The Social Inclusion and Community
Activation Programme
(SICAP)
WEEKLY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
FOR TENDERERS
Date:
Closing Date for this Week’s
Q&A:
Q&A covering period:
Questions numbering:
Thursday 6th November 2014
Tuesday 4th November 2014
Wednesday 29th October – Tuesday 4th
November 2014
54 – 134
Category 1: ITT / Tender clarification
Question #: 54
a) If North Cork is divided into 3 Areas 18-1, 18-2, 18-3, are Tenderers obliged to
submit a separate tender application for each ‘sub lot’ e.g. 18-1 and provide 3 hard
copies and 1 soft copy for this ‘sub lot’ and therefore if applying for all 3 areas of
North Cork would this require 9 hard copies and 3 soft copies?
b) Can Tenderers submit a tender for just one area or ‘sub lot’ in a Lot e.g. submit a
tender for just 18-2?
Answer #: 54
a) In the case of North Cork, each of the Lot Numbers 18-1, 18-2, and 18-3 all
constitute a separate Lot. Tenderers are required to submit a separate tender for
each Lot they wish to apply for. As per Section 2.13 of the ITT, tenders are required
to submit their tender in the following format:
 3 x hard copies by post/hand delivery in a sealed envelope, and
 1 x soft copy on a CDrom/memory key included with the envelope
Yes, in the case of North Cork, if a Tenderer is submitting a tender for the 3 Lots (18-1,
18-2,18-3) they would be required to submit 3 x hard copies and 1 x soft copy (as
detailed in the bullet points above) for each of the 3 Lot Numbers.
b) Yes, a Tenderer may decide to submit a tender for just one of the Lot Numbers in
North Cork.
Question #: 55
If a Tenderer is only allowed to be successful in 5 Lots does this mean that if a Tenderer
wins all 3 ‘sub lots’ in North Cork that is counted as 3 ‘wins’ or 1 ‘win’?
Answer #: 55
Please note that each individual Lot Number constitutes a separate Lot. The reference to
North Cork relates to the name of the LCDC. As per Section 2.25 of the ITT, the maximum
number of Lots that may be awarded to any one Tenderer is five. Thus if a Tenderer was
successful in each of the three Lot Numbers in North Cork (18-1, 18-2, 18-3) this would
constitute the award of three separate contracts.
Question #: 56
Is it correct to say that actions do not need to be outlined for 2016/17 at this juncture?
Answer #: 56
Yes, the Action Plan for 2015 under Award Criterion 1b relates to a 9 month period from
April to December 2015 and will set out how you plan to deliver SICAP in 2015.
Programme Implementers will be informed of the process to submit an annual Action Plan
for 2016 and 2017 at the relevant juncture in 2015.
Question #: 57
Are the majority of word document sections free form while obviously having to refer to
certain information requirements (headings etc.)?
Answer #: 57
Please refer to ‘Section 2.13 – Submission of Tenders’ and ‘Section 3 – Award Criteria’ in
the Invitation to Tender. Tenderers are required to answer questions in the tables provided in
Appendices 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.
Under Section 3, Tenderers must provide a response to each of the criteria. There are strict
limits on the lengths of the response for each criterion. Aside from this, the format of the
response is free-form.
2
Question #: 58
Is there a limit to appendices?
Answer #: 58
Yes. Tenderers are required to provide responses in a free response form to the Award
Criteria 3.1 and to complete Appendices 2 – 6. No further information in the form of
additional appendices should be included.
Please refer to Section 2.13 – Submission of Tenders to ensure that the tender follows the
overall format.
(Also categories: Finance related & Programme specific e.g. goals, target groups)
Question #: 59
a) Re ITT 2.15 Sufficiency of Tender (Page 16). The last paragraph states “While
Tenderers are requested to ensure they have included all of the information
requested as part of this Tender, excess documentation impedes the
evaluation process and should not be submitted. Tenderers should also
ensure they do not cross-reference information contained in the Tender to
information outside the Tender (such as information in other
documents/attachments or provide internet links) as this information may not
be taken into account.” Can you please clarify this point in relation to referencing
outside information sources, e.g. Census 2011, government reports, etc.
b) Re ITT 2.33 Currency and Payments (Page 21). Will there be an advance payment
system similar to LCDP?
c) Re ITT 2.34 Currency and Payments (Page 22). Who will carry out the formal
performance review on behalf of the LCDC – will it be County Council staff, Pobal or
other?
d) Re ITT Appendix 2 Programme Headline Targets for Lot (Page 38). Are some figures
overall and inclusive, e.g. does:
The target figure for Goal 2: No. of individuals (15 years upwards) in receipt of a
Goal 2 educational support include the Goal 2: No. of young people (aged 15-24)
in receipt of a SICAP, ESF and YEI Goal 2 educational support?
The target figure for Goal 3: No. of individuals (15 years upwards) in receipt of
Goal 3 employment supports include the Goal 3: No. of young people (aged 1524) in receipt of a SICAP, ESF and YEI Goal 3 employment support figure?
The target figure for Goal 3: No. of individuals (15 years upwards) progressing to
part-time or full-time employment up to 6 months after receiving a Goal 3
employment support include the Goal 3: No. of young people (aged 15-24)
progressing to part-time or full-time employment up to 6 months after receiving
a Goal 3 employment support figure?
Answer #: 59
a) The onus is on the prospective bidder to include relevant data and information
supporting their tender. However, to facilitate an efficient evaluation process,
publications, reports and/or websites included in tender submissions will be
considered ‘excess documentation’ and will not be evaluated by LCDC evaluation
teams. Tenderers should reference their sources of the data. However, evaluation
teams will not be required to read the source materials that are referenced.
3
b) The payment system for SICAP has not been confirmed at this stage. Further detail
of the SICAP schedule of payments will be outlined in the Programme Guidelines,
which will be issued to successful Tenderers prior to the commencement of the
programme in April 2015.
c) As Contracting Authorities, it is the responsibility of LCDCs to monitor each SICAP
contract. LCDCs will make all decisions regarding performance reviews.
d) Yes, a number of Programme Headline Targets represent overall numbers of
beneficiaries and include other targets. For example:
The overall target figure for Goal 2: Number of individuals in receipt a Goal 2
educational support includes the beneficiary targets for Goal 2: No. of young people
(aged 15-24) in receipt of a SICAP, ESF and YEI Goal 2 educational support.
The overall target figure for Goal 3: No. of individuals (15 years upwards) in receipt of
Goal 3 employment supports also includes the beneficiary targets for Goal 3: No. of
young people (aged 15-24) in receipt of a SICAP, ESF and YEI Goal 3 employment
support figure.
The overall target figure for Goal 3: No. of individuals (15 years upwards) progressing
to part-time or full-time employment up to 6 months after receiving a Goal 3
employment support also includes the beneficiary targets for Goal 3: No. of young
people (aged 15-24) progressing to part-time or full-time employment up to 6 months
after receiving a Goal 3 employment support.
Question #: 60
Confirm/explain how a Programme Implementer tender can provide for economies of scale if
tendering for more than one sub-lot in any of the original lots in the PQQ.
