SAMPLE FORM OF EVALUATION REPORT 20009 October 1999 Selection of Consultants The World Bank Washington, D.C. October 1999 SAMPLE FORM OF EVALUATION REPORT SELECTION OF CONSULTANTS (ha The World Bank Washington, D.C. October 1999 iii Preface, Consultants2 employed by Bank Borrowers and financed by the World Bank or under trust funds3 are hired according to the Bank's Consultant Guidelines (Guidelines).4 The Guidelines specify the Borrowers' obligations to submit certain reports to the Bank during the selection process: (a) for contracts subject to prior review by the Bank (see Appendix 1, para. 2(a), of the Guidelines): (i) a technical evaluation report subject to prior review by the Bank, such as the Bank's no-objection prior to opening the financial proposals; or (ii) a technical evaluation notice for contracts above the prior review threshold but below a higher threshold indicated in the Loan Agreement. In such case, the Borrower needs not wait for the Bank's no-objection to open the financial proposals; In both cases the Borrower must send to the Bank for prior review the combined technical/financial evaluation report; (b) for contracts subject to post-review by the Bank: (i) a combined technical/financial report to be reviewed or audited subsequently. This document sets out the format of a sample evaluation report. It is provided to Bank Borrowers to facilitate the evaluation of consultants' proposals and the subsequent review of these proposals by the Bank. Its use is strongly recommended but not mandatory. The evaluation must be in accordance with the criteria spelled out in the Request for Proposals and carried out by qualified evaluators. The Request for Proposals should be prepared in agreement with the Guidelines (para. 2.8). I This preface is not part of the report. It should not appear in the report submitted to the Bank. 2 The term Consultants in this document refers to organizations and not individuals. 3 Trust funds are funds provided by donors and administered by the Bank. 4 All references to the Guidelines made in this report are to Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, January 1997, revised September 1997 and January 1999). Copies of the Guidelines are available at http://www.worldbank.org/html/opr/procure/propage.html. iv Preface The evaluation report includes five sections: Section I. A Short Report Summarizing the Findings of the Technical Evaluation; Section II. Technical Evaluation Report-Forms; Section III. A Short Report Summarizing the Findings of the Financial Evaluation; Section IV. Financial Evaluation Report-Forms; Section V. Annexes: Annex 1. Individual Evaluations; Annex II. Information Data Monitoring; Annex III. Minutes of the Pub;lic Opening of the Financial Proposals; Annex IV. Copy of the Request for Proposals; Annex V. Miscellaneous Annexes-Ad Hoc. The report can be used for all methods of selection described in the Guidelines. Though it mainly addresses Quality- and Cost-Based Selection, each section contains a note indicating the data and forms that are to be provided for the other methods of selection. The evaluation notice is sent to the Bank after the technical evaluation is completed. It includes only Form IIB and a short explanatory note to flag important aspects of the evaluation. Following the Bank's no-objection to the evaluation notice, the Borrower prepares Forms IVC and IVD and a short explanatory note to highlight the most important aspects of the financial evaluation. For complex, specialized assignments, Borrowers may wish to obtain assistance from consultants to evaluate proposals. Such consultants or individual consultants may be financed under the relevant loan, credit, or grant. Users of this sample evaluation report, are invited to submit comments on their experience with the document to: Procurement Policy and Services Group Operational Core Services Department The World Bank 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433 U.S.A. http://www.worldbank.org/html/opr/procure/contents.html Fax: (202) 522-3318 v CONSULTANT EVALUATION REPORT Country [insert: name of country] Project Name [insert: project name] Loan/Credit No. [insert: loan/credit number] Title of Consulting Services [insert: title] Date of Submission [insert: date] vii Contents Section I. Technical Evaluation Report-Text ...............................................................1 Section II. Technical Evaluation Report-Forms ................................................................ 3 Form IIA. Technical Evaluation - Basic Data .............................................................4 Form IIB. Evaluation Summary ...............................................................8 Form IIC. Individual Evaluations-Comparison ........................................................9 Section III. Financial Evaluation Report-Award Recommendation-Text ........................... 