-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Franchise bids
- Thread starter Zoe
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
WatcherZero
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 10,272
The people who make the decisions dont know whose behind each bid, but they cant be anonymous as at some point in the chain someone at Dft has to run the fit and proper person/company and credit checks.
But if what has been posted above is correct, they can work it out.
WatcherZero
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 10,272
Are you saying people cant be impartial though? Judges are impartial on a daily basis, concealing past crimes of a defendent from a jury and ensuring they get a fair trial even though they know on past form they probably did it, or especielly in jury less hearings.
No I'm not. It's just that in the other thread it was stated that bids were not blind. If this is the case then it would need to be clear that previous track records were in no way considered when making the decision.
Last edited:
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
The Delivery Plan, which counts towards the evaluation score, has to include an organisation chart, corporate structure and proposed management team.
I don't see how this can be made anonymous.
What is possible is that the raw number crunching of the financials might be done anonymously by consultants.
But at the end of the day the overall rank has to include items specific to the (known) bidder.
DfT also consult with NR and other stakeholders about various parts of each bid.
Apparently, though, the Secretary of State is the last to know the winner and can't intervene.
WS Atkins seem to be playing the major consultancy role for DfT on West Coast.
I don't see how this can be made anonymous.
What is possible is that the raw number crunching of the financials might be done anonymously by consultants.
But at the end of the day the overall rank has to include items specific to the (known) bidder.
DfT also consult with NR and other stakeholders about various parts of each bid.
Apparently, though, the Secretary of State is the last to know the winner and can't intervene.
WS Atkins seem to be playing the major consultancy role for DfT on West Coast.
deltic
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 3,225
There are two stages to bidding for a franchise.
The first is the pre qualification stage.
This consists of basic questions about the bidder (who are they, are they part of a consortium, etc)
There are then a number of pass/fail questions (has your company/directors been convicted of bribery etc)
There are then a range of financial questions (eg can you demonstrate you can put up the required season ticket bond etc) and safety questions.
There are then two key sets of questions - the first set are generic business type questions along the lines of
Excellent organisations: develop and agree a set of performance indicators and related outcomes to determine the successful deployment of their strategy and supporting policies, based on the needs and expectations of their customers; set clear targets for Key Results based on the needs and expectations of their customers, in line with their chosen strategy; demonstrate positive or sustained good Customer Results over at least 2 years; clearly understand the underlying reasons and drivers of observed trends and the impact these results will have on other performance indicators and related outcomes; anticipate future performance and results; understand how the Key Results they achieve compare to similar organisations and use this data, where relevant, for target setting; and segment results to understand the experience, needs and expectations of specific customer groups.
The second set of questions relate to the specific franchise and asks how you will deal with issues such as - in the case of GW - IEP, Crossrail, electrification - provision of extra capacity within existing infrastructure and rolling stock constraints.
By the nature of the questions and information (bidders will give examples of what they have done to answer the questions) which are assessed by DfT and its appointed consultants every bidder is known to the evaluation team.
Provided you have answered correctly the pass/fail questions all the bids are scored on these latter two sets of questions and 3-5 bidders will be shortlisted for the next stage. Shortlisted bidders are made public.
The next stage is to invite shortlisted bidders to submit full bids - these are limited to 1500 pages! and in the case of ICWC consist of ten key delivery plans
In addition financial and operation models need to be supplied.
All these documents and models have to be clearly labelled with the bidder's name and are evaluated by the Department and its consultants.
Throughout the process there will be discussions between bidders and the DfT to clarify elements of the bid and in due course to negotiate key elements of it.
Throughout the process the evaluators know whose bid they are evaluating and how it compares to the other bids.
Details of the present franchise PQQs and ICWC invitation to tender can be found on the DfT's website.
The first is the pre qualification stage.
This consists of basic questions about the bidder (who are they, are they part of a consortium, etc)
There are then a number of pass/fail questions (has your company/directors been convicted of bribery etc)
There are then a range of financial questions (eg can you demonstrate you can put up the required season ticket bond etc) and safety questions.
There are then two key sets of questions - the first set are generic business type questions along the lines of
Excellent organisations: develop and agree a set of performance indicators and related outcomes to determine the successful deployment of their strategy and supporting policies, based on the needs and expectations of their customers; set clear targets for Key Results based on the needs and expectations of their customers, in line with their chosen strategy; demonstrate positive or sustained good Customer Results over at least 2 years; clearly understand the underlying reasons and drivers of observed trends and the impact these results will have on other performance indicators and related outcomes; anticipate future performance and results; understand how the Key Results they achieve compare to similar organisations and use this data, where relevant, for target setting; and segment results to understand the experience, needs and expectations of specific customer groups.