Answer #: 60
As this is a competitive process, it is not the responsibility of the Contracting Authority,
DECLG or Pobal to define how a Programme Implementer can provide for economies of
scale if tendering for more than one lot. The onus is on Tenderers to define and
demonstrates this, relative to their particular situation.
Question #: 61
Define “bona fide” tender?
Answer #: 61
The reference to ‘bona fide’ Tender on page 34 of the ITT relates to a tender that is
made/done in good faith; without deception or fraud.
Question #: 62
Action Plan Budget Template – is it envisaged as part of the Administration Cost that a
Tenderer will include or is it permissible to charge a Management Fee to implement SICAP?
Answer #: 62
The Administration Cost sheet relates to actual salary costs (indirect staff) and overhead
costs that are charged SICAP. There is no ‘management fee’ heading under the
Administration Cost sheet. Management costs should therefore be included as named
salary costs in the Administration Cost sheet.
4
Question #: 63
Programme Specific Conditions 2.6 - The clause is quite clear and is re-enforced in 14.1 in
relation to the obligation of the employer. Please advise on the situation where:
 A company is not successful is securing the SICAP tender - how will the cost of
redundancy be financed?
 Where a company is successful in securing the SICAP Tender and if TUPE comes
into play as a result of the closure of one company (where 2 companies are bidding
in the one area) how will the cost of redundancy be financed? There is a very strong
likelihood that there will then be too many posts in the Company who wins the
tender?
 Where a company is successful in securing the SICAP tender and where TUPE
applies the tender proposes 2 extra staff are to be recruited @ 35k (example only)
each and on winning the tender 2 staff are TUPE'd across with salaries of 45/50k
(example only) - where does the difference come from?
 A company is successful and the Contract ends after 33 months (or earlier) how will
the cost of redundancy be financed?
Answer #: 63
The questions raised here are not an issue related to the SICAP tendering process and thus
we are not in a position to respond. Please read section 3.32 Transfer of Undertakings in
the ITT. TUPE is a matter for Tenderers to be aware of and to seek their own advice on.
Regarding your last point, the cost of any redundancies will be borne by the employer as
this is a public procurement competition.
Question #: 64
With reference to section 2.13 of the ITT what is meant by ‘free response form’ Appendix 2,
3, 6?
Answer #: 64
As per Section 2.13 (Submission of Tenders), the ‘free response form’ relates to the Award
Criteria (3.1). The reference to Appendix 2, 3 and 6 is on a separate line and is unrelated to
the free response form.
In Section 3.2 (Detailed Definition of the Award Criteria), Tenderers are required to provide a
response to each of the criterion. The free response form refers to the fact that there is no
specific template to complete in providing a response. Tenderers should set out a response
in their preferred format whilst ensuring that they comply with the maximum permitted
response length for each criterion.
The reference to Appendix 2, 3 and 6 is on a separate line and relates to the requirement to
submit these documents as part of the overall tender submission. The template in each of
these Appendices relate to: Programme Headline Targets for Lots (Appendix 2), Staffing
Resources Schedule (Appendix 3) and the SICAP Action Plan Budget (Appendix 6)
Question #: 65
Paragraph 2.29 of the I.T.T. states that “The successful Tenderer (including any entity that
provides the services) must register with the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner”.
(a)
Does this mean that every tenderer must have registered prior to submission and
must include evidence of same or does the obligation to register only take effect at
commencement of SICAP on 1st April 2015?
(b)
Does any entity that provides the service include sub-contracted entities within the
definition of sub-contractors under SICAP?
Answer #: 65
(a) Section 2.29 of the ITT document refers to the successful Tenderer, being required to
5
register with the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner, once Tenderers are
informed of the outcome of their tender.
(b) As per Section 2.29 of the ITT, all processing of personal data by a third party or a
sub-contractor is permitted only where there exists a written agreement between the
Prime Contractor and the third party/sub-contractor which reflects, at a minimum, the
data protection requirements set out in Section 2.29.
Question #: 66
Is there any further hidden sub-division of the marks available within each of the award
criteria and if so could you make those known to tenderers in order to assist in division of
resources for tender preparation?
For example, Section 2a Methodology for Delivery of Services and Client Engagement –
What is the split of the 15% between Delivery of Services and Client Engagement?
Similarly, with regard to the 4 bullet points on page 30 of the I.T.T. (Performance
Management) what is the split of the 150 marks between each point?
Answer #: 66
The award criteria and weightings are set out in the ITT document, no additional information
will be provided to Tenderers in relation to this.
Question #: 67
Do all the priority indicators need to be included in the Action Plan, or can the Action Plan
just contain the highlighted headline indicators plus any other priority and general indicators
deemed relevant to the specific action?
Answer #: 67
Yes, the second approach you outline is acceptable. The Action Plan must meet the
programme headline targets for your Lot – using the related indicators.
Question #: 68
In Question 37 'further information will be issued prior to April 2015'. In advance of further
information being issued can it be confirmed that the Data Protection Commissioner is aware
and has approved the collection of PPSN numbers for individuals receiving goal 3 supports?
We currently do not know why the numbers are required, who will need them and what they
are used for. Therefore it is virtually impossible to develop a robust system which will also
inspire confidence and support from the individual receiving the support.
Answer #: 68
Programme Implementers need to ensure they provide robust end-to-end data management
systems and the onus is on them to put an effect data protection system in place. As stated
in the ITT 2.29 Data Protection, further information and requirements relating to the Data
Protection Policy for SICAP will be outlined in the Programme Guidelines to be issued prior
to the commencement of the programme in April 2015.
Question #: 69
How was the allocation of indicative budgets for sub lots determined where the footprints of
the sub-lots are different from the present i.e. LCDP delivery footprints. Was any weighting
given to previous ring-fenced budgets e.g. in Gaeltacht areas.
Answer #: 69
It should be noted that SICAP is a new programme and direct comparisons with LCDP
allocations is not appropriate in many cases. Where differences in boundaries between
specific Lot areas and LDC boundaries exist, a best fit (where possible) for the Lot was
taken using 2014 budgets, while also taking into account the total funding made available at
a county level. Weighting was given to Gaeltacht budgets and these budgets were included
6
in 2015 Lot budgets where appropriate.
Question #: 70
Do all the target outcomes listed under each Goal/objective have to be included in the Action
Plan? Or can we just include those which are relevant to our planned actions?
Answer #: 70
The 2015 Action Plan should only include SICAP outcomes that are relevant to proposed
actions. Please note, there is a maximum limit of 12 actions.
Question #: 71
I refer to your answer to question # 4. Paragraph 2.27 only mentions the “right during the
tender validity period to award the contract to the next highest scoring tenderer on the basis
of the terms advertised without re-opening the competition”. The paragraph does not
address my question # 4 which asks “what happens if the next highest scoring tenderer no
longer exists?” Could you please clarify the procedure if this scenario was to occur?
Answer #: 71
The question above does not relate specifically to the Invitation to Tender requirements and
instructions.
Question #: 72
As the Area Profile section is limited to 8 pages can we, for example, include maps and
tables in an appendix?
Answer #: 72
No, the maximum length permitted for Area Profiles is eight pages. Additional information
and data may not be included in an appendix.
