Para 4.2.4 — NONCONSULT_MANUAL

NONCONSULT_MANUAL

2. Schedule of Requirement shall indicate only a tentative estimate of the volume of required outputs/ inputs as well as the contract Period (one year, unless otherwise stipulated) over which such volume is likely to be availed. The Services shall be availed on-call as and when needed by the procuring entity without any commitment regarding the volume of services. The service provider shall be selected based on the total price (unit rate multiplied by indicative volume) of such Services/ Inputs (including service charges and taxes) over the period of contract.
3. In case of output admeasurement contracts, if expressly stipulated in the Tender Document, quantum of Input deployments (Personnel, equipment etc.) shall also be called for but shall be used only to monitor performance standards. Similarly in case of input admeasurement contracts, quantum of services to be delivered per quantum of inputs deployed per day/ month may also be called for to evaluate the quality and productivity of deployed inputs.
4. Please read the para 4.2.2-5) for differences between Time-based and Indefinite Delivery contracts. 5. Due to risks and mitigations discussed below, Indefinite Delivery contracts are commonly used to retain “advisers” or avail services 'on-call' - for example; expert adjudicators for dispute resolution panels, procurement advice, technical troubleshooting, Document
4.2.4. Indefinite Delivery Contract – Output or Input Admeasurement 1. These contracts are used when the Procuring Entity need to have “on call” specialised services, the extent and timing of which cannot be defined in advance. This is akin to the system of 'Rate Contracts' or framework contracts in the procurement of Goods. The Procuring Entity and the firm agree on the unit rates to be paid. This Type of Contract can be based either on input (more often) or output admeasurement. Payments are made periodically on the basis of the quantum of service or inputs actually utilised during the period.
Risk Mitigation a) The quality and Scope of the Output/ deliverables, as in Lump-sum Contracts, is not linked to the payment. There may be tendency for the service provider to cut corners on quality, scope and timing of the output/ deliverables by saving on resources employed. The contract should include provision for evaluation of quality and scope of deliverables and certificate for its acceptability may be recorded. Payments should be released only against such certificates. b) Performance in each time period is not linked to the payment. There may be tendency for the service provider to use resources in a dilatory and un-productive manner. Contracts need to be closely monitored and administered by the 'Procuring Entity' to ensure that the progress of assignment is commensurate with the time spent and that the resources for which payment is claimed have actually efficiently and productively been deployed on the assignment during the period. A system of monthly reporting of payouts and quantum of work achieved by the service provider to CA should be instituted to enable supervision. c) Time and Cost over-run is a major risk in such contracts, as the output may not be achieved in the estimated time. This type of contract should include an upper limit of total payments to be made to the service providers to safeguard against excessive prolonging of time and payments. After this limit is reached, or the period of completion is exceeded, CA should review justification for extension of the contract. d) Risk of over-utilization: Indefinite Delivery Contracts are at risk of being overutilized in excess of actual need since the scrutiny of service need may not be as intense as in case of other types of contracts. The need assessment of utilised services should be subject to some scrutiny to ensure that there is no abnormal, unexplainable trend in utilisation. Such contracts need to be closely monitored and administered by the 'Procuring Entity' to ensure that the there is no indiscriminate or unwarranted usage, and a maximum contract value may be laid down to keep control over usage and approval of CA may be obtained to extend it beyond such limit. A system of monthly reporting of payouts and quantum of work achieved by the service provider to CA should be instituted to enable supervision. In the report a monthly payout benchmark may be kept, above which
Management, Taxi Services, Temporary Manpower Deployment and so forth – normally over a period of a year or more. 6. Indefinite Delivery Contracts - Risks and Mitigations: Please also see Risk and Mitigations in Input and Output admeasurement contracts in para 4.1.1-5) and 4.1.2-6) respectively.
Chapter 4: Bidding Design for Non-Consultancy Services
4.3. Systems of Selection of service providers 1. The relative importance of Quality and Price aspects may vary from service to service depending on the complexities/ criticality of quality requirements, the internal capability of Procuring Entity to engage and supervise the contract, as well as the value of procurements. Hence different systems of selection of service providers are designed to achieve appropriate relative importance (weightage) of Quality and Price aspects. Decision on the system of selection is normally preceded by an assessment of the capacity of the user to engage and supervise the implementation of the proposed contract. The selection method chosen depends to some extent on this assessment. Selection of system of selection also should consider the likely field of Bidders.
Risk Mitigation the report may be required to be sent to a level above CA.
2. The nomenclature of various selection methods below is in line with generally prevalent practice: a) Price based System - Least Cost Selection (LCS); b) Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS); c) Direct Selection: Single Source Selection (SSS)
3. Unlike Procurement of Consultancy Services, procurement of Non-consultancy services is done by a simpler process akin to those of Procurement of Goods and Works. In the procurement of Non-consultancy services, the normal system of selection used is Pricebased – Least Cost Selection (L1) as in the procurement of Goods/ works for technically responsive offers. Under very special circumstances, Single Source Selection may also be used. However, the QCBS method of selection has been allowed to be used for procurement of Non-consultancy Services for highly technically complex and critical assignments where it is justifiable to pay appropriately higher prices for a higher quality proposal.

