Para 7.6 — NONCONSULT_MANUAL

Risks Mitigation 1. No key expert proposed from the main qualified partner in consortium/ JV: It is seen that though the shortlisting and contract is won by a consortium/ JV on the basis of qualifications of the main qualified partner firm, but no key experts (nor team leader) are proposed from that firm. As the effective contribution of the qualified partner firm can only come from experts (in particular the team leader) who have worked for sufficient time with the main qualified service provider. Tender Document should specify that the team leader proposed should have worked for a sufficient number of years (say, two to three years) with the main qualifying firm. If this is not complied with it could be a ground for the proposal being termed as nonresponsive. 2. Request for substitution of key experts at the time of contract negotiation: After the firm is invited for negotiation, it asks for substitution of key staff in the contract. This is an unacceptable practice unless the selection process is unreasonably delayed. Any request for substitution should be examined very closely and agreed only if permitted by the Tender Document 3. Presence of one or more unsigned CVs in technical proposal: If a proposal contains one or more unsigned CVs, it should be scrutinised carefully. It can be that the CV is used without permission or commitment from the concerned key expert. If few CVs are not signed by the key expert, the evaluation should be carried without considering these unsigned CVs and, if this firm is still a winner, clarification may be sought at the negotiation stage for resolution. In no case substitution of such key experts be agreed to at the contract negotiation stage. If most of the CVs are not signed by the respective

7.6. Evaluation of Bids and Award of Contract – Risks and Mitigation

Manual for Procurement of Non-Consultancy Services, 2025

Risks Mitigation proposed key experts, the proposal should be termed as non-responsive and rejected at the technical evaluation stage. 4. Evaluation of bids is subjective or leaves room for manipulation and biased assessments. Some TC members may not be independent or neutral or may have conflict of interest (COI). TC should give an undertaking at the appropriate time (as per para 7.2.4-3) that none of the members has any COI with the companies/agencies participating in the tender process. Any member having an COI with any company should refrain from participating in the TC. Some members of a TC may be subordinate to or related others in a strictly hierarchical organisation, so that they are not free to express independent views – such a situation must be avoided when constituting the TC. 5. Discriminating against a Best Value Bid: In case a bidder’s bid (not in the good books of the procuring entity) becomes the best value bid as per the evaluation criteria, some of the following actions may have risks of misuse. There is also a reverse risk in these actions if a favourite becomes best value bid: Mitigation for each type of risk is mentioned below. 6. Unwarranted retendering: Rejecting all bids and calling for retendering on the pretext of prices being high, change of specifications, budget not being available, and so on. Please refer to para 7.4.11 regarding safeguards against this. In case a procurement is rebid more than once, approval of one level above the CA may be taken. Please also see the complaint mechanism. 7. Sudden quantity reduction/increase or splitting of quantity work at the time of award: Many organisations have provisions for change/ splitting in the bid quantity at the time of award. Some organisations vary quantity even without such provisions Bid conditions must specify a limit beyond which originally announced quantity/scope cannot be reduced/increased. If parallel contracts are envisaged, clear criteria for the splitting may be specified in the tender documents beforehand. 8. Unwarranted negotiations: negotiations are called without justification. Sometimes a counter-offer is made to discourage lowest acceptable bidder. Normally, there should be no posttender negotiations. In certain exceptional situations, for example, procurement of proprietary items, items with limited sources of supply, and items where there is suspicion of a cartel formation, negotiations may

Chapter 7: Bid Evaluation, and Award of Contract

Risks Mitigation be held with L-1. In case of L-1 backing out, there should be retendering. 9. Unwarranted delays in finalizing or varying the terms of preannounce contract agreement: even after the TC recommendations are accepted, signing of the contract is delayed on one pretext or the other. Although there is a standard contract form in the tender documents, the contract may be drafted in a fashion to favour or discourage the successful bidder. A target timeline of finalisation of procurement should be laid down. Delays and reasons thereof should be brought out before the CA on the file at the time of TC’s acceptance or contract signing. The contract should be strictly as per the bid conditions and accepted offer. 10. Anti-competitive practices: Bidders, which would otherwise be expected to compete, secretly conspire to frustrate the buyer’s attempts to get VfM in a tender process. Anticompetitive conspiracies can take many forms. Sometimes the officers involved in procurement may be part of such collusion. a) Bid coordination: The bidders collude to the quote same or similar rates that are much higher than the reasonable price to force the buyer to settle the procurement at exorbitant prices. b) Cover bidding: Cover bidding is designed to give the appearance of genuine competition by way of supporting bids for the leading bid-rigger. c) Bid suppression: Bid suppression means that a company does not submit a bid for final consideration in support of the leading bid-rigger. d) Bid rotation: In bid-rotation schemes, conspiring firms continue to bid but they agree to take turns being the winning (i.e., lowest qualifying) bidder in a group of tenders of a similar nature. e) Market allocation: Competitors carve up the market and agree not to give competitive bids for certain customers or in certain geographic areas. These strategies, in turn, may result in patterns that procurement officials can detect, and steps can be taken to thwart such attempts. Such anticompetitive activities come under the purview of the competition law, where there is provision of stringent penalties. Regular training should be held for officers involved in procurement to detect and mitigate such practices and also use of the competition law against such bidders.

Chapter 8: Special Types of Non-Consultancy Procurements 8.1. Expression of Interest (EoI) for Shortlisting of Service Providers