7
Category 2: Finance related
Question #: 73
Can rent/venue costs/utilities for outreach services and actions be considered as an action
support cost?
Answer #: 73
If the above costs are being incurred directly by the tenderer themselves (i.e. if the tenderer
is referring to its own outreach premises), then these costs are categorised as administration
costs and are not action costs.
If the Tenderer is required to hire additional, external venues (i.e. premises not currently
owned by themselves) for outreach, these may be categorised as action costs.
Question #: 74
Re: p.29 – Actions under Goal 3 will have ESF co-financing – what are the eligibility
requirements and are they less or more than SICAP?
Answer #: 74
As noted in page 29 of the SICAP Specifications and Requirements for 2015, further
guidelines on ESF funding will be provided at a later date.
Question #: 75
Re: Section 2.6 of SICAP Draft Funding Agreement - Programme Specific Conditions
Can a Programme Implementer from the budget provide for and build up revenue reserves
to provide for future legal liabilities in relation to HR i.e. redundancy etc?
Answer #: 75
No, tenders must only include costs that are used solely for the implementation of SICAP
Goals and Objectives. Therefore, SICAP budgets may not be used to build up revenue
reserves to provide for future costs in relation to HR or redundancy. Please note that the
agreement is in draft form.
Question #: 76
What is the role of the Local Authority in issuing payments (pg 10;pg 23)?
Answer #: 76
As noted in page 10 of the ITT document, the relevant Local Authority will (inter alia) hold the
SICAP account and issue payments to Programme Implementers, subject to the approval of
payments by the LCDC. The Local Authority will also have a role in relation to review and
enforcement of the obligations of the Programme Implementer.
Question #: 77
What schedule of payments is to be expected from the Local Authority to the successful
tenderer?
Answer #: 77
The payment system for SICAP has not been confirmed at this stage. Further detail of the
SICAP schedule of payments will be outlined in the Programme Guidelines, which will be
issued to successful Tenderers prior to the commencement of the programme in April 2015.
Question #: 78
Will the Local Authority make payments to the successful tenderer in advance of the
successful tenderer paying its suppliers (eg rental and overheads) directly?
Answer #: 78
The payment system for SICAP has not been confirmed at this stage. Further detail of the
SICAP schedule of payments will be outlined in the Programme Guidelines, which will be
8
issued to successful Tenderers prior to the commencement of the programme in April 2015.
Question #: 79
We understand that the figures to go on the tender are to be exclusive of VAT, which is an
EU requirement. Please clarify then how this will work on completing the sheets. So for
those who cannot claim back VAT and need to put in the amount less VAT if the total tender
is for X less VAT and it amounts to the full allocation, if awarded how is this worked. Or do
groups provide the cost less vat and therefore the amount will be below the amount
allocated i.e. Allocation for Lot for 9 months less VAT cost
Answer #: 79
There have been a number of questions on VAT arrangements for SICAP. We are providing
the following response to all VAT related questions:
First: We confirm that all Tender submissions must be exclusive of VAT – as per the
guidance in the Action Plan Budget Template.
Second: The funding allocations for each Lot are exclusive of VAT. These allocations are
available on the Pobal website.
Third: VAT will be included by programme implementers when submitting returns.
Other VAT related questions raised are not relevant to the SICAP procurement process and
will not be answered at this time. We cannot comment on the VAT situation of any particular
organisation.
Question #: 80
Is there a requirement to ring-fence a percentage of the SICAP budget for volunteering?
Answer #: 80
See response to Question 45, which was included in the Week 2 Q&As for Tenderers, that
covered the period 22nd – 28th Oct.
Question #: 81
Can you please give the rationale for increasing the number of posts to be included under
Administration, at the same time as capping the admin budget at 25%? This will have a
particularly significant impact on smaller budgets, and could make an organisation’s position
untenable.
Answer #: 81
The administration budget has been capped at 25% of the Total Budget Cost to ensure that
the majority of funding under SICAP is focused on direct ‘frontline’ actions.
The ITT makes no reference to an increase in the number of posts to be included under
Administration. Staffing costs can be differentiated by direct salary costs and indirect salary
costs. As a general rule, the indirect salary costs included relate to staff members who are
involved in the management and financial/administration of the programme e.g. CEO/
Manager of the Company, Financial Controller and finance/administrative support. Whereas,
direct salary costs relate to any staff member who has a direct role in the implementation of
a particular action.
Please note, a staff member cannot be included as an Indirect Salary and also included in
Direct Salary costs (and vice versa) for the same post. However, if an individual is working
on a part time basis and has two separate posts each with its own separate job description,
they can be included under Indirect Salary costs and Direct Salary costs.
9
Category 3: Staffing
(Also category: Consortia/sub-contracting)
Question #: 82
Does a Partner organisation have to be shown on the staffing cost sheet?
Answer #: 82
The Staffing Cost in the Budget Template requires Tenderers to enter all staff who are
required to deliver SICAP for 2015, this includes staff members from partner candidates.
Question #: 83
Can you advise how someone can work on administration and also on actions in SICAP e.g.
management cost in administration and also service delivery cost in actions – apportioned to
time spent on each which is currently acceptable under L&CDP?
Answer #: 83
A staff member cannot be included as an Indirect Salary and also included under Direct
Salary Costs (and vice-versa) for the same post. If an individual is working on a part-time
basis and has two separate posts each with its own separate job description, they can be
included under Indirect Salary Costs and Direct Salary Costs.
Question #: 84
Do we need to include staffing details in Appendix 3 – Staffing Resources Schedule and
staffing sheet if they are being funded as an action?
Answer #: 84
Yes, the details of all staff which your organisation will use to deliver SICAP for 2015 have to
be provided in Appendix 3.
Question #: 85
Under Award Criteria 4a. how do we reflect expertise being provided to SICAP by staff
members who have a direct supportive input into the work of SICAP but who will not be
funded through SICAP? Do we detail these individuals under section 4a. and attach CVs
without including any associated cost? These resources are of considerable benefit to the
SICAP delivery and as such should be included somewhere in the tender submission.
Answer #: 85
Award Criteria 4a requests that the names of staff members who will be involved in
delivering SICAP i.e. whose salaries will be funded/part-funded from the programme, be
detailed along with additional information. Evaluation of tenders under 4a will only take into
account staff whose salaries will be funded/part-funded from the programme.
Question #: 86
a) As a follow on to Q11, we want to tender for two lots but will do so on the basis that
we will only have the staff resources to deliver one lot. Therefore, can you confirm
that it is in order to include the same staff details in both lot applications?
b) If a tenderer does not at this time have all the specific skill requirements within its
current staff, can it indicate that such staff will be recruited if the tender is awarded to
them?
Answer #: 86
a) Following on from Question 11, if the tenderer has applied for multiple Lots but only
wants to be considered for the award of one contract, then the same staff may be
replicated across each separate Lot tender submission.
If the tenderer has applied for multiple Lots and wishes to be considered for the
award of multiple contracts, then the tenderer needs to ensure that their tender
10
submission across the Lots applied for demonstrates the ability to deliver all
contracts. Therefore, in this instance, it would not be appropriate to replicate the
same staff across the lots unless it is demonstrated that the sum of their time
allocation does not exceed 1 FTE.
b) The Contracting Authority needs to assess at this time the quality of the personnel
being proposed for each tender bid. In practical terms, this means that tenderers
must identify any gaps in their current staff resources and to source potential
candidates who will be proposed in their tender submission.
