supply2.gov...

[imranali]

is this a govt ran website or a private?

i think its rather evil of the govt to ask to subscribe to apply for tenders or even see them!

its ok to a multi-million company - £500+ isnt much but ALOT to a new company...

 

[Rhyl Lightworks]

As far as I can see, it is a government sponsored scheme run by a private company, something that is becoming more and more common, and not just with the government, but other big businesses such as banks too. These companies sniff the opportunity to make money out of well intentioned schemes which are farmed out. These companies then run rings round the government, making a mockery of what was the original intention. Banks farming out credit card security such as HSBC farming out PCI compliance is another example of this.

Barrie

 

[a1isp]

You get one free region with access to "low value" (<£200k!?) contracts. If you want other regions, or "high value" contracts, you have to pay.

Good luck with tenders though - VERY hard work to create tender documents, and a bit too much neoptism during the process when it comes to choosing a supplier.

 

[imranali]

jdp - yeah i'm not looking forward to it if i get the chance

but one must do what he can to survive.

 

[Eagle]

As far as I can see, it is a government sponsored scheme run by a private company, something that is becoming more and more common, and not just with the government, but other big businesses such as banks too. These companies sniff the opportunity to make money out of well intentioned schemes which are farmed out. These companies then run rings round the government, making a mockery of what was the original intention. Banks farming out credit card security such as HSBC farming out PCI compliance is another example of this.

Barrie

Quoted for truth.

 

[Humphrey]

Another Government sponsored WOMBAT (waste of money, brains and time) designed to con the business community that they are making tendering easier for SMEs. In reality the few SME businesses that can get past the PQQ (pre qualification questionnaire) stage are usually eliminated on technicalities or lack of relevant experience (how you get this if you are never given the opportunity beats me).

 

[business123]

This was announced earlier:

The government's procurement website www.supply2.gov.uk will now be free to use for suppliers looking to secure small public sector contracts, as the fee that was previously charged to search the site will now be removed.
Business Minister Shriti Vadera said: "Small businesses are facing significant pressure in this downturn and new contracts are essential for their return to growth.
"We want to support small businesses by making it easier to access the thousands of government procurement opportunities that are directly relevant to them.
"This free service is an interim step along the way to introducing a single website for all public sector contracts next year."
Economic Secretary to the Treasury, Ian Pearson said: "Small- and medium-sized businesses are a crucial part of the UK economy and in these challenging times it is essential that we support them in as many ways as possible.
"By introducing a free to use national search service we are helping to create a level playing field on which SMEs can compete with their larger counterparts. This will realise benefits for SMEs, the economy as a whole, and help drive further innovation in public services.
Debasish Sen, Federation of Small Businesses Trade and Industry committee member, commented: "The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) has been working closely with the government to put better policies on procurement in place and we welcome this first step to create a free, national, on-line portal that small firms can use to apply for public sector contracts next year.
"FSB research shows that half of SMEs do not tender for public contracts because the process is too complicated and the contracts are too difficult to find in the first place. Making supply2.gov free to access is a first step in the right direction and something the FSB has been pushing for, for a long time."
Searching for lower-value contracts across the UK was previously only available as part of a commercial subscription service, which cost up to £180 per year.
This announcement is a move towards delivering on a key recommendation outlined in the Glover Review - that by the end of 2010 all public sector contract opportunities should be accessible through a single, free online web portal.

 

[Humphrey]

I have just checked my free local registration on supply2.gov.uk and the fees still apply if I want to 'upgrade', which I don't as the process, should you find an 'potential' contract to tender for, appears to be designed to eliminate SMEs.

Unless the process is totally redesigned and PQQs are made SME friendly the supply2.gov.uk will remain a white elephant simply created to meet political objectives. As a member of the FSB I appreciate the hard work being done to try and get the Gov to include SMEs in the tendering process, however the civil and LA servants make the final decision and they will always take the easy road - which excludes SMEs.

 

I have just checked my free local registration on supply2.gov.uk and the fees still apply if I want to 'upgrade', which I don't as the process, should you find an 'potential' contract to tender for, appears to be designed to eliminate SMEs.

Unless the process is totally redesigned and PQQs are made SME friendly the supply2.gov.uk will remain a white elephant simply created to meet political objectives. As a member of the FSB I appreciate the hard work being done to try and get the Gov to include SMEs in the tendering process, however the civil and LA servants make the final decision and they will always take the easy road - which excludes SMEs.

Personally not entirely keen on Supply2Gov, but it is the main portal used for Local and Central Govt tenders (also MyTenders is another good place).

I'm interested to know what it is about PQQs you find SME unfriendly?

I would object to the comment that civil and LA servants take the easy road and exclude SMEs, I'm currently running a tender exercise on behalf of a client who is an LA and the whole purpose of the project is to get community based - who by their very nature will be SMEs - organisations to come forward and bid. The problem I have is almost the opposite, small companies expect it to go to the large national organisations and so dont come forward. I've never had an issue explaining aspects of a PQQ or ITT to a prospective bidder to enable them to understand the criteria.

Most public sector organisations tend to use a variation on a theme of the OGC PQQ - which is actually under review and is looking for comments so people may wish to look at them and send OGC your views regarding aspects you feel are difficult for SMEs http://www.ogc.gov.uk/tools___services_pqq_4728.asp

The only issue I've ever really experienced with SME bids are those that try to over egg it, and dont realise that a search is going to be run on their finance & risk profiles, its better to be honest about your capacity and capabilities now and put forward a strong project plan for how you would be able to upscale and show an understanding of the risks and complexities than claim you can do it as it stands. This pushes purchasers into having to buy from organisations that already have the infrastructure because they can't have a company go bump because they didnt have a realistic view of what they can do. Its a fine balance and its public money, something which any good purchaser will be careful with and want to be able to justify in a Judicial Review or to and auditor why they took the route they did.

