Evaluation and Comparison of Tenders Sample Clauses

Evaluation and Comparison of Tenders. 2.22.1 The procuring entity will evaluate and compare the tenders which have been determined to be substantially responsive, pursuant to paragraph 2.20 2.22.2 The comparison shall be of the price including all costs as well as duties and taxes payable on all the materials to be used in the provision of the services. 2.22.3 The Procuring entity’s evaluation of a tender will take into account, in addition to the tender price, the following factors, in the manner and to the extent indicated in paragraph 2.22.4 and in the technical specifications: (a) Operational plan proposed in the tender; (b) Deviations in payment schedule from that specified in the Special Conditions of Contract; 2.22.4 Pursuant to paragraph 22.3 the following evaluation methods will be applied:

Evaluation and Comparison of Tenders. 2.23.1 The Procuring entity will evaluate and compare the tenders which have been determined to be substantially responsive, pursuant to paragraph 2.22 2.23.2 The Procuring entity’s evaluation of a tender will exclude and not take into account (a) in the case of goods manufactured in Kenya or goods of foreign origin already located in Kenya, sales and other similar taxes, which will be payable on the goods if a Framework Agreement is awarded to the tenderer; and (b) Any allowance for price adjustment during the period of execution of the Framework Agreement, if provided in the tender. 2.23.3 The comparison shall be of the ex-factory/ex-warehouse/off-the-shelf price of thegoods offered from within Kenya, such price to include all costs, as well as duties and taxes paid or payable on components and raw material incorporated or to be incorporated in the goods. 2.23.4 The Procuring entity’s evaluation of a tender will take into account, in addition to the tender price and the price of incidental services, the following factors, in themanner and to the extent indicated in paragraph 2.23.5 and in the technical specifications: (a) delivery and installation schedule offered in the tender; (b) deviations in payment schedule from the specifications in the SpecialConditions of Framework Agreement; (c) the cost of components, mandatory spare parts and service; (d) the availability in Kenya of spare parts and after-sales service for the goodsoffered in the tender; 2.23.5 Pursuant to paragraph 2.24.4 the following evaluation methods will be applied

Evaluation and Comparison of Tenders. 1The Procuring entity will evaluate and compare the tenders which have been determined to be substantially responsive, pursuant to paragraph 2.22

Evaluation and Comparison of Tenders. ITT 33.1 The currency that shall be used for Tender evaluation and comparison purposes only to convert at the selling exchange rate all Tender prices expressed in various currencies into a single currency is: KENYA SHILLINGS The source of exchange rate shall be: The Central bank of Kenya (mean rate) The date for the exchange rate shall be: the deadline date for Submission of the Tenders. For comparison of Tenders, the Tender Price, corrected pursuant to ITT 31, shall first be broken down into the respective amounts payable in various currencies by using the selling exchange rates specified by the Tenderer in accordance with ITT 15. 1. In the second step, the Procuring Entity will convert the amounts in various currencies in which the Tender Price is payable (excluding Provisional Sums but including Daywork where priced competitively) to the single currency identified above at the selling rates established for similar transactions by the authority specified and, on the date, stipulated above.

Evaluation and Comparison of Tenders. 1The procuring entity will evaluate and compare the tenders which have been determined to be substantially responsive, pursuant to paragraph 2.20

Evaluation and Comparison of Tenders. ITT 29.3 The manner of rectifying quantifiable nonmaterial nonconformities shall be as described below: Based on the average price of the item/ component as quoted in other substantially responsive tenders. If not derivable as aforementioned, then TWWDA will use its best estimate.

Evaluation and Comparison of Tenders. 2.24.1 The Procuring entity will evaluate and compare the tenders which have been determined to be substantially responsive, pursuant to paragraph 2.22 2.24.2 The tender evaluation committee shall evaluate the tender within 30 days of the validity period from the date of opening the tender. 2.24.3 Tenders are invited for individual lots, the contract will be awarded to the tenderer offering a substantially responsive Tender(s) and the lowest evaluated cost for individual lots, subject to the selected tenderer(s) meeting the required qualification criteria for each lot. In determining tenderer that offer the lowest evaluated cost to the Procuring Entity for each lot, the Procuring Entity shall apply the following steps in sequence: a. evaluate individual lots to determine the substantially responsive Tenders and corresponding evaluated costs; b. for each lot, rank the substantially responsive Tenders starting from the lowest evaluated cost for the lot; c. apply to the evaluated costs listed in (b) above, any applicable discounts/price reductions offered by a tenderer (s) for the award of each Lot based on the discounts and the methodology for their application offered by the respective Tenderer; and d. determine contract award based on the lots that offer the tender offers each of which has the lowest evaluated cost to the Procuring Entity. 2.24.4 A tenderer who gives false information in the tender document about its qualification or who refuses to enter into a contract after notification of contract award shall be considered for debarment from participating in future public procurement.

Evaluation and Comparison of Tenders. ITT 31.1 The currency that shall be used for Tender evaluation and comparison purposes is: [Kenya shilling] ITT 32.3 A margin of preference and/or reservation [ “shall not”] apply and specify the details. ITT 33.2 Price evaluation will be done for (all the items)

Evaluation and Comparison of Tenders. ITT 33.1 The currency that shall be used for Tender evaluation and comparison purposes only to convert at the selling exchange rate all Tender prices expressed in various currencies into a single currency is: Kenya Shillings The source of exchange rate shall be: The Central bank of Kenya (mean rate) The date for the exchange rate shall be: the deadline date for Submission of the Tenders. ITT 34.1 Margin of preference allowed or not allowed: N/A ITT 35.1 Evaluation of the Bids: The Procuring Entity shall use the criteria and methodologies listed in PART II – Procuring Entity's Requirements. Responsive bidders shall be award shortlisted in the Framework agreement, Bidders shall be notified of Call of Contracts as and when required F. Award of Contract ITT 50.1 The procedures for making a Procurement-related Complaint are available from the PPRA Website ▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇.▇▇.▇▇ or email ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇@▇▇▇▇.▇▇.▇▇. If a Tenderer wishes to make a Procurement-related Complaint, the Tenderer should submit its complaint following these procedures, in writing (by the quickest means available, that is either by hand delivery or email to: The Principal Secretary State Department for Broadcasting and Telecommunications. ITT Reference PARTICULARS OF APPENDIX TO INSTRUCTIONS TO TENDERS For the Attention: Head Supply Chain Management Postal Address: P.O Box 30025-00100 Physical Address: Nairobi, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Avenue, Teleposta Towers 11th Floor Email: ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇@▇▇▇.▇▇.▇▇ In summary, a Procurement-related Complaint may challenge any of the following: (i) the terms of the Tender Documents; and (ii) the Procuring Entity’s decision to award the contract.