Invitation to tender
Contract award notice
Questions and answers:
Question 1: On page 12 of the specification document for Lot 1 you identify 12 types of exercise, varying in format, target audience and duration. Clearly therefore they will cost different amounts to develop and deliver.
Annex 4 pg 30 identifies a single form to reflect costs for Lot1. Do you therefore require 12 individual costings using the form provided and based on the ‘types’ described on page 12 or just 1 based on an average of all types or something else I have not thought of?
Answer: Yes, you are required to provide 12 individual costings.
Question 2: In the tender specifications part 5. Subject of the Contract, 6. Description of Tasks and 9.Deliverables are quite similar. We are wondering where in our answer and proposal you would like us to describe our methodology and proposed structure in order to fulfill the expected deliverables?
Answer: You are permitted to present the methodology and proposed structure in whatever format you consider appropriate.
Question 3: Since the tender includes three different lots should our answer be structured as three completely separate ones if we choose to bid on all three lots?
Answer: Yes, please provide three separate bids for the lots.
Question 4: Can you confirm that all costs of attendees at training courses (Lot 3) ie travel, hotel and meals have to be borne by the contractor?
Answer: Yes, all the costs will be borne by the contractor and should be included in the offer provided. The costs related to the ECDC staff participation will be covered by ECDC.
Question 5: Could you please clarify how the Award Criteria ( Section 14,Page 24) will be judged particularly as there does not appear to be any prescribed format required in responding to the Tender?
Answer: There is no prescribed format. How the tenderer presents their offer in terms of format, methodology and content will be evaluated based on the three award criteria detailed in section C.14.
Question 6: Please confirm that there is no prescribed format/word count etc required for the response to this Tender
Answer: There is no prescribed format nor a minimum or maximum word count.
Question 7: Could you clarify how expenses for experts and participants should be included in the financial proposal ( Annex 4 Financial proposal, Page 30 ) ?
Answer: Please see the Questions & Answers section below. The expenses for experts and participants should be presented for each type of exercise broken down by work package and number of days.
Question 8: Could you give us more details on the type/ format/ participants and costs of previous simulation exercises commissioned by ECDC ?
Answer: Please see a brief summary of some of the simulation exercises conducted by ECDC below. The costs related to the exercises conducted vary according to location, number of participants, origin of the participants, duration of the exercise. The estimated value of the previous framework contract was €600,000.
The simulation exercises is a instrument which enables organisations, agencies, institutions to test the implementation of new procedures and the exploration of processes or in the challenge of approved procedures pertinence. It enables to test procedures and protocols, internal coordination of communications, activities as well coordination with external communication and response actions.
ECDC has participated in major exercises organized by the Commission as “New Watchman” and “Common Ground” in 2005. In 2006 and 2007 ECDC participated in pandemic preparedness national exercises organized by France and Germany.
In 2006, ECDC signed a three years framework contract with HPA for the development of simulation exercises on outbreak detection, investigation and response, for the Centre to develop its own exercises.
“Brown Lagoon” was the first internal simulation exercise that took place in June 2007. It was designed to provide ECDC with an opportunity to review and practice internal procedures and tools to deal with major public health events at the recently inaugurated Emergency Operation centre (EOC). Following the evaluation and lesson learnt, ECDC revised its public health event operational plan (PHEOP), further defining functions and tasks of ECDC staff.
“Green Field” was the second internal exercise that was carried out in June 2008 , exploring the application of the revised PHEOP during a crisis. Major improvements were observed from one exercise to another, especially in setting up internal communication systems, organisation of ICT and logistic and the use of equipments and tools.
“Red wing” was the first desktop exercise involving players from EU Member States. It took place in September 2007 and the script aimed at exploring contact tracing procedures within the EU, based on the Health Security Committee ‘s (HSC) guidance document. Recommendations from the evaluation were considered to a greater extend and changes to the HSC document were addressed.
In June 2008 ECDC took part in the “Aeolus” Commission organised simulation exercise, a large command-post exercise organized by the Commission and involving stakeholders from public health as well as law enforcement and justice sector. It was an opportunity to further test the PHEOP and internal procedures regarding reaction to emergencies of unknown origin. The improvement of setting facilities as well of the internal and external communication and coordinating of risk assessment during crisis among EU partners and Member States, was well recognised by observers and evaluators.
In November 2008, a desktop exercise aiming to test EU response to food born diseases (FWD) outbreaks took place at ECDC involving different Member States, the European network on FWD and other stakeholders as SANCO, EFSA and WHO regional office for Europe. It was an opportunity to identify the best communication flow and to improve coordination of information sharing among the different stakeholders.
ECDC is planning to carry out more simulation exercises in 2009 and to participate in exercises organised by the Commission and international organisations.
In the tender specifications under 6. Description of tasks – Work package 1 it is stated that Interim Report 1 shall be delivered no later than 1 month after the signature of the specific contract. However, under 8. Expected Timeframe it is stated that “Within 2 months after signature of the specific contract , delivery of Interim Report 1”. Could you please clarify these possible divergencies.
Thank you for your question as it indeed raises a discrepancy in the dates related to WP 1 of Lot 1, due to a typing error. For the purpose of this call for tenders it should be considered that for WP1 of Lot 1, the Interim Report 1 should be delivered no later than 1 month after the signature of the specific contract, as stated on page 14.
Since you haven’t specified a fixed amount of exercises to be conducted (per year), could you also clarify how the prices will be weighted in order to render a total price?
For each type of exercise a price should be presented and as part of the evaluation process the price of tender referred to in Section 14 will be based on the total of the 12 types of exercises.
Is it possible to get access to the manuscripts of the handbook that are mentioned mention for the development of the tender?
The handbook is still on editing process and will be available on the ECDC website in October 2010.
Can you provide detailed breakdowns for the target audience for the training?
It will be Public health experts within EU member states and EU Autonomous regions, Outermost regions, Overseas countries and territories as well as from EU candidate and potential candidate countries, countries covered by neighbouring policy and other countries worldwide.