Peabody Hackney Windows

Question 1

How did you ‘collate’ the documents? (tender documents)

Answer 1

Colleagues (BSs) produced the tender documents
Completed documents were converted to electronic format and PDFs (excluding the pricing document)
Organized into folders mirroring the Contents Page of the Covering Document
Folders included Prelims, Pricing Document, Form of Tender, Appendices
Appendices contained Employer’s Requirement documentation, such as specifications, drawings, Quality Questions, photo schedule, PCI

Question 2

What did the ‘tender documents’ include?

Answer 2

Preliminaries
Window replacement pricing document
Associated works summary
Main summary (the pricing document)
Form of tender
Appendices:
Materials and workmanship NBS
Drawings
Heron window Schedule (supply only quotation)
Photo schedule
PCI
Quality questions
Employer’s requirements

Question 3

What are ‘Preliminaries’?

Answer 3

Refer to Key Lists Flashcard Deck

Question 4

What were the ‘Specifications’?

Answer 4

Windows: the window schedule (produced by Heron Joinery);
materials and workmanship NBS document;
Ancillary works: NHF descriptions of works.

Question 5

What type of ‘Pricing Document’ was it?

Answer 5

Two pricing documents:
Supply and installation of the Windows for each property:
Reference to the Heron Window Schedule
“Associated Works” pricing document:
Scheduled scope of works for each property:
Internal communal area redecorations
External repair works and external decorations, including:
Chimneys
Pitched roof
Rainwater goods
Soil pipe
External walls
Windows (refurbishment of retained windows)
External doors
Internal communal areas
External decorations
Boundaries and external areas

Question 6

What is a ‘Form of Tender’?

Answer 6

Refer to Key Lists Flashcard Deck

Question 7

What is this ‘online portal’?

Answer 7

Delta Portal:
Online portal accessible via a website address.
Password-accessed portal for registered users assigned by the client for specific projects.
Documentation, including the initial tender package, is uploaded and shared with tenderers on the portal.
All sharing of documentation and correspondences for the tender is conducted on the portal.
Set deadline for submission, after which no submissions are accepted.

Question 8

How did you ‘issue responses to queries’?

Answer 8

Via the Portal:
Query Sheet produced on to which all queries and responses were compiled, updated, and issued to all tenderers

Question 9

What are ‘tender addendums’?

Answer 9

Refer to other Flashcard Decks

Question 10

How did you ‘issue’ these addendums, and what were ‘the addendums’?

Answer 10

Query Sheet updated with addendum details and actions required.
Addendum documentation packaged up.
Both issued to all Tenderers via the Portal (onto the ‘Shared Folders’ section)

The addendums -

Question 11

Was there additional time given along with the ‘addendums’?

Answer 11

????

Question 12

What is ‘tender analysis’?

Answer 12

Refer to other Flashcard Decks

Question 13

How did you carry out the ‘tender analysis’?

Answer 13

Submission Handling:

Quality and price submissions were separate documents.
Only the client had access to them.
Quality submission was handled by the client’s team.
Price submission was handled by the pricing team (including the user).
The teams were segregated; they couldn’t share or access each other’s information.
Submission Composition:

Quality submission comprised 60% of the evaluation (due to the project being in a conservation area).
Quality questions covered programming, resourcing and management, customer service, health and safety, adding value, and corporate social responsibility.

Contents of the Tender Report:

Tender Details: Included tenderer information, submission figures, and program period.
Tender Considerations: Covered the basis of scoring and quality assessment criteria questions.
Tender Evaluations: Anticipated tender return figure, submission costs after adjustments, brief description of submission quality, adjustments required, OHP levels, and scoring results for quality and price with a combined total scoring.

Question 14

Were ‘post tender interviews’ part of the tender analysis?

Answer 14

Post Tender Interview:

Assessment of tenderer’s performance.
Validation of submissions.
Evaluation of their understanding and solutions.
Questions posed prior to the meeting.
Correlation between submitted responses and interview performance.
Scoring as an indicator of future performance.
Conclusions and Recommendation:

Selection review including:
Revised tender figures.
OHP rates.
Contract period.
Likely performance.
Collaboration ability.
Quality of execution.
Health and safety record.
Understanding of works.
Adequate staffing.
Quality scoring.
Summary of the preferred contractor’s analysis.
Recommendation of the preferred contractor and contract sum.
Proposal on how to proceed.
Appendices:

Tender Analysis.
Tender Comparison.
Post Tender Adjustments.
Tender Query Sheets.
Qualitative Scoring Sheets.

Question 15

What was the purpose of the ‘post tender interviews’?

Answer 15

Refer to earlier flashcard

I was not given access to the quality submission documentation until after I had completed my quantitative analysis (to avoid CoI).

Question 16

Who was invited to the post tender interviews?

Answer 16

All 4 tenderers.

Question 17

Were they scored based on the post tender interviews?

Answer 17

No.
This was just to see how well their responses in their submission corresponded with their performance at the interview (confidence that the qualitative scoring that had already been marked was justified).

Question 18

How did the post tender interviews inform the ‘tender report’?

Answer 18

Confidence that the quality scoring (which had already taken place) correlated with their written submission and performance in the interviews.
Check on the veracity of the scoring.