11 Section IV. Financial Evaluation Report-Award Recommendation-Forms ........................ 13 Form IVA. Financial Evaluation-Basic Data ........................................................... 14 Form IVB. Adjustments-Currency Conversion-Evaluated Prices ........................ 16 Form IVC. QCBS-Combined Technical/Financial Evaluation-Award Reconimendation ............................................................... 17 Form IVD. Fixed-Budget and Least-Cost Selection-Award Recommendation ....... 18 Section V. Annexes ............................................................... 19 Annex I(i). Individual Evaluations .............................................................. 20 Annex I(ii). Individual Evaluations-Key Personnel .................................................. 21 Annex II. Information Data Monitoring ............................................................... 22 Annex III. Minutes of Public Opening of Financial Proposals .................................. 23 Annex IV. Request for Proposals .............................................................. 24 Annex V. Miscellaneous Annexes-Ad Hoc .25 Section I. Technical Evaluation Report-Text' 1. Background Include a brief description, context, scope, and objectives of the services. Use about a quarter of a page. 2. The Selection Elaborate on information provided in Form IIA. Process (Prior to Technical Describe briefly the selection process, beginning with the advertising Evaluation) (if required), the establishment of the shortlist, expressions of interest, and withdrawals of firms before proposal submissions. Describe major events that may have affected the timing (delays, complaints from consultants, key correspondence with the Bank, Request for Proposals (RFP), extension of proposal submission date, and so on). Use about one-half to one page. 3. Technical Describe briefly the meetings and actions taken by the evaluation Evaluation committee: formation of a technical evaluation team, outside assistance, evaluation guidelines, justification of subcriteria and associated weightings as indicated in the Standard Request for Proposals; relevant correspondence with the Bank; and compliance of evaluation with RFP. Present results of the technical evaluation: scores and the award recommendation. Highlight strengths and weaknesses of each proposal (most important part of the report). (a) Strengths: Experience in very similar projects in the country; quality of the methodology, proving a clear understanding of the scope of the assignment; strengths of the local partner; and experience of proposed staff in similar assignments. (b) Weaknesses: Of a particular component of the proposal; of a lack of experience in the country; of a low level of participation by the local partner; of a lack of practical 5 Section I applies to Quality- and Cost-Based Selection (QCBS), Quality-Based Selection (Quality-Based), Fixed-Budget Selection (Fixed-Budget), and Least-Cost Selection (Least-Cost). Provide appropriate infornation in the case of Selection Based on Qualifications (Qualifications) and Single-Source Selection (SS). 2 Section 1. Technical Evaluation Report-Text experience (experience in studies rather than in implementation); of staff experience compared to the firm's experience; of a key staffer (e.g., the team leader); of a lack of responsiveness; and of disqualifications (conflict of interest.). Comment on individual evaluators' scores (discrepancies). Items requiring further negotiations. Use up to three pages. 3 Section II. Technical Evaluation Report Forms6 Form IIA. Technical Evaluation-Basic Data Form IIB. Evaluation Summary-Technical Scores/Ranking Form IIC. Individual Evaluations-Comparison (Average Scores) 6 Section II applies to Quality- and Cost-Based Selection (QCBS), Quality-Based Selection (Quality-Based), Fixed-Budget Selection (Fixed-Budget), and Least-Cost Selection (Least-Cost). Supply appropriate data in cases of Selection Based on Qualifications (Qualifications) and Single-Source Selection (Single-Source) in Form IIA. 4 Section II. Technical Evaluation Report-Forrns Form 11A. Technical Evaluation - Basic Data 2.1 Name of country Name of Project 2.2 Client: (a) name (b) address, phone, facsimile 2.3 Type of assignment (pre-investment, preparation, or implementation), and brief description of sources 2.4 Method of selection7: QCBS Quality-Based Fixed-Budget Least-Cost_ Qualifications Single-Source 2.5 Prior review thresholds: (a) Full prior review US$ (b) Simplified prior review (notice) US$ 2.6 Request for expressions of interest8: (a) publication in United Nations Development Business (UNDB)9 Yes No (b) publication in national newspaper(s) Yes No (c) number of responses 7 See Guidelines. 8 Required for large contracts (see Guidelines). 