Form IIA.

Technical Evaluation Basic Data

2.1

Name of country
Name of Project

Uganda
Proposed Expansion of Laboratory Building for
Technology University

2.2
Client:
(a) name
(b) address, phone, facsimile

Technology University
P.O. Box

2.3
Type of assignment (pre-investment,
preparation, or implementation), and brief description
of sources
2.4
Method of selection:

Consulting Services for Supervision of Proposed

Expansion of Laboratory Building for Technology
University
QCBS -Yes

2.6
Request for expressions of interest:
(a) publication in United Nations Development
Business (UNDB)
(b) publication in national newspaper(s)
(c) number of responses
2.7
Shortlist:
(a)
names/nationality of firms/associations (mark
domestic firms and firms that had expressed interest)

2.9
Amendments and clarifications to the RFP
(describe)
2.10 Contract:
(a) Bank Standard Time-Based
(b) Bank Standard Lump Sum
(c) other (describe)
2.11 Pre-proposal conference:
(a)
minutes issued
2.14 Opening of Technical Proposals by selection
committee
2.15 Number of proposals submitted
2.16 Evaluation committee:
Members names and titles (normally three to
five)
2.17 Proposal validity period (days):
(a)
original expiration date
(b)
extension(s), if any
2.18 Evaluation Criteria/subcriteria:
(a) Organization Capability and General Experience
of the Consultant [10]
(i)
General organization capability

No
Yes _
4
Mecury Consultancy
PCM Architects
PUZZLE
MAKR International Inc.
TEMAC International Ltd
Wangwe Engineers Ltd
none

(a)
yes
Date. at ..hours local time
Four (4)

120 Days
Date ;Time

Weight 2.5 points

(ii)
(iii)

General experience in the building sector Weight 5points

Regional Experience in Sub-Saharan
Africa
Weight 2.5points

(b) Adequacy of proposed methodology work plan

(i)
Technical approach and methodology
(ii)
Work Plan
(iii)
Organization and Staffing

Weight : 5 points
Weight : 10 points
Weight : 15 points

(c) key staff individual(s)

(A) Project Manager
(B) Site Engineer
(C) Architect
(D) Quantity Surveyor
(E) Service Engineer
(F) Electrical Engineer

Weight : 10 points
Weight : 15 points
Weight : 10 points
Weight : 10 points
Weight : 5 points
Weight : 5 points

(e) local input (optional)

(i) Participation by nationals among
proposed key staff
2.19 Technical scores by Consultant
Consultants names
M/s Mecury Consultancy
M/s. PCM Architects
M/s MAKR International Inc
M/s Wangwe Engineers Ltd

Weight : 5
Minimum qualifying score : 75 points
Technical scores

Section VI. Financial EvaluationAward RecommendationForms

Form IIC. Individual EvaluationsComparison

M/s Mecury
Consultancy

Consultants Names
10
Criteria
Experience

10
10

Methodology

Key staff

10

10

10
10

27

55
55
55

55

Training

Local input

10

24
30
30

27

55

M/s Wangwe
Engineers Ltd

10

10

10

7.5

8.5

10

10
10

10

8.5
7.5

8.5

10

30
23
30
55
55
55

NA

5
5
5

M/s MAKR
International
Inc

M/s. PCM
Architects

30
30
55
55
55

28
30
30
55
55
55

NA

5
5

5
5
5

30
30
55
55
55

22
24
22

23

51
51
51

51

NA

5
5

5
5
5

23

51
NA

5
5
5

4
4
4

4
4

Total

A, B, C, D and E = scores given by evaluators; AV = average score

Form IVA. Financial EvaluationBasic Data

4.1

4.2

4.3

Banks no-objection to
technical evaluation report
(Quality-Based, Qualifications,
Single-Source)
Public opening of financial
proposals
(a) Names and proposal
prices (mark Consultants
that attended public
opening)

Evaluation committee:
members names and titles (if

Date:Date:- 19/10/2011 Time:- 10a.m.

Consultants
name
M/s Mecury
Consultancy
M/s. PCM
Architects
M/s MAKR
International Inc
M/s Wangwe
Engineers Ltd

Proposal Price

Attendance

97,365,000/

yes

USD 146,814

No

106,240,000/

YES

TAS
287,764,400/
USD 72,000

yes

Section VI. Financial EvaluationAward RecommendationForms

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 : YES
cross as appropriate)
Other

4.5

Submission of final
technical/financial evaluation
report to the Bank (QualityBased, Qualifications, SingleSource)
QCBS
(a) Technical, financial and
final scores (QualityBased: technical scores
only

4.6

(b)

Award recommendation

Date 25th September 2011

Consultants
name

M/s Mecury
Consultancy
M/s. PCM
Architects
M/s MAKR
International
Inc
M/s Wangwe
Engineers
Ltd

Technical
scores

Financial
scores

Final scores

Section VI. Financial EvaluationAward RecommendationForms

Form IVB. AdjustmentsCurrency ConversionEvaluated Prices1

Proposals prices
Consultants
Names

Currency

Amounts

Adjustments/E
rrors

Evaluated
price(s)

(2)

(3) = (1) + (2)

(1)

Conversion to currency of evaluation

Exchange
rate(s)e to TZS

Proposals prices
(5) = (3)(4)

Financial scoresd
(6)

(4)
M/s Mecury
Consultancy

TZS

97,365,000

+10987

M/s. PCM
Architects

US$

146,814

-22,395

M/s MAKR
International Inc

TZS

106,240,000

0.0

TZS

287,764,400

-9,900

US$

72,000

0.0

M/s Wangwe
Engineers Ltd

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

TZS+UD$xrate=

Comments, if any (e.g., exchange rates); three foreign currencies maximum, plus local currency.
Arithmetical errors and omissions of items included in the technical proposals. Adjustments may be positive or negative.
As per RFP.
100 points to the lowest evaluated proposal; other scores to be determined in accordance with provisions of RFP.
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.

1 For Quality-Based, Qualifications, and Single-Source, fill out only up to column 3.

Section VI. Financial EvaluationAward RecommendationForms

Form IVC. QCBSCombined Technical/Financial EvaluationAward Recommendation

Technical Evaluation

Consultants names

Technical
scoresa
S(t)

Weighted scores
S(t) Tb

Technical rank

M/s Mecury
Consultancy
M/s. PCM Architects

M/s MAKR
International Inc
M/s Wangwe
Engineers Ltd

Award recommendation

To highest combined technical/financial score.

Consultants name: M/s

Financial
Evaluation
Financial scoresc
Weighted scores
S(f)
S(f) Fd

Combined Evaluation
Scores
S(t) T + S(f) F

Rank