It is not a requirement that all the personnel proposed are current staff members and
Tenderers are not required to engage in a recruitment process with potential
candidates. However, Tenderers are expected to identify and nominate specific
people to deliver SICAP services and to include their CVs in their tender applications.
N.B. The above answer supersedes Questions 30(b) and 39 in the Week 2 Q&A
for Tenderers.
Question #: 87
Further to the response to Q 11 in Week 1, This seems to imply that Lot tenders are not
going to be assessed separately and independently. Surely under this criterion the
only assessment criteria used should be the extent to which the named staff have the skills
and capacity to deliver the Actions in their SICAP submission for that Lot? The reality is
that if any qualifying applicant wins a number of Lots, that applicant will have to then
consider the resources available to them and add to them if necessary. If they win one lot
out of for example two, then their resources will be used in that Lot, whichever one of the two
it is.
Answer #: 87
(a) If the tenderer has applied for multiple Lots but only wants to be considered for the
award of one contract, then the same staff may be replicated across each separate
Lot tender submission.
(b) If the tenderer has applied for multiple Lots and wishes to be considered for the
award of multiple contracts, then the tenderer needs to ensure that their tender
submission across the Lots applied for demonstrates the ability to deliver all
contracts. Therefore, in this instance, it would not be appropriate to replicate the
same staff across the lots unless it is demonstrated that the sum of their time
allocation does not exceed 1 FTE.
Question #: 88
We note that in Section 4.2 of the Stage One Questionnaire (Human Resources), potential
tenders were requested to addressed the human resources available and for which marks
were allocated as part of the scoring matrix. However, we note that a similar question has
now been asked in the Tender Stage: Appendix 3 – Staffing Resources Schedule.
It is our understanding of the PPG that you cannot ask a capacity question at Award Stage
(this is covered in both the guidelines and in Case Law), and this appears to be the case in
respect of Appendix 3 and Criterion 4 of the stage two tender documentation. Furthermore, it
is our understanding that you certainly cannot use the same criteria in both qualification and
award stages of a public procurement tendering process. This also seems to be the case
under the process currently being put forward by Pobal and the Department.
We believe that you have to withdraw this question from the stage two process and
reallocate the non-cost scoring. Please advise how you propose to proceed and comply with
11
the Guidelines and established case law.
Answer #: 88
Pobal is fully cognisant of the public procurement rules (as informed by the case-law)
concerning selection and award criteria and has applied these rules in the formulation of the
two criteria referred to your query.
During Stage 1 selection, Criterion 4.2 Human Resources assessed the numbers of
personnel available to the candidate under certain categories. Indeed, that criterion further
stated that, “… at this stage Candidates are being asked to only provide information on
current staff resources and not to propose specific personnel for the delivery of SICAP. This
information will be requested at Stage 2 when tenderers can make an informed decision
based on the programme specifications and the availability of appropriate personnel.”
In contrast, Award Criterion 4a, Staffing Resources (to which Appendix 3 of the ITT
Document relates) will assess the technical merit and resourcing of the proposed personnel
for the delivery SICAP for 2015 (9 months).
12
Category 4: Programme specific e.g. goals, target groups, reporting
Question #: 89
Can the target group, ‘people living in disadvantaged communities’, be interpreted
as communities of interest as well as geographic areas and if so include groups not listed as
target groups at present e.g. LGBT, Homeless etc.?
Answer #: 89
SICAP has been designed to ensure that there is sufficient flexibility to target elements of the
programme to particular target groups and issues depending on local contexts and priorities.
Services to other designated disadvantaged groups living in disadvantaged communities
may be delivered depending on local context and priorities. Tenderers should indicate the
programme Goal and programme objective to be supported by each action.
Question #: 90
a) Re Specifications document G2.3.2 (Page 16). Is this sentence complete?
b) Re Specifications document
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
G2.3.4 (Page 16). No. of children in receipt of a Goal 2 educational or
developmental support (QN). - No. of children and young people who
receive support through SICAP and who were identified as at risk of early
school leaving, who remain in school up to Junior Cert Level/Leaving Cert
Level.
Framework (Page 27) Progression of Community Groups
Personal Action Plan (Page 28) Progression of individuals
Monitoring and evaluation (Page 29)
Will IRIS be fit to fulfil the function of tracking caseload progression for SICAP?
c) Re Specifications document (Page 23). The document states “N.B. The targets
above take into account the number of individuals already registered with LCDP who
will continue to receive one-to-one supports under SICAP.” How has this been done
– can you please elaborate?
d) Re Specifications document(Page 29). Under Additional requirements it
states…“Under Goal 3, SICAP Implementers may allocate grants to people
seeking to start their own business and to support the development and
enhancement of social enterprises. However, limits to the proportion of grant
funding which can be allocated will be set and these may have to be agreed in
conjunction with the LCDC.” Will this be a general overall limit or will it be applied
to individual cases?
e) Re Specifications document (Pages 25-26). Must the Code of Practice & Framework
be developed to submit with the tender application or is it envisaged that the code will
be developed prior to commencement of SICAP delivery.
Answer #: 90
a) The objective should read: ‘Greater levels of engagement with children in educational
and development work in order to support them in education and development.’
b) IRIS will be subject to refinements based on the specification and requirements of the
new programme. Further information will be outlined in the Programme Guidelines,
13
which will be issued prior to the commencement of the programme in April 2015.
Please note, a certain proportion of the budget given to each Programme
Implementer must be set aside for monitoring activities, which is in addition to the
monitoring carried out on IRIS. The intention is that this will provide a partial
contribution to follow-up/track participants, meet EU reporting requirements and
develop complementary tools to demonstrate the qualitative outcomes etc.
c) It is expected that people currently in receipt of supports and services under LCDP
will be signposted to the SICAP Implementer’s services.
d) An overall limit will be applied across the programme for local grant allocations to
social enterprises. Further information will be outlined in the Programme Guidelines,
which will be issued prior to the commencement of the programme in April 2015.
e) Please refer to Criterion 2: Methodology for the Delivery of Services and Client
Engagement. Tenderers are expected to develop a Code of Practice and Framework
for their tender application. A synopsis of all relevant codes of practice must be
included in tender submissions.
Question #: 91
a) Under Goal 3 how is the figure for self employment reached as our average for the
years 2012 & 2013 was a lot less that the current target to be achieved in nine
months?
b) Under Goal 3 does the target figure for the number of individuals (15 years and
upwards) progressing to self employment include the figure given for the number of
young people (aged 15-24) progressing into self employment?
c) Under Goal 3 does the target figure for the number of individuals (15 years and
upwards) progressing to PT /FT employment include the figure given for the number
of young people (aged 15-24) progressing into PT/FT employment?
d) In the primary indicators for Goal 3 what does the ‘number of individuals /young
people progressing to self employment 6 months after receiving a Goal 3
employment support mean?
e) Likewise, what does the ‘number of individuals /young people progressing to PT/FT
employment 6 months after receiving a Goal 3 employment support ?
