not exist only on paper

but also in reality for citizens and businesses who want to work, travel, shop, invest or do

business across borders. This requires effective governance of the Single Market by the

European Commission and by the EU and EEA Member States, as well as effective

implementation “on the ground”, in the Member States.

The original Single Market Scoreboard was introduced in 1997 as a tool to monitor the

compliance with Single Market legislation and to put peer pressure on Member States to ensure

better transposition of EU directives. The scoreboard has been fully online since 2013 and its

scope has been extended to also cover 13 governance tools, 4 policy areas and trade related

indicators.

The current scoreboard aims at giving an overview of the practical management of the Single

Market. The scoreboard covers all those areas of the Single Market where sufficient reliable data

are available. Certain areas of the Single Market such as financial services, transport, energy,

digital economy and others are closely monitored separately by the responsible Commission

services.

The information in the scoreboard is organised:

by stage in the governance cycle:;

by performance per Member State;

by governance tool:

o Formal and informal cooperation between the European Commission and the

Member States

Transposition

Infringements

EU Pilot

o Administrative cooperation between national authorities

Internal Market Information System (IMI)

Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Network

Technical Regulation Information System (TRIS)

o Assistance services for citizens and businesses

European Consumer Centre Network

e-Certis

EURES

Your Europe

Your Europe Advice

SOLVIT

Points of Single Contact

o

3

by policy area:

o Public Procurement

o Postal Services

o Professional Qualifications

o Collaborative Economy and

by state of trade integration and market openness:

o Trade in goods and services

o Foreign direct investment (FDI).

The scoreboard not only gives a performance overview for all the Member States but also covers

the results that have been achieved, the feedback received and conclusions drawn, providing a

basis for future action.

2. RATIONALE FOR AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study is to produce a report providing input to the Commission for upgrading the

Single Market Scoreboard to better monitor the state of the Single Market in its four dimensions: free

movement of goods, services, people and capital.

This study responds to the Commission’s call on Member States, in its November 2018

communication on the Single Market, to be vigilant in implementing, applying and enforcing EU

rules and to refrain from erecting new barriers. It also responds to the call from the European Council

and the Competitiveness Council for better implementation and enforcement of Single market rules1.

Ensuring proper implementation of Single Market rules on the ground can only happen based on a

clear picture of the situation in the Member States, hence the need to further complement and

upgrade the existing annually published Single Market Scoreboard.

The study should map all existing tools for monitoring Single Market policies (a list of the

Commission tools will be provided at the start of the study) and identify the gaps to fill to provide

the full picture. It should identify available data from different sources and define possible new

indicators, beyond existing ones. It should also define indicators from a user’s (i.e. citizens and

businesses) perspective to give a picture of the obstacles and difficulties users are facing. It should

link the situation of the users to policy measures to identify the real effect of those policies and how

they are implemented. It should suggest innovative ways to present/display information in the

scoreboard, notably delivering easily accessible and practical information to a broader audience than

the current one, mostly composed of administrations, universities and think tanks. It should also

explore the data needs of academics, professionals, researchers and other stakeholders in order to

facilitate their work and enrich their research opportunities, thus making the Scoreboard an even

more useful tool for the professional audience.

In particular, the identified indicators should help assessing whether the Single market is working

properly in areas where it is expected to deliver most, such as products and services markets,

financial markets, network industries, but also the digital single market, the data economy and

circular economy, to take a few examples. The objective is also to provide an annual benchmarking

of the performance of Member States in those areas, based on the most meaningful indicators.

– 1 “The Commission is invited to develop by March 2020, in close coordination with the Member States, a

long-term action plan for better implementation and enforcement of Single Market rules” (EUCO

conclusions 22./03/19)

4

The Commission aims to use the results of the study to develop and publish a new expanded Single

Market Scoreboard, possibly as of 2020 or 2021 at the latest, providing a more complete picture of

how the Single Market works in practice to deliver on the four freedoms, for the benefit of

businesses and citizens. A staged approach to the upgrade of the current scoreboard, where the most

relevant and available indicators are introduced first and other ones in later annual editions could be

an option.

3. SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study will assess the relevance, coherence and effectiveness of measuring performance in Single

market policy implementation with the indicators currently provided in the online Single Market

Scoreboard with a view to addressing potential information gaps, to have a broad and coherent

picture of how the Single Market works on the ground for citizens and businesses in the different

Member States.