Admittedly I'm sure there are those who always play it safe, or who have a jobs for the boys type approach - personally I've never been one of those and I believe in getting the right supplier for the job and making sure the right support is there, its a 2 way process and procurement needs to move away from the dictatorial model of telling suppliers what to do because its in their contract, and into a supplier relationship management approach where its a collaborative effort between procurer, supplier and end user to get it right for all.

 

[Humphrey]

I think you have summed it up. Whereas many private sector companies look to support SMEs and look to see how an SME can be given opportunities to prove themselves, the public sector is too concerned in protecting themselves by 'finance & risk profiles' and 'risks and complexities' and 'having to buy from organisations that already have the infrastructure'.

Having been a civil servant involved in contracting and procurement for over 17 years in a previous working life I understand the 'play it safe' mentality and suggest that it is more the norm than the exception. Now that I am a self-employed consultant I have worked with a few public bodies who do 'look outside of the box' but the majority are firmly locked inside of their safe little box and will do little to risk that security. Why should they when they have treats of 'judicial review' and 'public accounts auditors' hanging over them?

The PQQs ask for levels and detail of financial information that an SME is very often simply unable to produce. Result - immediate exclusion! The whole system requires a complete review, not a supply2.gov.uk political smoke screen.

 

[Anders]

I am really frustrated by the whole E-tender / PQQ process, no they are not free, they are not consistent, you get very little in the way of feedback, and they are not friendly to new or emerging SME's.

Having now learnt a few brutal lessons whilst going through various PQQ stages and on the whole failing at over 90%, SME's are caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place.

With very little trading or finacial history, only starting in May 09, and with no support from a larger group or organisation to support, you are almost always going to fail, as such although the government stance to strike out a reaching hand to the SME's out there to support the public sector in reality nothing will really change,

I have no issue with not succeeding during the ITT phase (yes it would be nice to gain the contract in question), but the PQQ stage really does need to be readressed in order for SME's to engage more directly and robustly with the public sector.

 

Sorry to hear that, it is your right though to ask for feedback and if you dont get enough feedback during the telephone feedback then write and request a face to face feedback meeting and this should be carried out.

What feedback are you getting, do you have any idea what in the PQQ process you are failing on? Its generally not the accounts and trading history that are the issue, yes there are formulas purchasers have to abide by - such as looking for finances and verification by bank references to support the value of the contract - generally this is 2-3 times the contract value itself, but its unlikely that financial stability is the only factor!

PQQs should always detail the evaluation criteria that is going to be used by the awarding body, so you need to examine this with a fine toothcomb and ask questions during the pre submission phase to clarify anything you dont fully understand. Questions asked are usually circulated to all bidders, so not asking for clarification and not paying attention to answers given to others is often where bidders fall down.

The evaluation criteria will also explain how the contract is intended to be divided into lots and what the financial value of those lots are, it will also lay out expectations regarding insurance levels required - dont bid for more than you have the finances to support, if its divided into lots then bid for those you have 2 or 3 times the turnover of and make sure you have your ducks in a row with regards to business referees and bank managers references etc.

In my experience unless an SME is financially very weak and poses an immense risk then the financial criteria is unlikely to be the reason for not taking them forward, Local and Central Government will look at block contracts and pump prime funding for the right bidders. Its correct interpretation and explanantion of answers to the specialised questions that are where most bidders (SMEs and larger orgs) fall down. They fall into the trap of treating the exercise like a sales pitch for the company and not exploring and understanding the Purchasers needs or thinking in detail about the questions asked.

Prime example I recently ran a PQQ and very specifically asked about company experience in the field in question, I made it quite clear that I wanted to know about working with Service Users, the responses from all but the shortlisted few were spiels about being market leaders, telling me how wonderful they were and how many millions of pounds, or contracts they had got and how they told everyone in the universe what to do in this field. Did this answer my question? No, I wanted to know about Service Users, I wanted to see demonstration that they clearly understood the political and emotive nature of the work they would be undertaking. What they demonstrated was that they fundamentally did not have the caring mindset I was looking for - something that was very critical to the work I needed to put in place.

Think about the work that needs to be undertaken, how it needs to be done, what the purchasers vision is and get under the skin of that and let that lead how you answer PQQs, its just the same as getting a job description and tailoring your CV to emphasise those skills which are relevant.

If you have the PQQ and your responses to it then I'm happy to take an independent look and see if I can offer any advice as to where you might have gone wrong. I would ask for face to face feedback from the purchaser though.

 

I would also consider building strategic partnerships with other organisations who you can bid with to increase the stability of your proposition and to tap into areas where you may not be skilled. Local and Central government encourage consortium bids, and are very keen on things such as 3rd sector and user led organisations. Start networking and looking for companies that would be suitable to work with in this way.

 

[Noah]

As far as I can see, it is a government sponsored scheme run by a private company, something that is becoming more and more common, and not just with the government, but other big businesses such as banks too. These companies sniff the opportunity to make money out of well intentioned schemes which are farmed out. These companies then run rings round the government, making a mockery of what was the original intention. Banks farming out credit card security such as HSBC farming out PCI compliance is another example of this.

True, frustrating and rather worrying. I spoke to HSE about practical requirements for pressure vessels; I thought as they were the designers and implementers of the regulations, they could advise me on what I needed to do to comply. Well, they did : "Ask your insurance company." My insurance company was, of course, happy to advise - for a fee. No doubt when I fail an inspection, I can just refer them to my insurance company and everything will be fine.