NONCONSULT_MANUAL

2. Schedule of Requirement shall indicate only a tentative estimate of the volume of required outputs/ inputs as well as the contract Period (one year, unless otherwise stipulated) over which such volume is likely to be availed. The Services shall be availed on-call as and when needed by the procuring entity without any commitment regarding the volume of services. The service provider shall be selected based on the total price (unit rate multiplied by indicative volume) of such Services/ Inputs (including service charges and taxes) over the period of contract.
3. In case of output admeasurement contracts, if expressly stipulated in the Tender Document, quantum of Input deployments (Personnel, equipment etc.) shall also be called for but shall be used only to monitor performance standards. Similarly in case of input admeasurement contracts, quantum of services to be delivered per quantum of inputs deployed per day/ month may also be called for to evaluate the quality and productivity of deployed inputs.
4. Please read the para 4.2.2-5) for differences between Time-based and Indefinite Delivery contracts. 5. Due to risks and mitigations discussed below, Indefinite Delivery contracts are commonly used to retain “advisers” or avail services 'on-call' - for example; expert adjudicators for dispute resolution panels, procurement advice, technical troubleshooting, Document
4.2.4. Indefinite Delivery Contract – Output or Input Admeasurement 1. These contracts are used when the Procuring Entity need to have “on call” specialised services, the extent and timing of which cannot be defined in advance. This is akin to the system of 'Rate Contracts' or framework contracts in the procurement of Goods. The Procuring Entity and the firm agree on the unit rates to be paid. This Type of Contract can be based either on input (more often) or output admeasurement. Payments are made periodically on the basis of the quantum of service or inputs actually utilised during the period.
Risk Mitigation a) The quality and Scope of the Output/ deliverables, as in Lump-sum Contracts, is not linked to the payment. There may be tendency for the service provider to cut corners on quality, scope and timing of the output/ deliverables by saving on resources employed. The contract should include provision for evaluation of quality and scope of deliverables and certificate for its acceptability may be recorded. Payments should be released only against such certificates. b) Performance in each time period is not linked to the payment. There may be tendency for the service provider to use resources in a dilatory and un-productive manner. Contracts need to be closely monitored and administered by the 'Procuring Entity' to ensure that the progress of assignment is commensurate with the time spent and that the resources for which payment is claimed have actually efficiently and productively been deployed on the assignment during the period. A system of monthly reporting of payouts and quantum of work achieved by the service provider to CA should be instituted to enable supervision. c) Time and Cost over-run is a major risk in such contracts, as the output may not be achieved in the estimated time. This type of contract should include an upper limit of total payments to be made to the service providers to safeguard against excessive prolonging of time and payments. After this limit is reached, or the period of completion is exceeded, CA should review justification for extension of the contract. d) Risk of over-utilization: Indefinite Delivery Contracts are at risk of being overutilized in excess of actual need since the scrutiny of service need may not be as intense as in case of other types of contracts. The need assessment of utilised services should be subject to some scrutiny to ensure that there is no abnormal, unexplainable trend in utilisation. Such contracts need to be closely monitored and administered by the 'Procuring Entity' to ensure that the there is no indiscriminate or unwarranted usage, and a maximum contract value may be laid down to keep control over usage and approval of CA may be obtained to extend it beyond such limit. A system of monthly reporting of payouts and quantum of work achieved by the service provider to CA should be instituted to enable supervision. In the report a monthly payout benchmark may be kept, above which
Management, Taxi Services, Temporary Manpower Deployment and so forth – normally over a period of a year or more. 6. Indefinite Delivery Contracts - Risks and Mitigations: Please also see Risk and Mitigations in Input and Output admeasurement contracts in para 4.1.1-5) and 4.1.2-6) respectively.
Chapter 4: Bidding Design for Non-Consultancy Services
4.3. Systems of Selection of service providers 1. The relative importance of Quality and Price aspects may vary from service to service depending on the complexities/ criticality of quality requirements, the internal capability of Procuring Entity to engage and supervise the contract, as well as the value of procurements. Hence different systems of selection of service providers are designed to achieve appropriate relative importance (weightage) of Quality and Price aspects. Decision on the system of selection is normally preceded by an assessment of the capacity of the user to engage and supervise the implementation of the proposed contract. The selection method chosen depends to some extent on this assessment. Selection of system of selection also should consider the likely field of Bidders.
Risk Mitigation the report may be required to be sent to a level above CA.
2. The nomenclature of various selection methods below is in line with generally prevalent practice: a) Price based System - Least Cost Selection (LCS); b) Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS); c) Direct Selection: Single Source Selection (SSS)
3. Unlike Procurement of Consultancy Services, procurement of Non-consultancy services is done by a simpler process akin to those of Procurement of Goods and Works. In the procurement of Non-consultancy services, the normal system of selection used is Pricebased – Least Cost Selection (L1) as in the procurement of Goods/ works for technically responsive offers. Under very special circumstances, Single Source Selection may also be used. However, the QCBS method of selection has been allowed to be used for procurement of Non-consultancy Services for highly technically complex and critical assignments where it is justifiable to pay appropriately higher prices for a higher quality proposal.

Para 4.2.4 — NONCONSULT_MANUAL

Original Rule Text

Para 4.2.4 — NONCONSULT_MANUAL

Original Rule Text