9 Indicate whether expressions of interest advertised in Web or hardcopy edition of UNDP. Section II. Technical Evaluation Report-Forms 5 2.7 Shortlist: (a) names/nationality of 1. firms/associations (mark 2. domestic finns and firms that 3. had expressed interest) 4. 5. 6. (b) Submission to the Bank for no- objection Date (c) Bank's no-objection Date 2.8 Request for Proposals: (a) submission to the Bank for no- objection Date (b) Bank's no-objection Date (c) issuance to Consultants Date 2.9 Amendments and clarifications to the RFP (describe) 2.10 Contract: (a) Bank Standard Time-Based Yes Price adjustment: Yes No (b) Bank Standard Lump Sum Yes_ Price adjustment: Yes No (c) other (describe) 2.11 Pre-proposal conference: Yes No (a) minutes issued Yes No 2.12 Proposal submission: (a) two envelopes (technical and financial proposals) Yes (b) one envelope (technical) Yes (c) original submission Date Time (d) extensions(s) Date Time 2.13 Submission of Financial Proposal Location 2.14 Opening of Technical Proposals by selection committee Date Time 6 Section II. Technical Evaluation Report-Forms 2.15 Number of proposals submitted 2.16 Evaluation committeel°: Members' names and titles 1. (normally three to five) 2. 3. 4. 5. 2.17 Proposal validity period (days): (a) original expiration date Date Time (b) extension(s), if any Date Time 2.18 Evaluation Criteria/subcriteria": (a) Consultants' experience (i) _ Weight_ (ii) _ Weight (b) methodology (i) Weight (ii) Weight e_ (c) key staff (i) individual(s) (A) Weight_ (B) Weight (C) Weight (ii) group(s) (A) Weight _ (B) Weight (C) Weight ___ (d) training (optional) (i) Weight_ (ii) Weight_ (e) local input (optional) (i) Weight_ (ii) Weight_ 10 It is important that evaluators be qualified. I I Maximum of three suboriteria per criterion. Section II. Technical Evaluation Report-Forms 7 2.19 Technical scores by Consultant Minimum qualifying score Consultants' names Technical scores 2.20 Evaluation report: (a) submission to the Bank for no- objection Date 2.21 Evaluation notice: (a) submission to the Bank: Date Form IIB. Evaluation Summary Technical Scores/Ranking [Insert name of [Insert name of [Insert name of [Insert name of Consultants' names Consultant I] Consultant 2] Consultant 3] Consultant 4] Criteria Scores Scores Scores Scores Experience Methodology Proposed staff Training Local input Total scorea ' IT Rankll ) a. Proposals scoring below the minimum qualitfing score of [number] points have been rejected. 0 0 Form IIC. Individual Evaluations-Comparison C [Insert name of [Insert name of [Insert name of [Insert name of Consultants' Namnes Consultant 1] Consultant 2] Consultant 3] Consultant 4] cD Criteria Experience A B c AVa ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 Methodology Key staff0 Training Local input Total a. A, B, C, and D scores given by evaluators; AV = average score, see Annex 1(i). 10 Section II. Technical Evaluation Report-Forns NOTE: Please see the Preface. For contracts above a threshold indicated in the Loan Agreement and requiring the Bank's no-objection of the technical evaluation report, financial proposals must not be opened before the Borrower has received such no-objection. The technical evaluation (technical scores in particular) cannot be changed following the opening of the financial proposals. 11 Section III. Financial Evaluation Report-Award Recommendation-Text12 [The text will indicate: (a) any issues faced during the evaluation, such as difficulty in obtaining the exchange rates to convert the prices into the common currency used for evaluation purposes; (b) adjustments made to the prices of the proposal(s) (mainly to ensure consistency with the technical proposal) and determination of the evaluated price (does not apply to Quality-Based (Quality-Based), Selection Based on Qualifications (Qualifications), and Single-Source Selection (Single-Source)); (c) tax-related problems; (d) award recommendation; and (e) any other important information. Taxes are not taken into account in the financial evaluation whereas reimbursables are.] 12 Applies to QCBS, Fixed-Budget, and Least-Cost. For Quality-Based, Qualifications, and Single-Source provide relevant infortnation as indicated. 13 Section IV. Financial Evaluation Report-Award Recommendation-Forms'3 Form IVA. Financial Evaluation-Basic Data Form IVB. Adjustments-Currency Conversion-Evaluated Prices Form IVC. QCBS-Combined Technical/Financial Evaluation-Award Recommendation Form IVD. Fixed-Budget and Least-Cost Selection-Award Recommendation 13 Applies to QCBS, Fixed-Budget, and Least-Cost. For Quality-Based, Qualifications, and Single-Source, provide relevant inforrnation as indicated. 