Para 7.3.3 — CONSULT_MANUAL

Table 2. Suggested Qualification criteria and their weightages

Criteria/ Sub-criteria Suggested Values Sub-criteria Criteria Criteria 1 General and Similar Experience: Bidders providing Consultancy services for at least the specified period and have completed the specified volume of general and similar consultancy assignments during the specified period. 70% Similar assignments Define based on value, general and specific sector of work, region, Key activities/ methodologies/ technologies etc. Consultants must have at least α years' experience in Consultancy Services α = 7 20% During the last α years, Consultancy Assignments completed or substantially completed (at least γ payments received) should be at least β α = 7 γ = 80% β = 7 50% Out of the Consultancy Assignments mentioned above, δ should be similar assignments δ = 2 30%

7.3.3 Evaluation of Qualification 1. Procuring entity shall determine whether the Consultants are qualified and capable in all respects to be shortlisted to provide the ‘Services’. The Procuring Entity shall evaluate the consultants for shortlisting, inter-alia, based on their past experience of handling general and similar consultancy assignments, and financial capability of the firm. 2. The determination shall not consider the qualifications of other firms, such as the consultant's subsidiaries, parent entities, affiliates, or any other entity different from the consultant. Assignments completed by the Consultant’s individual experts working privately or through other consulting firms cannot be claimed as the relevant experience of the Consultant or that of the Consultant’s partners or sub-consultants. 3. The Procuring Entity reserves the right to waive minor deviations in the qualification criteria if they do not materially affect the capability of a Consultant to perform the contract. 4. The qualification and Experience of Key Experts are not included in the shortlisting criteria but shall be evaluated at the RFP stage. Since the bidders who meet the REoI qualification, can well manage to attract right Key experts during RfP. 5. In case a particular certification/ licence is required to perform the assignment, that may also be included in eligibility or qualification criteria. 6. Each criterion may be sub-divided into sub-criteria, if called for. Table 2 below gives an indicative criterion. The criteria and their weightage may be changed as per the need of Procuring Entity.

Chapter 7: Shortlisting of Consultants, Expression of Interest (EoI)

Criteria/ Sub-criteria Suggested Values Sub-criteria Criteria Criteria 2 - Financial Capability: Overall financial strength of the consultant in terms of turnover, profitability, and cash flow (liquid assets) situation 30% Turnover: Minimum average annual turnover of at least Rs. θ Crores, at least κ of which should be from Consultancy Service Contracts, (total payments received for contracts in progress or completed) within the last α years θ = 200% of the value of assignment κ = 50% α = 7 70% Financial Viability - Net Worth: The Net Worth of Bidder firm should not be negative on ‘The Relevant Date’ and should not have eroded by more than ξ in the last 3 years. ξ = 30% 30% Relaxation for Start-ups: Qualification criteria can be relaxed upto λ % for startups subject to meeting the quality and technical specifications during the RFP. (Please refer to paras 1.10.1-4-b), 5.2.2-6-d) and 1.10.4- 2-b)) λ = [20% (twenty percent)]

Note: During RFP Process Consultant shall be asked to furnish documentary evidence to demonstrate his compliance to Criteria 1 and Criteria 2. Relevant Date when the specified period ends for different criteria shall be: 1) For all annual reports, periods mentioned are ending with the financial year of the company [say 2023-24]. 2) For other statements, latest statement available on the last date of bid submission.

7. Qualification Criteria shall be based entirely upon the capability and resources required to perform the particular contract satisfactorily, considering bidders’ experience and past performance, capabilities with respect to personnel, equipment and manufacturing facilities, financial standing and relevant compliance with environmental protection regulations/ Environment Management System. There should be no qualification criteria that would be advantageous to foreign consultants at the cost of domestically provided consultancy.

8. Qualification of demerged entities 69 (by virtue of a corporate restructuring exercise etc.): Tender documents must clearly mention if (and under what conditions) the demerged entity will be permitted to use credentials of original/parent entity (for initial five years from the incorporation of the demerged entities) to satisfy the qualification criteria or not (Refer para 5.2.2-6-d).

9. It is also noted that while shortlisting/ selecting consultants, some procuring entities are keeping the minimum qualifying financial turnover at the level of 5-10 times of the estimated cost of the consultancy work. This, prima facie, appears high. Higher qualification criteria increase the likelihood of adequate experience/ capacity but reduce the competition; if

Manual for Procurement of Consultancy Services, Second Edition, 2025 set unduly high they may increase the cost without any improvement in quality. It is suggested that the criteria should be fixed on a reasonable basis while drafting tender documents and such higher minimum qualifying turnover should be kept only, if adequately justified70. In higher value procurements, the minimum annual turnover should not be blindly a multiplier of the assignment value, but there may be an upper cap on demanded turnover, so as not to restrict competition only to the big four or five Consultancy Firms.

10. In EoI, simplified evaluation criteria should be used, instead of marking schemes. A fail-pass, minimum benchmark in each criteria/ sub-criteria can be specified e.g., must have past experience of at least two similar projects; firm must have a turnover of at least Rs 10 (Rupees Ten) Crores and so on. Any firm which passes these benchmarks is declared as qualified.

11. However, in complex situation, marks/ scores may be assigned to the response of each consultant based on weightages assigned to each of the criteria in the EoI. For example, in case of number of assignments in last 7 years, out of maximum 35 marks for the sub-criteria, scoring can be a) 3 marks per assignment upto 7 assignments (benchmark); and b) 3.5 marks for additional assignments, subject to maximum of 35.

12. This exercise of scoring is not merely for disqualification of firms below a threshold, but to establish the relative strengths and weaknesses of the applicants, in order to arrive at a robust short list of qualified consultants who have the required experience and qualifications to deliver the required services at the desired level of quality. Please refer to para 8.4.3 also. 13. The Procuring Entity shall short list all the consultants who secure the minimum required marks [normally 75% (seventy five percent)]. The minimum qualifying requirement shall be specified in the EoI document.