Does a ‘Personal Action Plan’ count as an employment support where somebody (on
1-2-1 referral basis) has received their 2 or more interventions?
Answer #: 91
a) SICAP is a new programme and the national headline targets have been set by
DECLG. In addition, EU targets have been incorporated into the national targets. The
headline targets for each Lot have been calculated by disaggregating the national
headline targets to the contract Lot areas within LCDCs. The targets reflect the 9month implementation timeframe for 2015.
f)
Please note that the Lot Headline Targets document may be amended to reflect any
changes to the headline targets. Pobal will notify Tenderers by email if new headline
targets have been set by Friday 7th November.
b) Yes, under Goal 3, the Programme Headline Target for the number of individuals
14
(15 years upwards) progressing to self employment includes the beneficiary targets
for the number of young people (aged 15-24) progressing into self employment.
c) Yes, under Goal 3, the Programme Headline Target the number of individuals
(15 years upwards) progressing to part-time or full-time employment also includes
the beneficiary target for the number of young people (aged 15-24) progressing to
part-time or full-time employment.
d) The number of individuals or young people progressing to self-employment up to 6
months after receiving their last Goal 3 support refers to the number of individuals or
young people who become self-employed within six months of:
i.
ii.
receiving one-to-one supports by a SICAP Programme Implementer
participating in a SICAP funded activity (e.g. training course) relating to selfemployment.
e) The number of individuals or young people progressing to part-time or full-time
employment up to 6 months after receiving their last Goal 3 support refers to the
number of individuals or young people who enter part-time or full-time employment
within six months of:
iii.
iv.
f)
receiving one-to-one support by a SICAP Programme Implementer
participating in a SICAP funded activity (e.g. training course) relating to
education or employment.
Personal action plans are tools for SICAP Programme Implementers to assess
clients’ needs and to monitor their progress following interventions. As stated in the
Programme Specifications document, the registration meeting is not counted as an
intervention. Likewise, the development of a personal action plan may not be
categorised as an employment support.
Question #: 92
Please explain Re: 1.6 of the ITT, the Departments right to provide/create separate
programme funding for target groups.
Answer #: 92
In addition to SICAP, DECLG has the right to create a separate programme or funding
stream, which is distinct from SICAP, for any one or more of the SICAP target groups.
Question #: 93
Can you give more guidelines on the type of courses that would be classified as Goal 2
Education courses and those that would be classified as Goal 3 Training courses?
Answer #: 93
The classification of an education / training course funded by SICAP will depend on the
needs of the individual and the intended outcome of that intervention.
For instance, Goal 2 actions are not designed to lead to employment in the short-term.
Courses funded by Goal 2 prioritise the educational needs of clients (rather than
employment needs) due to their level of educational attainment. Goal 2 education courses
will range from basic literacy or numeracy skills to courses preparing people for further
education and training. They may also provide pre-development supports for people not yet
ready to participate in a validated training course. (Goal 2 actions will also include initiatives
targeting children and young people in schools and also young people at risk of early school
leaving.)
15
Goal 3 education and training courses are primarily designed to support people directly into
employment or to move them to better quality employment. Goal 3 actions will include
education courses and services that support people to find employment through job
preparation and/or to development specific skills required in the labour market. Goal 3
courses will also include employment initiatives including apprenticeships, traineeships, work
placements.
Please refer to pages 12 and 18 of the SICAP Specifications and Requirements for 2015 for
more information.
Question #: 94
I refer to your answer to question # 23. Can you provide any indication of what the EU
reporting requirements will consist of? In deciding on the level of budget to be set aside for
monitoring we need to be able to quantify the amount of work to be done, and the frequency
of same etc.
Answer #: 94
EU reporting requirements have not been confirmed yet. However, it is envisaged that
Programme Implementers will be required to report on a bi-annual basis. Additional reports
may also be required at the end of scheduled funding timeframes and six months to one
year after the end of funding timeframes.
The content of reports will broadly cover outputs and outcomes relating to Goal 2 and Goal 3
supports targeting 15-24 year olds. The reports are also likely to request outputs relating to
progression to employment or education at the end of funded interventions and six months
and/or one year following interventions. Data from beneficiary profiles including age, gender,
address, target group (e.g. person with a disability, migrant), level of educational attainment
and employment status are also likely to be requested.
Information regarding individuals, interventions, outputs and outcomes to be included in the
reports must be recorded using the programme’s online database system, IRIS.
Question #: 95
Your answer to question # 20 indicates that “services to other designated disadvantaged
groups.....outside the primary target groups listed, may be supported where prioritised and
requested by the LCDC”. Your answer to question 26 appears to allow the provision of
services to such groups without any reference to the LCDC and your answer to question 28
appears to support answer 20.
In preparing our tender can we include services/actions to support other target groups
outside of the primary target groups listed or does this have to wait until the tender has been
awarded and subsequent discussions with the LCDC?
Answer #: 95
Tenders may include services / actions to support designated target groups that constitute
the listed SICAP primary target groups. Therefore, under Question 26, tenderers are not
required to consult with LCDCs regarding the provision of pre-school childcare services once
these services meet the needs of ‘children and families living in disadvantaged areas’ – a
SICAP target group.
Services to other designated target groups (that are not SICAP target groups), may only be
supported where prioritised and requested by the LCDC. Tenderers may include services /
action to other target groups in their action plans. However, proposed activities targeting
other designated target groups may not be approved until the formal performance review
after nine months or until LCDCs review and modify SICAP actions based upon the priorities
set out in Local Economic and Community Plans.
16
Question #: 96
Under Goal 2 & 3 we have specific targets for young people aged 15-24 in receipt of SICAP,
ESF & YEI support, have we a specific ESF/YEI budget or are is a % of SICAP ring fenced
for this particular target?
Answer #: 96
The ESF/YEI budget has been included in the SICAP budget for each Lot.
Question #: 97
In light of us having to target 15-24 year olds will there be a formal referral structure with the
Department of Education in order to work with young people referred to SICAP?
Answer #: 97
As noted in the SICAP: Specifications and Requirements for 2015, individuals can approach
SICAP Programme Implementers individually or may be referred by another statutory or
non-statutory agency/organisation. It is not envisaged there will a national protocol with the
Department of Education and Skills in relation to referrals to SICAP. Successful Tenderers
would be expected to develop their own local linkages with statutory and non-statutory
agencies/ organisations in relation to referring individuals to SICAP.
Question #: 98
Where there is only one lot in a county and a restriction regarding sub-contracting to a
maximum of 15% is there a recommendation regarding the availability of access to SICAP
services and equality of access to the service (i.e.: do outreach offices have to open Monday
to Friday 9am -5pm).
Answer #: 98
The same requirements apply to the availability and accessibility of SICAP services as
outlined in the Programme Specifications and Requirements (p.23) to all Lots. In the case of
outreach offices, access to services should be provided according to need (e.g. if there is a
demand for evening time services) and this can be decided on a case-by-case basis.
Question #: 99
In relation to Section 2b Validated Programmes of Learning/ Industry Certified Training, what
is meant by the provision of evidence of current validated/ certified programmes? Do you
want evidence from the certifying bodies or evidence that we have delivered these
programmes?