The second set of questions relate to the specific franchise and asks how you will deal with issues such as - in the case of GW - IEP, Crossrail, electrification - provision of extra capacity within existing infrastructure and rolling stock constraints.
By the nature of the questions and information (bidders will give examples of what they have done to answer the questions) which are assessed by DfT and its appointed consultants every bidder is known to the evaluation team.
Provided you have answered correctly the pass/fail questions all the bids are scored on these latter two sets of questions and 3-5 bidders will be shortlisted for the next stage. Shortlisted bidders are made public.
The next stage is to invite shortlisted bidders to submit full bids - these are limited to 1500 pages! and in the case of ICWC consist of ten key delivery plans
- Organisation, Staffing & Stakeholder Relations, Mobilisation & Migration
- Management & Delivery of Change including Sustainability & the Environment
- Modelling Change and Profit Sharing
- Marketing & Fares
- Ticket Sales & Revenue Protection
- Timetabling to Accommodate Current Demand & Future Growth
- Rolling Stock, Depots & Train Maintenance
- Operational Performance Improvement
- Stations and accessing the Network
- Improving Service Quality
In addition financial and operation models need to be supplied.
All these documents and models have to be clearly labelled with the bidder's name and are evaluated by the Department and its consultants.
Throughout the process there will be discussions between bidders and the DfT to clarify elements of the bid and in due course to negotiate key elements of it.
Throughout the process the evaluators know whose bid they are evaluating and how it compares to the other bids.
Details of the present franchise PQQs and ICWC invitation to tender can be found on the DfT's website.
So in an attempt to remove any confustion as to if the bidders are known, the response has been:
Is there any way to find out who is actually correct here?
Is there any way to find out who is actually correct here?
Last edited:
WatcherZero
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 10,272
Theres two sets of people, evaluators rate the strength and weaknesses of the bids, providing a score in various categories and someone else makes the absoloute final decision (minister or senior civil servant) by comparing the sets of scores. The final decision maker doesnt have the time to spend months on the process and the results will be condensed down to a level that they might just spend a week considering it. For example one might have scored highly on value for money while another might score better on service and investment.
Similar system in Universitys marking, your lecturers will mark your papers but then they are handed over to another university who will anonymously confirm the marks and award the final score to make sure your lectureres havent shown bias. Though there are other systems too such as marking by committee and giving it to another lecturer at the same university with your name removed.
Similar system in Universitys marking, your lecturers will mark your papers but then they are handed over to another university who will anonymously confirm the marks and award the final score to make sure your lectureres havent shown bias. Though there are other systems too such as marking by committee and giving it to another lecturer at the same university with your name removed.
Last edited:
In that case then it wouldn't be possible for previous track records to be taken into account as when the information is sent for the final decision it would be possible for the person to work out which company it was.
On the other thread it was stated that in 2005 First couldn't win the Integrated Kent franchise as they were to be awarded two other franchises. I don't see how this would be possible if the final decision maker knows nothing about which bid is from which company. If First had scored the highest on all three and the person making the decision didn't know that First had the highest scores then they could have awarded all three franchises to First.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
This occurs at the pre-qualification phase, not in the formal bid process.
WatcherZero
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 10,272
They would have been eliminated in the initial examination as not fit and proper due to competition issues.
I understand the process to be as follows:
The bids are not anonymous to the people evaluating them. Each will be given a code name (so they can be discussed by evaluators and around the office without accidentally giving away commercial information). The final approval will be by Senior Civil Servants and then by Ministers; this is done by code name only so there can be no accusation of political interference to the procurement exercise. Only when Ministers agree that "Bidder Bravo" (or whatever the code name is) provides the best value for money (as per the outlined criteria), will they be informed that Bravo is, in fact, GoVia (or Abellio, or DB, or SNCF...)
It's not really possible to mark a tender without knowing the company behind it. Especially when past performance is one of the criteria!
The bids are not anonymous to the people evaluating them. Each will be given a code name (so they can be discussed by evaluators and around the office without accidentally giving away commercial information). The final approval will be by Senior Civil Servants and then by Ministers; this is done by code name only so there can be no accusation of political interference to the procurement exercise. Only when Ministers agree that "Bidder Bravo" (or whatever the code name is) provides the best value for money (as per the outlined criteria), will they be informed that Bravo is, in fact, GoVia (or Abellio, or DB, or SNCF...)
It's not really possible to mark a tender without knowing the company behind it. Especially when past performance is one of the criteria!
Is it though?
Sorry, I wrote that bit without specific knowledge of the requirements of the tender. I *believe* that previous performance (or evidence of current or previous operations) is a requirement but cannot be sure.
The preceding information on the process is, as far as I am told, accurate.
- Status