14 Section IV. Financial Evaluation Report-Award Recommendation-Forms Form IVA. Financial Evaluation-Basic Data 4.1 Bank's no-objection to technical evaluation report (Quality-Based, Qualifications, Single-Source) Date _ 4.2 Public opening of financial proposals Date_ Time (a) Names and proposal prices 1. (mark Consultants that 2. attended public opening) 3. 4. 4.3 Evaluation committee: mernbers' names and titles (if not the same as in the technical evaluation - Quality- Based, Qualifications, Single- Source) 4.4 Methodology (formula) for evaluation of cost (QCBS only; Weight inversely proportional to cost cross as appropriate) Other_ 4.5 Submission of final technical/financial evaluation report to the Bank (Quality-Based, Qualifications, Single-Source) Date 4.6 QCBS Consultant' Technical Financial Final (a) Technical, financial and final Name scores scores scores scores (Quality-Based: technical scores only (b) Award recommendation 4.7 Fixed Budget and Least-Cost Consultant' Technical Proposal Evaluated (a) Technical scores, proposal and Name scores prices prices evaluated prices Section VI. Financial Evaluation-Award Recommendation-Forms 15 (b) Award recommendation (c) Fixed-Budget: best technical proposal within the budget (evaluated price) Name (d) Least-Cost: lowest evaluated price proposal above minimum qualifying score Name Form IVB. Adjustments-Currency Conversion-Evaluated Prices14 Evaluated Conversion to currency of Financial Proposals' pricesa Adjustmentsb price(s) evaluationc scoresd Consultants' Amounts Exchange rate(s)e Proposals' prices Names Currency (1) (2) (3) (1) + (2) (4) (5) (3)(4) (6) .~~~~~~~~~~~ a. Comments, if any (e.g., exchange rLates); tree foreign currencies maximum, plus local currency. b. Arithmetical errors and omissions of items included in the technical proposals. Adjustments may be positive or negative. c. As per RFP. d. 100 points to the lowest evaluated proposal; other scores to be determined in accordance with provisions of RFP. e. Value of one currency unit in the common currency used for evaluation purposes, normally the local currency (e.g., US$1 = 30 rupees). Indicate source as per RFP. 4 For Quality-Based, Qualifications, and Single-Source, fill out only up to column 3. Form IVC. QCBS-Combined Technical/Financial Evaluation-Award Recommendation _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Technical Financial Evaluation Evaluation Combined Evaluation Technical Weighted Financial Weighted scoresa scores Technical scores' scores Scores Consultants' names S(t) S(t) x Tb rank S(f) S(f) x Fd S(t) T + S(f) F Rank 0 _ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C Awr recommendatin ToO hiuglhest cminedl tehncalfmancial Scor=e. Consultant's name: a. See Formn IIB. b. T = As per RFP. c. See Form IVB. d CD 0i 0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~jTIr _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Award recommendation To highest combined technical/financial score. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t c. SeeFormIVB.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~B d. F~~~~~~~~~~~asperRFP.~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -: Form IVD. Fixed-Budget and Least-Cost Selection-Award Recommendation15 Fixed-Budget Selection Least-Cost Selection Consultants' names Technical scoresa Evaluated pricesb Technical scores Evaluated prices .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .~~~~~~~~~~~ CD I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- Award recommendation To best technical score with evaluated price within To lowest evaluated price above minimum qualiflying budget. score. Consultant's namc: Consultant's name: l a. See Form IIB. b. See Fonn IVB. 15 Fill in appropriate part of form. 19 Section V. Annexes16 Annex I. Individual Evaluations Form V Annex I(i). Individual Evaluations Form V Annex I(ii). Individual Evaluations-Key Personnel Annex II. Inforrnation Data Monitoring Annex III. Minutes of Public Opening of Financial Proposals Annex IV. Request for Proposals Annex V. Miscellaneous Annexes-Ad Hoc 16 Annex I applies to Quality-Based, Fixed-Budget and Least-Cost. For Qualifications and Single-Source, it is replaced by a review of the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal, which may be amended by one or several evaluators. 20 Section V. Annexes Annex I (i). Individual Evaluations Consultant's name: Evaluators Criteria/Sub-Criteria Maximnum 1 2 3 4 5 Average Scores Scores Experience . ........~~~~ ~~~~~~~~... .... .. . .................... .. ...........- - .. ..... .... ......... ... . .............. . .. - ... ... .I........... .. ... - - - . ...... ... ...... .. .. ~~~~~~~....... ... .. ... ......... . .... _. ....... .::: .... .: : . : : ....... . ... :.:._:. .:_ .. __ ..... _.._... ..._ ........... .. .. ......._ __ .......... .. Methodlogy.,.. , ,, , ...,,.. . . ... ................ , ...,,.... ., . ....I-- - - - ---- .. . ..... ..,... . ... . Methodology . ......... . ... .,...... .. ..... ....... ........ ....-... ....... .... .... ..... ... ......... .... ......... ... . ......... .... ... .... ... .... . ... .. _.... . ....... ........... Transfer of nowledge (Trai i ga) . . _ . . _ . .. ........ ...... . ........ . . ...... .. .... . - .... .. ... ... .......... ..... . .. .~ . ... ...... ...... ..................... ... ... . ..... . ... ~~~~~~~. . ,....... ............. ... ..... ........ .... . .. ... _.. . ....... . ..... -.-..... ...... -.... . ..... .. ...... .. ..... ...-. Participation by NatIoasa .................. . ......... ...... ........ ... .- .-... ..... ............... ...... ......... ..... ... ........... .................. ........... . .. ............ .... .... ........ .. .._......... ... . . . .. ......... . ..... _..... ........... ..... . ...... ............ ...........- .......... .. .............. . ...... . ...... ....... .... ........ ........ ........... ...... ....... ... . ............... . .............. ............ .............. ........... ....... ..... t . ........... ................................... . . . .......I.. .............................................. . ..............- - .......... . .. . .... ......... . .. . .............-...........-... ---I.-.....-.........-....".'.......'.. ' ..........'...'...............- Total 100 __ _= _ =_________ ____ a. If specified in the RFP 1. Evaluator's Name: __ __________Signature: __________Date:_____ 2. Evaluator's Name: ..._....._..............Signature: -______..........Date: _____.... 3. Evaluator's Name: _____________Signature: _ _________Date: _____ 4. Evaluator's Name: _____________Signature: -_ _ _ _ _ _ __Date: _____ 5. Evaluator's Name: __ __________Signature: __________Date:_____ Section V. Annexes 21 Annex I(ii) Individual Evaluations-Key Personnel Consultant's Name: Key Staff Namesa Maximum General Adequacy Experience Total Scores Scores Qualifications for the in Region Marks Assignment ( )b ( )b )b (100) Total _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ a. Sometimes evaluations are made by groups instead of individuals. Each group (e.g. financial group) has a weight. The group score is obtained by the weighted scores of the members of the group. For example, the score of a group of three individuals scoring a, b, and c would be ax + by + cz with x, y, and z representing the respective weights of the members (x + y + z = 1) in this group. b. Maximum marks as per RFP Name of Evaluator: Signature: Date: 22 Section V. Annexes Annex II. Information Data Monitoring 5.1 Loan/credit/grant (a) number (b) date of effectiveness (c) closing date (i) original (ii) revised 5.2 General Procurement Notice (a) first issue date (b) latest update 5.3 Request for expressions of interest": (a) publication in United Nations Development Business (UNDB) Date _ (b) publication in national local newspaper(s) Name of newspaper(s) and date(s) 5.4 Did the use of price as a factor of selection change the final ranking?"8 Yes _ No 5.5 Did the use of "local input" as a factor of selection change the technical ranking?"9 Yes _ No 17 Required for large contracts (see Guidelines). 18 Compare technical rank with rank in Form IVC. 19 Figure out technical scores with and without "local input" (Form IIB). Section V. Annexes 23 Annex III. Minutes of Public Opening of Financial Proposals20 MINUTES [The minutes should indicate the names of the participants in the proposal opening session, the proposal prices, discounts, technical scores, and any details that the Client, at its discretion, may consider appropriate. All attendees must sign the Minutes.] 20 Annex III applies to QCBS, Fixed-Budget, and Least-Cost. 24 Section V. Annexes Annex IV. Request for Proposals2' [A Standard Request for Proposals must be used for World Baink-financed contracts in excess of US$200, 000. The Bank also recommends the use of the Standard Request for Proposals document for smaller contracts to simplify its prior review (i.e., when the Borrower cannot issue the document without the Bank's no-oblction). The Standard Request for Proposals is available on the Bank's Internet site (hzttp//Iwww.worldbank orglhtmllopr/p7rocurelconspage.html) and in the Bank InfoShop at the following address: The World Bank InfoShop 701 18th Street, N. W Rm. JJ1-060 Washington, D.C. 20433, UISA. 1.202.458-5454 books@worldbank. org]. 21Annex IV applies to all selection procedures (The Bank Standard Request for Proposals may be used for Qualifications and Single-Source, with appropriate modifications). Section V. Annexes 25 Annex V. Miscellaneous Annexes-Ad Hoc THE WORLD BANK 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433 USA Telephone: 202-477-1234 Facsimile: 202-477-6391 Telex: MCI 64145 WORLDBANK MCI 248423 WORLDBANK Internet: www.worldbank.org E-mail: books@worldbank.org 9 780821 346266 ISBN 0-8213-4626-1