Answer #: 99
In the ITT award criteria 2b we have stated that for in-house provision, tenderers must
provide evidence of current validated /industry certified programmes, or validation which you
have applied for, and give details of these programmes/the validation application. We are
looking for evidence from the certifying bodies here.
Question #: 100
Re: SICAP: Specifications & Requirements, P 27.
Support and Resource participating in Public Participation Networks (PPNs).



Does the programme envisage direct support and resources to be provided to
Municipal PPNs?
Where Municipal PPNs cross Lot boundaries or borders with differing Programme
Implementers, how do those Programme Implementers ensure that there is
uniformity in their support, and that there is no double funding or cross funding in that
support?
Please confirm that the islands off the Donegal Coast are part of the Lot 2 Gaeltacht?
17
Answer #: 100
It is not envisaged in the Programme Specifications and Requirements document that
resources be directly provided to PPNs but rather support be given to local community
groups/individuals to participate in PPNs and that PPNs (and other local fora) are more
engaged and aware of social inclusion and equality issues in their area. Programme
Implementers will not be providing funding to PPNs so the double/cross funding scenario
should not arise.
Donegal Lot 2 is the closest possible Electoral Division and/or Small Area match to the
Gaeltacht region plus all Donegal islands.
Question #: 101
Can you please specify what is meant by the term ‘life chances’? What is considered a life
chance?
Answer #: 101
The term ‘life chances’ (Programme Specifications and Requirements p.4) is a general term
signifying opportunities each individual has to improve his or her quality of life.
Question #: 102
Are LCDCs aware that they can request to prioritise other designated disadvantaged groups
and thematic issues than those prioritised in the document? If so, can you outline the
process LCDCs have to engage in to do so?
Answer #: 102
As stated in the Programme Specifications and Requirements, services to other designated
disadvantaged groups or thematic issues outside the areas identified may also be supported
where prioritised and requested by the Local Community Development Committee (p.6).
LCDCs are aware of this. The LCDC may review and modify actions based upon the
priorities set out in the Local Economic and Community Plan following the formal
performance review after nine (9) months.
Question #: 103
In the context of Social Inclusion, can you please define the term ‘Traveller Economy’? Is
this a special economy and if so how is this different to other economies such as the
‘Mainstream’ or the ‘Informal’ Economy?
Answer #: 103
The term is commonly used in reports relating to Travellers e.g. see Third Systems
Approaches (A Pavee Point Publication) “Dismantling the Traveller Economy?: A Case
Study of the impact of increasing regulation of the Traveller economy: the implications of the
EU Directive on the ‘End of Life Vehicles’ (2003), or National Traveller Women’s Forum,
“Traveller Women and Employment”.
Question #: 104
Outcome G1.3.1 is ‘greater representation and participation in decision-making structures…’.
Can you please outline or give examples existing decision-making structures at national,
regional and local level that you deem relevant for participation of community groups?
Answer #: 104
This is in the Programme Specifications and Requirements document (p.10) as an outcome.
The decision making structures depend on the Goal, the groups/individuals being assisted,
the nature of assistance etc. therefore we cannot provide examples on this as these
variables will impact on the types of structures.
Question #: 105
Do the above structures have the capacity to accommodate and effectively manage greater
18
representation and participation from a diverse body of community groups (national target is
800)?
Answer #: 105
We cannot comment on the capacity of the structures for the reasons outlined in the
response to above.
Question #: 106
Objective G1.4 uses an indicator that looks at number of groups/public services supported to
put anti-discrimination and equality measures in place.
Are community groups and public services tasked to work with Implementers to put antidiscrimination and equality measures in place?
Will Implementers be tasked to assess whether/to what extent community groups and public
services have such measures in place?
Answer #: 106
This is in the Programme Specifications and Requirements document (p.11) as an indicator.
We consider this indicator to be self-explanatory. The word ‘tasked’ has not been used. Note
that one of the horizontal themes of the programme is ‘Promoting an equality framework with
a particular focus on gender equality and anti-discrimination practices’.
Question #: 107
Objective 2.2. uses ‘frequency of follow-up supports’ as an indicator. Does this mean that the
more follow-up support is required and provided the more effective and beneficial the
intervention is?
Answer #: 107
This is in the Programme Specifications and Requirements document (p.15) “Frequency of
follow-up supports to SICAP clients to encourage them to remain in LLL course e.g. phone
calls, 1-to-1 meetings, mentoring with individuals (QN)”. We consider this indicator to be selfexplanatory.
Question #: 108
Outcome G3.3.1 has ‘Amount of funding given by SICAP Implementer to assist social
enterprises’ as an indicator. Does this suggest that higher financial support equals better
outcomes?
Answer #: 108
This is in the Programme Specifications and Requirements document (p.20) “Amount of
funding given by SICAP Implementer to assist social enterprises (QN)”. We consider this
indicator to be self-explanatory and there is a cap on this.
Question #: 109
Outcome G3.4.1 is an ‘Increased and improved joint planning and delivery between service
providers and statutory agencies which reduces duplication of employment service provision
and leads to better identification of gaps in mainstream services’.
Does this mean that service providers and statutory agencies are mandated to work with
Implementers if the scope for improvement was identified by the Implementer?
And how exactly is duplication defined?
Answer #: 109
This is in the Programme Specifications and Requirements document (p.21). Note that the
term ‘mandated’ has not been used in this outcome. Duplication should be read as per its
general definition and is intended to mean duplication by service providers already in
existence.
19
Question #: 110
Objective G3.4 refers to ‘creating a more joined up employment eco-system locally’. Can you
please clarify what an employment eco-system consists of? What are its defining
parameters?
Answer #: 110
This term is in the Programme Specifications and Requirements document (p.21) as an
indicator. Eco-system is a term commonly used in relation to employment, learning,
entrepreneurship etc., in addition to its common definition relating to the natural
environment. It can be read in this context as a synonym for network.
Question #: 111
Implementers are asked to build ‘the capacity of local institutions and agencies to
understand and address local communities’ concerns and needs’.
Can you clarify what is meant by local institutions and agencies, provide examples of such
and whether these bodies will be informed that Implementers are expected to support them
in understanding and addressing local communities’ concerns and needs?
Answer #: 111
This is outlined in the Programme Specifications and Requirements as an intervention type
under Goal 1 (p.27). It is assumed that prospective applicants in this process will understand
what is meant by local institutions and agencies. They may refer to Criterion 3: Networking
Structures with Key Stakeholders for examples of types of organisations to be considered.
Criterion 1a Area Profile requires a description of the key co-ordinating and decision making
structures in the Lot and at a county/regional level, an outline of mainstream statutory
services and an outline of community and voluntary provided services. This should include
local institutions and agencies.
Question #: 112
Re: 2 b validated programmes: Does this refer to training provided through SICAP only or
also through other programmes run by the implementer?
Answer #: 112
Validated programmes can be provided inhouse via referrals to other organisations. Training
programmes do not have to SICAP specific.