It will target all policy areas that are directly relevant for the Single Market and that are related

to the four freedoms of circulation of goods, services, people and capital, with a selection of the most

relevant indicators, both on the legal and economic side, as well as on the practical side for user’s

rights, etc. This should also cover Single Market legislation that applies to citizens who are not

necessarily mobile within the EU, such as rules ensuring consumer protection, for instance.

The international dimension of the Single Market should also be included in the study, by

identifying possible indicators for benchmarking/comparing market integration within the EU and

within its major trading partners, including what it delivers for citizens and businesses.

The study will also identify relevant data and indicators based on:

causality and significance of Single Market policies and their implementation by Member

States in relation to identified indicators, to ensure that the indicators are meaningful for

measuring the performance by Member States in the policy areas;

data quality and stability, with information on how data could be collected periodically and

interpreted, including through potential links with other relevant existing scoreboards at EU

level; in the longer term, the objective would be to gather “real time” data on the single

Market, allowing for a regular update of the Single Market Scoreboard;

data analytics and data mining, to help identify barriers within the Single Market across

sectors, by checking different sources of information within EU institutions and beyond and;

data visualisation, to improve the user-friendliness of the current scoreboard and aim at an

easy and simple access to most meaningful data, through a dashboard identifying the most

relevant areas for instance.

The study should identify indicators that are available and relevant for all Member States in the

EU/EEA.

Further input regarding end-users’ expectations should be based on interviews and surveys of

stakeholders and authorities from a representative and geographically balanced sample of small and

large Member States as well as EU level organisations. The study should for instance explore the

needs of academics, professionals, researchers and business stakeholders in order to facilitate their

access to information on the Single Market and their learning opportunities, to make the Scoreboard

a more useful for a professional audience.

5

Presentations of the interim report and the draft final report to Member States and stakeholders are

foreseen to get their input ahead of the final report, in conjunction with the interim meeting and final

meeting.

4. COMMISSIONING BODY AND PUBLICATION

The present study is commissioned by Directorate R: Resources, Unit R/2: Single Market Service

Centre of DG Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs.

The results may be shared with other interested bodies inside and outside the European Commission.

5. RELEVANT DOCUMENTATION AND INFORMATION

Information on the Single Market Scoreboard, together with links to related governance tools and

policy areas is found on the dedicated website of the European Commission: The Single Market

Scoreboard - European Commission

Making EU trade in services work for all – Report from Copenhagen Economics

Towards Indicators for Measuring the Performance of the Single Market - Think Tank briefing for

the EP IMCO Committee

Indicators for Measuring the Performance of the Single Market – Building the Single Market Pillar

of the European Semester – Study for the EP IMCO Committee

Commission study to explore data availability at the national level in order to develop indicators for

evaluating the performance of the Remedies Directives

The Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) | Digital Single Market

6. APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

The choice and a detailed description of the methodology must form part of the offer submitted.

Advantages, limitations and risks involved in using the proposed tools and techniques should be

explained.

The contractor shall ensure robustness of information by trying to acquire it from more than one

source. In particular, findings from consultations should be complemented when possible by official

statistics and studies. The latter should be duly referenced and contain as a minimum the following

information: data source, the title of the work, year of publication or year of data collection, relevant

pages and any other important information if necessary.

The contractor must support findings and recommendations by explaining the degree to which these

are based on opinions, analysis and objectively verifiable evidence. Where opinions are the main

source, the degree of consensus and the steps taken to test the opinions should be given.

The contractor will have a free choice as to the methods used to gather and analyse information and

for making the assessment, but must take account of the data collection and data analysis in part 8 of

these terms of reference.

6

7. TASKS

7.1. Literature, sources and stakeholders review

The contractor will identify literary and other sources, including studies and reports of

usefulness to the study. The contractor will identify the stakeholder to consult in the study.

7.2. Mapping of existing tools for monitoring Single Market policies

The contractor should map all existing tools for monitoring Single Market policies within the

EU institutions and beyond the tools that already exist within the EU institutions.

A list of the Commission tools for monitoring single Market provided by Eurostat will be

available at the start of the study.

7.3. Identification of available data from different sources

The contractor should identify available data from different sources (EU institutions, Member

States, International organisations such as OECD, etc.) and analyse their quality and

feasibility of using them periodically, including the time lag between the reference period for

data and their availability.

