Discovery into presenting event fee information about retirement properties

Tender description

Summary of the work The Law Commission have recommended a database to provide information about event fees to elderly property buyers. We want to conduct a discovery to investigate whether this is the best way of meeting user needs. Expected Contract Length 6-8 weeks Latest start date Saturday 1 December 2018 Budget Range £60-80k Why the Work is Being Done This is in response to the Law Commission’s recommendation to implement an Event Fee database. There is agreement that the aim of the objective (to provide clear, timely, and up front information to consumers prior to the purchase of a property) should be accepted, but we wish to test the best means to deliver this objective (be it a database as suggested by the Commission, or an alternative digital or non-digital solution). Problem to Be Solved Each year thousands of older people consider a move to specialist (leasehold) retirement properties. Many of these leases require the owner to pay a fee/event fee on certain events – such as sale, sub-letting or change of occupancy. In 2013, the Office of Fair Trading investigated the use of transfer fees (a type of event fee). They found that terms in leases imposing this type of event fee were potentially unfair. For example, older people and their families were not informed of the fees which in some case can amount up to 30% of the sale price. Who Are the Users Retired home purchasers - I need to understand about event fees before I purchase my property, so I can make a good decision Estate agents - I need to know I'm marketing a property that has an event fee, so that I don't misled consumers Extra care housing providers (set the event fees) - I need to provide information about event fees/what it entails Existing Team Product Owner and stakeholders. (We will also help recruit users.) Current Phase Discovery Skills & Experience • Experience of having delivered user-centred solutions to problems • Experience of conducting discovery exercises that recommended digital and non-digital solutions • Evidence of meeting skill requirements based on the anticipated composition of the team • Demonstrate a track-record agile approaches Nice to Haves • Evidence of delivering within the Government Digital Services design standards • Knowledge of retirement housing or extra care housing Work Location London. Working Arrangments We expect we will need to meet regularly during the discovery in 2 Marsham Street. We're expecting an agile supplier, who will need to work offsite (for example to conduct research) Security Clearance BPSS required. CTC and above would be useful in terms of access to 2 Marsham Street, but is not required. No. of Suppliers to Evaluate 3 Proposal Criteria • Technical solution • Approach and methodology • Value for money • Estimated timeframes for the work • Understanding of user needs Cultural Fit Criteria • Work as a team with our organisation and other suppliers • Be transparent and collaborative when making decisions • Challenge the status quo Payment Approach Fixed price Evaluation Weighting Technical competence 45% Cultural fit 15% Price 40% Questions from Suppliers 1. You require 'Evidence of meeting skill requirements based on the anticipated composition of the team' is there any detail you can provide of these skill requirements and/or the composition of the team please? We’re seeking a team who can help us run a discovery. We expect the supplier to suggest what roles are necessary, although the GOV.UK service manual has further information. MHCLG will provide a Product Owner. 2. You mention a start date of 1st December. Given the need for evaluating suppliers and going through an RFP stage, do you envisage that work on this project will actually start at the beginning of December or later and what flexibility is there in regard to project timings? There is flexibility in timings, although we’d like to start in December if possible. 3. What are the job roles you anticipate of the expected team? Please see our response to Question 1. 4. Are you sure you want the project to start on a Saturday? No, the correct starting date for this requirement is Monday 3rd December. 5. There seems to be a word or two missing from the essential requirement: demonstrate a track-record agile approaches With apologies, the correct wording should have read:Demonstrate a track-record in delivering agile approaches for previous discovery projects. 6. Do you have a view on the composition of the team expected to deliver the Discovery? Please see our response to question 1. 7. For the final nice to have skill (Knowledge of retirement housing), would MHCLG be interested in experience with similar users? Yes, although a good demonstration of experience of the specified market would probably be marked higher. 8. Is this procurement solely for Discovery with the intention to reprocure for any future phases? Yes. 9. What roles will MHCLG deploy during Discovery? Product Owner, support (with room booking, escorting, etc) and access to stakeholders/users. 10. What roles do MHCLG expect suppliers to provide during the Discovery phase? Please see our response to Question 1. 11. Have MHCLG already identified users for user research and be able to facilitate access to these users during Discovery? Yes. 12. Is the budget listed exclusive of VAT? Yes. 13. Will this service be taken through the GDS Service Assessment? Discovery is not subject to assessment although GDS will want to see the outputs and we want to meet the Service Standard anyway. If the discovery recommends going to alpha, then it’s likely the service would be assessed. 14. What is the timeline for procurement after the first stage (suppliers to providing evidence to the listed skills and experience)? The current, provisional timeline is as follows:Proposals sent to evaluators – Thursday 8 NovemberLong-listing to shortlisting takes place – Friday 9 November Supplier presentations – Wednesday 14 November Final decision made – Friday 16 November Assignment starts – Monday 3 December 15. Can we ask what criteria MHCLG will be using to judge whether an evidence answer 'exceeded' requirements and therefore scores full marks (3)? This has not yet been discussed or agreed with the Evaluation panel. However, previous experience determines an exceeded response as providing added value, a specific delivered outcome and details of what benefits were achieved. 16. When suppliers are asked to submit evidence, the following advice is given: "You should only provide one example for each essential or nice-to-have requirement (unless the buyer specifies otherwise)." Do you want suppliers to provide one example for each evidence answer? Please focus primarily on one example. But you can refer briefly to wider experience. 17. Is this opportunity outside of IR35? Yes. We are procuring an outcome, rather than a specialist. 18. Will scoring from the evidence stage be taken through to final evaluation scoring? As opposed to being used solely for the purpose of shortlisting This has not yet been discussed or agreed with the Evaluation panel. However, previous experience of using the DOS framework suggests that long-list scoring will be taken forward to the short-list stage. 19. In order to compare suppliers, how will price be evaluated? At the appropriate time, we shall request this information from suppliers. Normally, we request number of days and day rates for each role suppliers shall provide to deliver the requirement. We have asked for a time and materials model, but if there are elements which are already fixed (by suppliers), these should be noted within suppliers commercial proposals.