Question #: 113
Outcome G3.3.2 is ‘Social enterprises provide volunteering and employment opportunities
for individuals receiving supports from SICAP’. Does this:
a) mean that supporting social enterprises in employing individuals who are not SICAP
clients (but who still might be from the SICAP target group) is less worthy and
b) suggest it is within the scope of Implementers to influence recruitment decisions of
independent private companies?
Answer #: 113
This is in the Programme Specifications and Requirements document (p.20). Programme
Implementers will be working with SICAP individuals towards this objective and outcome.
Goal 3 of SICAP is intended to support target groups in accessing employment so this would
also relate to access employment opportunities within social enterprises. We are not
prioritising any employment outcomes over others. The addition of social enterprises is an
acknowledgement of the valuable role they can play to fill gaps in service provision.
Question #: 114
Regarding the headline targets on page 22 of the specifications and requirements – No 7
refers to “young people who have progressed.....6 months after registering with SICAP”. On
the other hand No. 13 mentions progression “up to 6 months after receiving a Goal 3
20
employment support” (no mention of SICAP). Can we take it from this that the progression
would count even if the Goal 3 employment support was provided under LCDP in the few
months prior to SICAP?
Answer #: 114
The headline targets outlined in the SICAP: Specifications and Requirements for 2015,
relate solely to SICAP. LCDP is a separate funding programme which is distinct from
SICAP. Local Development Companies will be required to report on targets and outcomes
under LCDP, separately in 2015. It is important to ensure that there is no double counting of
outcomes in the transition from LCDP to SICAP.
Question #: 115
In terms of document formatting, can narrow margins be used and can multiple columns per
page for paragraphs be used?
Answer #: 115
Please refer to Section 2.13 – Submission of Tenders and Section 3 – Award Criteria in the
Invitation to Tender.
Under Section 3, there are strict limits on the lengths of the response for each criterion.
Aside from this, the format of the response is not subject to other formatting requirements.
Multiple columns may not be added to the tables in Appendices 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. However,
where necessary, additional rows can be added to tables in Appendices 3, 4 and 6 to
accommodate numbers of staff or Partner Candidates.
Question #: 116
In a follow up to the answer in question 6, would a one hour part time job count as
progression, or is there a minimum standard for part-time work to be measured as
progression? Are there any controls in place for sub optimal work progressions e.g. a
Qualified Accountant working on minimum wage cutting grass?
Answer #: 116
As a general rule part-time is defined as anything less than 30 hours per week. However, the
employment should be ‘meaningful employment’. If, for example, a person was attempting to
prove that they were habitually resident by citing the fact that they were working 1 hour a
week for six weeks, they would be refused on the grounds that 1 hour a week is not
‘meaningful employment’. On the other hand 1 hour a week might be perfectly valid for a
person on a Disability Allowance. It would be expected that Programme Implementers place
individuals in meaningful employment at an appropriate skills level to the individual. We need
not remind Programme Implementers that they are expected to prioritise employment
supports for people with low educational attainment.
21
Category 5: Pobal Maps & data, IRIS
Question #: 117
Re: Section 1.4.2 of the SICAP Draft Funding Agreement - Licences to IRIS
a) How many will be allocated, 1 per staff member or less?
b) Is there a fee payable and if so how much and how often will it have to be paid.
c) Is there training available on the use of IRIS?
Answer #: 117
a) Programme Implementers will receive a fixed number of IRIS licences free of charge.
As noted on page 30 of the SICAP Specifications and Requirements for 2015, more
specific information on IRIS will be provided to Programme Implementers at a later
date.
b) It is not envisaged that Programme Implementers will be required to pay a fee for
IRIS licences.
c) It is envisaged that IRIS training will be provided to successful Tenderers. As noted
above, information about training provision will be provided to Programme
Implementers at a later date.
Question #: 118
On the Pobal website there is the Pobal HP index which has statistics regarding
disadvantaged areas and people suffering disadvantage. There are no statistics regarding
disadvantaged communities. Where can we find those?
Answer #: 118
The Pobal HP Deprivation Index and Pobal Maps provide a broad range of overall data
relating to relative deprivation and socio-economic disadvantage in Electoral Districts and
Small Areas.
The onus is on Tenderers to source other relevant data on the particular target groups and
communities they plan to engage with in their designated Lots. As this is a competitive
process, it is not the responsibility of the Contracting Authority, DECLG or Pobal to further
explain how data should be sourced.
Question #: 119
Re p.30 – Training on using IRIS will be provided by Programme Implementer – please
confirm that this is a correct statement.
Answer #: 119
In relation to page 30 of the SICAP Specifications and Requirements for 2015, the text in the
document states that “Further more detailed information on the requirements under IRIS and
training on using IRIS will be provided to Programme Implementers.”
22
Category 6: Draft Funding Agreement
Question #: 120
Does the statement “No amount paid by way of this Agreement or otherwise shall be
distributed to any shareholders or officers of the Programme Implementer by way of dividend
on the share capital of the Programme Implementer or otherwise” comply with Public Sector
Directive 2004/18EC?
Answer #: 120
In relation to clause 3.3 of the Draft Funding Agreement, the terms have been prepared and
reviewed by the Chief State Solicitor’s Office. Please note that the agreement is in draft
form.
Question #: 121
Re: SICAP Draft Funding Agreement, Programme Specific Conditions 2.4
This section states that any publicity, documentation or press release or similar
announcement shall be subject to the prior written approval of the LCDC. Is this an error as
such a clause is impractical? Does this relate to SICAP only?
Answer #: 121
All clauses in the SICAP Draft Funding Agreement relate solely to SICAP. All Programme
Implementers will be expected (under the terms of their contracts), to liaise with LCDCs and
provide advance notification regarding publicity materials or events.
Question #: 122
Payment Details 3.1 - SICAP Payment will be at the sole discretion of the LCDC. This clause
is too broad. Can this be refined to include payment within the Prompt Payments Act and
some clarification/reason as to why payment may be held or delayed?
Answer #: 122
In relation to clause 3.3 of the Draft Funding Agreement, the terms have been prepared and
reviewed by the Chief State Solicitor’s Office. Please note that the agreement is in draft
form. Additional information regarding payments is included in the ITT 2.33 Currency and
Payments.
Question #: 123
Part 3 – General Conditions
Covenants 2.5 - “The Programme Implementer shall notify the LCDC prior to changing its
membership or its Directors.” Please advise the purpose of this clause as it would seem to
be impracticable?
Answer #: 123
This is a necessary requirement for good governance and to minimise the risk of conflict of
interest. It is also standard procedure.
Question #: 124
Please provide the documentation ‘Guidelines for Public Procurement for Groups Funded’.
Answer #: 124
The ‘Guidelines for Public Procurement for Groups Funded’ is referred to in the context of
the ‘Draft Funding Agreement’ document (01 April 2015 - 31 December 2017). Please note
that the agreement is in draft form. The associated documents will be provided to each
successful contractor when contracts are issued in February 2015.
Question #: 125
Please provide the documentation ‘Best Practice Guidance on the use of Electronic Banking
23
Systems’.
Answer #: 125
The ‘Best Practice Guidance on the use of Electronic Banking Systems’ is referred to in the
‘Draft Funding Agreement’ document (01 April 2015 - 31 December 2017). Please note that
the agreement is in draft form. The associated documents will be provided to each
successful contractor when contracts are issued in February 2015.