7.4. Identification of gaps

A gap analysis should be made to identify which indicators are needed to give the full

picture of the state of the Single Market – for the four freedoms of circulation of goods,

services, people and capital. In particular, areas where the Single Market is expected to

deliver the most, such as products and services markets, financial markets, network

industries, but also the digital single market, the data economy and circular economy should

be considered.

7.5. Definition of new indicators including user’s perspective indicators

The contractor should identify possible new indicators, starting from an end user’s

perspective, to give a picture of the obstacles and difficulties users are facing. The indicators

need to be relevant, as well as causally and significantly linked to Single Market policies

demonstrating the real effect of those policies.

7.6. Recommendation of indicators

The contractor should recommend which indicators to include in the upgraded Single Market

Scoreboard. In particular, the identified indicators should allow an annual benchmarking of

the performance of Member States in the most relevant Single Market areas.

The contractor should also define how “real time” information on the Single Market could be

provided in the longer term.

7

7.7. Presentation of upgraded scoreboard

The contractor will make recommendations and give ideas on how to present new and

existing data within the upgraded scoreboard, using visualisation tools ensuring that it is more

innovative and user friendly for a broader audience.

8. DATA COLLECTION TOOLS

8.1.1. Desk research/literature review

The contractor should collect data and information from a wide range of publicly available sources,

including, among other:

- Relevant studies/reports from EU Institutions

- Studies and reports from Member States, other national authorities, citizens, stakeholders'

associations, etc..

- Relevant academic research

- Other relevant consultations reports/studies on the fields outside the EU

- National/international official statistics (Eurostat, OECD, etc...;)

- Qualitative and quantitative analysis of existing data (e.g. existing scoreboards and

benchmarking tools, application of Single Market policies in the Member States, market

data).

8.1.2. Stakeholders consultation

Offers are to provide input to the consultation strategy which will be finalised by the Commission

taking into account that input. Based on the strategy, the contractor shall design a detailed

implementation plan that will allow relevant stakeholders to be duly consulted. Stakeholders can be

consulted either to collect evidence, or to test/validate already existing analysis or evidence coming

from different sources.

Particular attention should be paid to a balanced coverage of stakeholders consulted (businesses

(including all sizes), public authorities, consumer organisations, etc...), geographical coverage,

sectorial coverage, etc... The relevant parts of the Commission Toolbox concerning stakeholder

consultation should be followed.

The Commission shall be consulted on draft questionnaires as well as the selection of stakeholders.

The contractor shall respect the European Commission standards for data protection when analysing

responses.2

For each proposed consultation tool and for each category of stakeholder the contractor shall analyse

the potential gaps and propose a mitigation strategy. An analysis of possible overlap between the

different tools shall also be put forward (in particular between the public and targeted consultation).

Targeted consultation

The targeted consultations will collect the view of the different categories of stakeholders. It can take

place at any time point during the study. There is no minimum mandatory period for targeted

consultation, but sufficient time should be given in order to reach as many replies as possible.

Questionnaires shall be customised to different stakeholder categories such as businesses (including

SMEs), consumers, Member State authorities etc…. The contractor should outline in the proposal

2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018R1725&from=EN

8

how representativeness of the survey(s) will be incorporated in the design. The contractor shall

propose mitigation strategies in case of low number of replies.

Targeted stakeholders will be consulted through EU survey on the basis of questionnaires developed

and encoded in EU survey by the contractor.

Any operational works related to the survey itself will be the responsibility of the contractor. The

contractor remains the sole responsible for the analysis. The contractor shall respect the European

Commission standards for data protection when analysing responses.

Interviews

The contractor shall carry out a number of structured/semi-structured interviews. Whereas most

interviews could be done via the phone or video conferencing, face-to-face interviews may be used

when necessary

The Commission may issue a Recommendation Letter that the Contractor will be able to present to

approached stakeholders.

In conducting the interviews the Contractor shall respect data protection and privacy standards of the

Commission3. The responses and transcripts of interviews shall be given to the Commission.

The selection of interviewees should be based on their knowledge of the subject and should be

agreed with the Commission service. The number of interviews is also to be agreed with the

Commission.

