FAQ

FAQ: Selection of realization partners

• C.1 Which procurement procedure should be used?

  The most suitable procurement procedure for integrating construction expertise into the planning is a selective (two-stage) procedure with a pre-qualification and a dialog procedure.

• C.2 How is the procurement process organized?

  1. Call to participate in the competition (public invitation to tender)

  2. Submission and examination of requests to participate (dossiers regarding suitability criteria and corresponding evidence)

  3. Selection of the most suitable providers as dialog partners (prequalification of at least three providers based on the suitability criteria and evidence)

  4. Conclusion of a dialog agreement

  5. Dialogue procedure in several rounds (at least 2 rounds)

  6. Examination and evaluation of the bids

  7. Acceptance of the most advantageous offer

• C.3 Is it possible to downgrade after the 1st dialog round?

  The Factsheet SIA 2065 recommends a selective procedure with a limited number of participants. This means that the tender must specify the measurable suitability criteria on the basis of which the candidates to be invited to the dialog will be determined. The relative weighting of these criteria must be indicated.

  Federal procurement law (BöB) and the Intercantonal Agreement on Public Procurement (iVöB) require that at least three participants must be invited for each service package in public projects.

  A reduction to two bidders after the first round of dialog is possible under public procurement law, provided that the criteria for the selection of one or more bidders are clearly defined in the tender documents.

• C.4 How are the “Prequalification” and “Dialog” phases remunerated?

  Participation in the prequalification procedure is free of charge for the client.

  The dialog procedure, on the other hand, should be remunerated appropriately for all participating bidders in accordance with the Factsheet SIA 2065, because initial project planning services must be provided as part of the dialog.

  These project planning services must be remunerated appropriately so that the dialog phase can produce the services required for the success of the project and the alliance in the necessary quality.

  In particular, this means that the proposed remuneration framework must correspond to a reasonable forecast of the cost of the applicants’ planning services. The pure acquisition activities (bid preparation, participation in the dialog rounds) are not remunerated for public projects.

  The services of the successful bidders should be remunerated in the same way as those of the unsuccessful bidders. It does not make sense to “price” the efforts of the successful tenderer into the target costs, as the principle of cost price compensation cannot be consistently applied to these services.

   

• C.5 Can a planner from the strategic planning and preliminary study phase support the client in the selection process (tender evaluation or award of contract)?

  It is possible, and often makes sense, for the planner to support the selection process. In such a case, however, he himself cannot be a participant in the award procedure for the project alliance contract. For the duration of the alliance contract, however, the planner can be a subcontractor of the client.

• C.6 Does a client's planner inevitably drop out of the early project phases after the preliminary study phase and therefore cannot participate in the project alliance?

  If the planner does not support the client in the selection procedure for the project alliance contract, it is possible for him to participate in this procedure

  Two fundamentally different cases must be considered:

  1. The client names the previous planner as an alliance member appointed by him or as his subcontractor.
  2. The previous planner offers his services as a future realization partner, e.g. as part of a bidding consortium.

  In this case, the regulations on prior involvement must be observed in the area of public procurement. This may result in the previous planner’s knowledge advantage having to be disclosed to all bidders.

• C.7 How are the realization partners put together? Does the “market” or the client decide?

  The facthsheet describes both models. However, it is recommended that the market should determine the best option.

• C.8 How and when are the realization partners involved for trades that will be carried out late?

  As a general rule, all members of the project alliance should be involved in the alliance agreement from the outset (“early contractor involvement” principle). They should also be involved in the alliance committees from the outset.

  In special cases, the late involvement of realization partners can be useful (see question B3).

• C.9 Does a target cost framework have to be specified in the tender (the second stage) and when?

  The target cost framework does not have to be specified.

  However, the cost framework for the overall project is often known, particularly in the case of publicly financed projects.

  The client decides on a project-specific basis whether or not it wishes to specify the proportion of its overall budget available for the project alliance’s scope of services. If necessary, the client announces that it will terminate the procedure without awarding a contract if the budget is not met by an acceptable bid at the end of the dialog.

• C.10 Can undercutting the client's budget be an award criterion?

  If the client chooses an award procedure in which the contract is awarded to the realization partners on the basis of the (estimated or detailed) target cost calculation, the target costs are included in the evaluation of the financial award criteria.