24
Category 7: Consortia/sub-contracting arrangements
Question #: 126
We currently fund local community groups as third parties in line with Pobal Financial
Procedures Handbook 2004 to deliver/provide local services/action plans specific to their
respective needs, i.e. the Local Community Group in turn may then contract trainees etc. to
deliver services. Can you please advise how this should be implemented under SICAP?
Answer #: 126
Please refer to Section 2.28 of the ITT. At delivery stage, the successful Tenderer may wish
to consider taking on additional expertise through sub-contracting to deliver specific aspects
of the SICAP Action Plan 2015. A sub-contractor is a third party (i.e. a legal entity), that is
not a partner candidate, that provides assistance by delivering specific work or a service on
behalf of the Programme Implementer.
Please note that the sub-contracting of services may be subject to public procurement rules.
In addition, the sub-contractor will not form part of the legal contractual arrangements
between the successful Tenderer and the LCDC. A maximum of 15% of an Implementer’s
budget can be paid to sub-contractors on an annual basis. The successful Tenderer is
expected to seek the Contracting Authority’s prior written consent with respect to subcontracting.
Question #: 127
a) We are part of a consortium bid for Stage 2. In Stage 1 we selected an organisation
as the lead agency. We have since developed a new legal entity for the consortium.
Can this new entity be the primary contractor?
b) Can another member of a consortium not listed as the lead agency in Stage 1 take
over as Primary Contractor in Stage 2?
Answer #: 127
As a general note, tenderers should note the provisions of Section 2.9 of the ITT Document
which require tenderers to list any changes to their status or to the information supplied in
the Stage 1 PQQ under Appendix 5. On a case by case basis, the Contracting Authority will
assess the implications (if any) of the proposed changes and will inform tenderers
accordingly.
In response to your queries:
a) Assuming that your question relates to a consortium which has now assumed a legal
personality, the answer is yes – as long as the constituent members of the new legal
entity are those (and only those) which applied during Stage 1 and that there is no
material change to the status or to the information supplied in the Stage 1 PQQ.
b) Yes, provided this does not result in a material change to the status or to the
information supplied in the Stage 1 PQQ.
Question #: 128
The document states that ‘Programme providers may use a limited amount of SICAP funding
to enable state, community and voluntary agencies to deliver elements of services under
Goals 2 and 3. Does this mean that Implementers are allowed to sub-contract the state to
assist them with the delivery of services provided as part of the state-financed SICAP
programme?
Answer #: 128
All requirements relating to sub-contracting arrangements are set out in the ITT 2.28 SubContracting. As stated, the successful Tenderer is expected to seek the Contracting
Authority’s prior written consent with respect to sub-contracting. The successful Tenderer
25
shall not assign, sub-contract or transfer any part of the Services or contract without the
Contracting Authority’s prior written consent.
Question #: 129
Are salary costs to third party contracts i.e. Local Community Groups, acceptable under
SICAP?
Answer #: 129
Please refer to Question 136 and Section 2.28 of the ITT. Salary costs relating to subcontractors can be funded. However, a maximum of 15% of an Implementer’s budget can be
paid to sub-contractors on an annual basis.
Question #: 130
Re 2.9.Consortia: Clarify if members of a consortium bid are regarded as sub-contractors
Answer #: 130
Please refer to Section 2.28 of the ITT. At delivery stage, the successful Tenderer may wish
to consider taking on additional expertise through sub-contracting to deliver specific aspects
of the SICAP Action Plan 2015. A sub-contractor is a third party (i.e. a legal entity), that is
not a partner candidate, that provides assistance by delivering specific work or a service on
behalf of the Programme Implementer. For example, this could relate to sub-contracting an
external trainer to deliver a training course which is unable to be delivered internally as staff
members do not have the required skill-sets.
Question #: 131
I refer to your answer to question # 30. You mention that if a programme implementer were
to pay for the services of a tutor, that this would constitute sub-contracting. Using the
example of the breakfast club, under the LCDP a Grant Aid contract would have been
entered into between the programme implementer and the school with the purpose of the
funding clearly stated. The LDC would have paid the school and the school then paid the
tutors etc. Leaving materials aside, would this grant aid contract come under the definition
of sub-contracting in SICAP?
Answer #: 131
As noted in response to Question 30, a sub-contractor is a third party (i.e. a legal entity)
that is not a partner candidate, that provides assistance by delivering specific work or a
service on behalf of the Programme Implementer. In the example of the breakfast club, if
the school is not a partner candidate, then this would constitute sub-contracting.
26
Category 8: Conflict of Interest / Confidentiality
Question #: 132
Can you please circulate the list of names and memberships/roles for the LCDC ?
Answer #: 132
We have received a number of queries from Tenderers requesting the name of LCDC
members, in the event of any conflict or potential conflict of interest. In general, the names
of LCDC members are in the public domain and in many cases this information is available
on the Local Authority website.
As the LCDC is an entity which is separate from the public procurement process for SICAP,
Pobal is not in a position to provide the names of LCDC members to Tenderers. We have
requested Chief Officers of the LCDC to ensure this information is available in the public
domain and/or provide the names of LCDC members to Tenderers when requested. Please
be patient and allow a few days for this information to be made available.
Question #: 133
I am writing to advise of a conflict of interest in relation to the SICAP tendering process.
As you are aware I am the lead person for a tender submission and I wish to advise that I
am also a member of the LCDC. I have declared my conflict of interest repeatedly at the
LCDC and have ensured that I am not involved in any decision making processes in relation
to SICAP.
Answer #: 133
As per Section 2.19 of the ITT document, any conflict of interest involving a Tenderer must
be fully disclosed to the Contracting Authority immediately. There is a section in Appendix 5
Additional Information Form that Tenderers should use to outline, should this apply.
In the event of any conflict or potential conflict of interest, the Contracting Authority may
seek further information from the Tenderers and / or invite the Tenderers to propose means
by which the conflict might be removed. The Contracting Authority will, at its absolute
discretion, decide on the appropriate course of action, which may in appropriate
circumstances include eliminating a Tenderer from the competition or terminating any
contract entered into by a Tenderer.
LCDC members who are either tendering or are involved with a Tenderer will exclude
themselves from any role or decision-making in relation to the content or issue of the ITT,
the evaluation process or any other aspect of the Tender process.
Question #: 134
How is a consortium tender application affected if a partner of that consortium decides to
withdraw from the consortium?
Answer #: 134
As per Section 2.9 of the ITT, additional parties cannot be introduced to the original qualified
party and partner candidates cannot be substituted in the event that a partner candidate
decides to withdraw. Tenderers are required to inform the Contracting Authority in their
Tender to any changes in their composition from the information provided in Stage 1 PQQ
i.e. the withdrawal of a partner candidate. There is a box included in Appendix 5 Additional
Information Form which Tenderers can use should this situation have arisen.
Please note, the withdrawal of a partner candidate may affect a Tenderers standing in the
competition, this is on the basis that the Tenderer may not have qualified under Stage 1
PQQ without the partner candidate.
27