Interviews should be conducted with:

o Relevant National Administrations / Organisations, Authorities, etc…

o Selected representatives from organisations of stakeholder's categories (Businesses including

SMEs, citizens, consumers, etc...)

o NGOs, civil society

Other tools

Focus groups, such as European Enterprise Network (EEN), Your Europe, SOLVIT centres,

European network of employment services (EURES), Product contact points, Product contact points

for construction, National assistance centres for professional qualifications, National contact points

ofr cross-border healthcare, ECC-Net, Points of single contact, Online dispute resolution, European

Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters (EJN-civil), etc. are encouraged to be used.

8.1.3. Purchase of commercial data/statistics

For the purpose of conducting this study the contractor may create or purchase access to external

databases. Licensing costs need to be clearly stated and be included in the final price of the offer.

The contractor should be able to assess the quality and completeness of data in such database.

Any database purchased for the purpose of this study will become property of the European

Commission, together with all documentation and access rights.

Any database created for the purpose of this study will become property of the European

Commission; the datasets should be accompanied by a clear documentation explaining all the

variables and be presented in a format that is readable by Commission software.

All source-codes and/or spreadsheets used for the statistical/econometric analysis have to be shared

and will become property of the European Commission.

3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018R1725&from=EN

9

8.1.4. Quality of the collected data

The data collection process as well as all data and statistics that are part of the study should be

clearly and exhaustively described so that the users are able to (a) assess the quality of these

data/statistics, (b) interpret them in a consistent way and (c) replicate their methodology in the future.

For that purpose each data collection process carried out by the contractor should include the

following information as a minimum:

Objective of the exercise

Target population and sampled population

Data (variables) to be collected

Degree of precision i.e. are there some missing data or breaks in time series?

Collection mode, i.e. how will the data be collected (by email, web platforms, dedicated

application)

Periodicity/frequency of a process i.e. is it a one-off exercise or a regular one?

Validation

Publication format i.e. in which electronic (open) format will the data be published (plain text

CSV files,. Excel, R, or Stata files)

Metadata i.e. what background information about the data needs to be disclosed to the public:

o Data collection methodology;

o Target population;

o Sampled population;

o Glossary and definitions of indicators/variables and their respective measurement

units;

o Codes, acronyms, flags used (those should normally be harmonised with Eurostat

codes, e.g. two-letter country codes);

o The timing and frequency of data collection;

o The publication date;

o Limitations, confidentiality issues, disruptions of methodology etc.

o Contact point for potential questions and comments from the public.

8.2. DATA ANALYSIS

Considerable emphasis should be put on the analysis of the information/data collected. The

contractor will have a free choice to propose the methods used to analyse information and for making

the assessment, but the methods must be agreed with the Commission at the kick-off meeting.

9. REPORTING AND DELIVERABLES

General reporting requirements

The contractor shall provide the required reports and documents in accordance with the timetable

below. Any discrepancies should be agreed with the Commission.

The contractor must ensure that all deliverables under this contract are clear, concise and focused on

their purpose. All deliverables shall be written in English and reviewed and corrected by a native

speaker before submission.

Electronic files must be provided in Microsoft ® Word format. Additionally, besides Word, the Final

report must be delivered in pdf format and in 5 hard copies. Any data underlying estimations or

10

graphs must be provided in Microsoft Excel format with metadata duly described to enable

replicating the methodology in the future if necessary.

All deliverables are presented as draft documents to be discussed with the Commission and finalised

based on the comments received from Commission services.

The Commission shall have 30 days to approve or reject the final report. The contractor shall have 30

days in which to submit additional information or a new report.

Deliverables

For the purpose of this specific contract, the contractor shall produce the following deliverables:

Deliverable 1 (D1)

INCEPTION REPORT

At the latest 3 weeks after signature of the contract

by the last contracting party

An inception report (max 20 pages) will specify the detailed work programme and planning for the

study (including timeline) and describe the methodological approaches and working assumptions to

be used for the tasks defined. The report will also identify any additional needs. It will also include

the deliverable of task 7.1. The inception report will take the form of a draft document to be

discussed with the Commission in order to finalise the methodology in a kick-off meeting that will

take place 1 week following its delivery.