Question 19

What ‘recommendation’ did you make in your tender report?
What was the scoring based on?
Who won?

Answer 19

Recommended Contractor and Contract Sum:

Amber Construction Ltd selected with a contract sum of £3,669,475.47.
Letter of intent to be issued initially.
Contract documentation to be prepared while mobilization is enacted, with surveys to commence.
Tenderers:

Amber Construction Ltd.
Axis.
Quinn.
AD Construction.
Niblock.
Scoring:

Amber: 81.
Niblock: 64.
Quinn: 70.
Axis: 69.
AD Group: 68.

Question 20

How was ‘management of residents’ a ‘key operational risk’?

Answer 20

Importance:
Ensures smooth operation of works.
Prevents delays and hindrances caused by unresolved issues.
Aims to maintain high levels of client satisfaction and worker focus on quality workmanship.

Quality Question #3 Overview:

Focuses on engagement with residents throughout the contract duration.
Emphasizes proposals for customer care and complaints management.
Requires a description of the approach to diverse customer demographics.
Includes resolution strategies for service failures to ensure customer satisfaction.
Key Components:

Engagement with Residents: Detailed plans for communication and involvement.
Customer Care and Complaints Management: Procedures to address resident concerns and complaints promptly.
Approach to Diverse Customers: Strategies for accommodating different resident needs and preferences.
Service Failure Resolution: Protocols for addressing and resolving issues to maintain customer satisfaction and client relations.

Question 21

How was this identified as a risk?

Answer 21

Experience from similar projects by the client and Ridge.

Question 22

What management requirements were proposed for this risk of managing residents?

Answer 22

Amber’s Proposals:
Engagement with Diverse Residents:

Dedicated engagement team.
“Meet the Contractor” events.
Coffee mornings.
Resident drop-ins.
Collaboration with local resident associations.
Continuous involvement and engagement opportunities.
Resident Profiling:

Review Vulnerable Persons/No Access lists.
Conduct Profiling Assessments (GDPR compliant).
Consult with residents, housing officers, care workers, and neighbors.
Identify family composition, cultural considerations, language needs, vulnerable person requirements, work patterns, and preferred communication methods.
Bespoke Communication Plans:

Developed based on customer needs.
Follows a three-stage process: Advance Engagement, During Works, Following Works.
Detailed plans for each stage of engagement.
Customer Care:

Operatives trained in appropriate conduct during works.
Complaints Management:

Satisfaction surveys.
Resident Liaison Officer (RLO) consistent presence.
Follow-up of complaints promptly and courteously.
Follows stages 0, 1, 2 for complaint resolution.
Strategy for resolving problems includes apologies, communication, fixing the problem, documentation, and continual improvement.
Dedicated Point of Contact:

Keeps residents informed.
Tracks complaints.
Reports to the client.

Question 23

You mention, during tender analysis, you were ‘part of the interview panel’ re ‘qualitative responses’, but you also carried out the quantitative analysis - is this a conflict of interest

Answer 23

Refer to earlier flashcard.

I was not given access to the quality submission documentation until after I had completed my quantitative analysis (to avoid CoI).
I was not part of the panel which undertook the qualitative scoring.

Question 24

Who and how was this panel comprised? (interview panel)

Answer 24

Ridge Building Surveying personnel
Client personnel

Neither of the above had access to my progressing quantitative analysis, and were not informed of the relative positions in the developing price checks.

Question 25

What qualitative questions were included in the tender pack?

Answer 25

Programming – 30%
How would you manage to adhere to strict timescales and how you would deal with contract programming and access restrictions or difficulties?

Resourcing and Management – 30%
Provide a resource statement/plan and chart setting out your proposed management and staffing structure for delivering the works including resident liaison

Customer Service – 20%
How will you work with and engage with residents in the delivery of works over the duration of the contract to ensure that a successful programme is delivered?

Health and Safety – 10%
When working this contract, you will be working on multiple properties in different areas of London with residents in situ, Please demonstrate what your approach will be to managing Health and Safety issues.

Adding Value – 5%
Please provide details of where you will bring added value to the Employer in the delivery of this contract that you have chosen to submit for.

Corporate Social Responsibility - 5%
Describe the way in which your organisation could support Peabody’s community investment programme. In your response please identify which of Peabody’s community projects and activities resonate with your organisation’s cultural ethos and social values.

Question 26

What questions were asked at the interviews?

Answer 26

Questions reflecting the tender question submissions;
clarifications of submission answers;

Question 27

You mention ‘managing residents effectively’ and aspects of this being considered - what ‘procedures’ did the contractor put in place to effectively manage these aspects?

Answer 27

Refer to earlier flashcard where this is detailed extensively

Question 28

How was the qualitative analysis scored in the end?

Answer 28

Amber 49; axis 41; Quinn 42; AD Group 41; Niblock 38.

Question 29

Was there a contingency allowance in the contract sum to cover any residual risk in relation to resident management and how was this calculated?
Was there a risk register?

Answer 29

10%, but not just for resident issues but all other risks

Risk register - the client had a policy of all risks identified from the risk register becoming PSUMs.
Those risks which were nefarious/unidentifiable being covered by the standard 10% Contingency Allowance the client required.

The quality questions identified the primary risk areas and these were primarily what the 10% Contingency covered.