Deliverable 2 (D2)

INTERIM REPORT

At the latest 10 weeks after signature of the

contract by the last contracting party

The interim report (max 50 pages) will summarise results reached until that moment and raise any

problems encountered with sufficient information to permit reorientation if appropriate and

required. It will demonstrate what preliminary conclusions have been drawn and give clear

indications and detailed planning of the work to be carried out during the rest of the period of

completion of the tasks. It will present the further progress made. This report will include the

conclusions on tasks 7.2 to 7.4.

Deliverable 3 (D3)

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

At the latest 5 months after signature of the

contract by the last contracting party

A draft final study will deliver the results of all tasks covered by these Terms of Reference, and

must be clear enough for any potential reader to understand. Technical terms must be explained.

The draft final study will take into account the comments made earlier on in the process by the

Commission and it will cover all points of the work plan and shall include sound analysis of

findings and factually based conclusions, in line with the purpose and objectives described above

The structure of the study should follow a broad classification into the following parts:

Main study: The main study must be limited to 70 pages and present, in full, the results of the

analyses, and conclusions arising from these. It must also contain a description of the subject

assessed, and the methodology used (including an analysis of its strengths and weaknesses). It

must follow the same format as for the final study.

Annexes: These must collate the technical details of the study, and must include questionnaire

templates, interview guides, summary of responses to consultation activities and relevant

statistics, any additional tables or graphics, glossary of technical terms and references and

11

sources.

Deliverable 4 (D4)

FINAL REPORT

At the latest 6 months after signature of the

contract by the last contracting party

The final report (of around 70 pages + Annexes). Annexes to the final report will include any

graphical material, the main bibliographic and information sources, verbatim of interviews.

Deliverable 5 (D5)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ABSRACT

At the latest 6 months after signature of the

contract by the last contracting party

An executive summary (around 3 pages) summarising the purpose, methods used, key findings and

possible recommendations of the study.

An abstract of no more than 200 words in English, French and German.

Deliverable 6 (D6)

FULL DATA SET AND

BACKGROUND MATERIAL

At the latest 6 months after signature of the

contract by the last contracting party

All the data collected under this contract, as well as all the summaries, analyses, underlying

calculations and findings, will be the property of the Commission and must be handed over in the

agreed format.

The Commission will accept the draft final report in the definitive form or comment on it within 30

days of its reception. If the Commission does not react within this period, the final study shall be

deemed to have been approved.

Should the Commission still not consider the final report acceptable, the Contractor will be invited to

amend until the Commission is satisfied within 30 days. In cases of late delivery, the Commission

reserves its right to apply the corresponding liquidated damages according to the provisions of

Article II.15 of the Framework Contract.

The Commission reserves the right to carry out a quality assessment of the final report and publish it

along with the study.

The Commission shall have 30 days to approve or reject the reports. The contractor shall have 30

days to submit additional information or a new report.

10. PUBLICATIONS

The study (including executive summary, abstract, and the annexes) will be published on the DG

Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs internet site, EU Bookshop website, on the

Interinstitutional Database of EU studies and on other web-sites in relation to the study.

In view of its publication, the final study must be of high editorial quality. In cases where the

contractor does not manage to produce a final study of high editorial quality within the timeframe

defined by the contract, the contracting authority can decide to have the final study professionally

edited at the expense of the contractor (e.g. deduction of these costs from the final payment)

according to Article II.16 of the framework contract.

12

11. WORK ORGANISATION

11.1. MEETINGS WITH THE COMMISSION

The contractor is expected to take part in four meetings with the Commission services that will take

place on Commission premises in Brussels.

a kick-off meeting at the beginning of the study

two interim meetings;

a meeting to present the results of the draft final study.

The 'kick-off' meeting will allow for the discussion of the draft outline approach and work

programme elaborated by the contractor for the execution of the contract.

The 'interim' meeting will allow an in-depth discussion of the inception, progress/interim draft report.

The Commission may decide to have this meeting with Member States and stakeholder

representatives.

The 'final' meeting will allow an in-depth discussion of the draft final report and requirements for the

completion of the Final report. A presentation to Member States and stakeholders is foreseen in

conjunction with this meeting.

The contractor will provide the minutes of each meeting.

11.2. WORK PLAN

The tender must include an estimated work plan for the main activities (desk research, methodology

design, data collection, data analysis, etc...). Deadline for the deliverables and indicative times for

meetings should be reported in the following table. Please note M1, D1 and M2 cannot be modified.

Meetings shall indicatively take place 1-2 weeks after the deadline for the corresponding deliverable.

After contract signature Meetings (M) and deliverables (D)

1 week at the latest M1: Kick off meeting

3 weeks at the latest D1: inception report

4 weeks at the latest M2: meeting on D1

10 weeks at the latest D2: interim study 1

11 weeks at the latest M3: meeting on D2

5 months at the latest D4: draft final report

5 months and 1 week at the latest M5: meeting on D4

6 months at the latest D5, 6 and 7: final report including executive summary,

abstract, full data set

13

11.3. PROPOSED TEAM

Total days

The tender must include a description of the proposed team, its composition, its expertise and

the work effort planned for each member in terms of man/days for each task of the project.

11.4. PRICE

The maximum budget available for this project is up to € 200,000.

The offer must include a detailed proposed budget. The tenderer should provide a quote of the

total cost of the services to be provided (fixed price) in its financial tender following the table below:

Task Name

Role in the

team Staff Category Education

Expertise Languages Unit price

Man

days

Cat. I -

Team Leader

Cat. II -

Senior Consultant

Cat. III -

Junior Consultant

Cat. IV

Price component Staff category Unit price

(= daily rate for

Human Resources

including the travel and subsistence

expenses linked to the five meetings with the

Commission on its

premises in Brussels)

Quantity

(= number of man

days devoted to

the project by person XY for

Human

Resources)

Total

Human resources

Person X (name and a role)

Person Y (name and a role)

…..

Subtotal (1)

Other

Item X

Item Y

…..

Subtotal (2)

TOTAL (1+2)

14

12. Payments

The payment scheme will consist of one single balance payment at the end of the contract.

The schedule and the procedure for the approval of payments and the documents to be submitted are

described in Articles I.6, II.21, II.22 and II.23 of the framework contract.

13. Award of the specific contract

As specified in the tender specification for this FWC, the offers submitted within the re-opening of

competition must contain:

a) A technical part, detailing the methodology, the composition and skills of the team and the

responsible team leader for the specific agreement;

b) A financial part detailing the number of man-days to be multiplied by the man-day price as

defined in the Framework Contract, and other cost items.

The Specific Contract will be awarded based on the qualitative award criteria given below AND the

price of the financial tenders.

15

A) TECHNICAL QUALITATIVE AWARD CRITERIA

No Qualitative award criteria Weighting

(maximum

points)

1 Clarity, relevance and coherence

This criterion will assess whether the offer is written in a clear language, whether it

is well and logically structured, whether all the information requested in the

specific contract is duly covered.

0-15

2 Quality of the proposed mechanisms for project management, including

quality control, risk management and reporting

This criterion will assess the quality control system proposed for the services

foreseen in the offer concerning the quality of deliverables, the language quality

check, continuity of the service in case of absence of a member of the team, as well

as the overall project management (organisation of work, contacts with the

contracting party etc.). This quality control system should be detailed. A generic

quality control system will result in a low score.

0-15

3 Balance of profiles and breakdown of tasks

This criterion will assess how the roles and responsibilities of the proposed team

and of the different economic operators (in case of joint tenders, including

subcontracting if applicable) are distributed for tasks specified in individual Terms

of Reference for specific contracts. The tender should provide details on the

rationale behind the choice of this allocation.

0-15

4 Relevance and quality of the methodologies to carry out data collection and

mapping

This criterion will assess how the tenderer will collect and map data.

0-20

5 Quality of the proposed methodology to carry out data analysis

This criterion will assess how the tenderer will analyse the available and collected

data.

0-35

Total number of points 100

The award criteria cannot be further supplemented during the evaluation procedure.

Only bids that have reached a total score of a minimum of 60% and a minimum score of 50% for

each criterion will be taken into consideration for awarding the specific contract.

B) AWARD METHOD

The contract will be awarded to the tender which is the most cost-effective (offers the best value for

money) on the basis of the ratio between the total points scored and the price using the following

formula:

Score for

tender X =

Lowest price

Price of tender X * 100 *

Price weighting

(30%) +

Total quality score (out of 100) for all

award criteria of

tender X

* Quality criteria

weighting (70%)

* Only tenders passing minimum quality levels are ranked. The lowest price refers to the lowest

price among the tenders that have passed the minimum quality levels.