Facilities management services

Tender description

Queen Margaret University is nearing the end of its existing contractual arrangements for the provision of certain, key FM services and is therefore taking the opportunity to review its overall FM service delivery strategy. Current arrangements for the delivery of services include: — soft FM services — cleaning/window cleaning/hygiene/pest control/grounds; — hard FM services — mechanical, electrical and fabric maintenance; — security services — manned guarding/front-of-house. This is not an exhaustive list and does not represent the entire scope of service requirements. The future delivery model envisages an increasingly integrated FM service and includes some elements that are currently being delivered in-house. The delivery model is to provide for flexible working arrangements that allow significant levels of cross-working and integration between the various service elements and the associated staff. The University is looking to enter into a potential 8-year partnership. A primary objective of the University is to deliver a comprehensive, customer focused service. An integrated FM service would have the benefit of bringing together existing services in a one team approach whilst removing barriers to flexible service delivery. The service model currently utilised by QMU in security and facilities support was shaped by the initial demands of operation of the campus at Craighall following relocation whilst importing the traditional function line of the delivery structure. The total estimated magnitude of this contract is GBP 7 M. Objective criteria for shortlisting — ESPD Section 4C scoring method: 0 = Unacceptable. Nil or inadequate response. Fails to demonstrate previous experience/capacity/capability relevant to this criterion. 1 = Poor. Response is partially relevant but generally poor. The response shows some elements of relevance to the criterion but contains insufficient/limited detail or explanation to demonstrate previous relevant experience/capacity/capability. 2 = Acceptable. Response is relevant and acceptable. The response demonstrates broad previous experience, knowledge and skills/capacity/capability but may lack in some aspects of similarity e.g. previous experience, knowledge or skills may not be of a similar nature. 3 = Good. Response is relevant and good. The response is sufficiently detailed to demonstrate a good amount of experience, knowledge or skills/capacity/capability relevant to providing similar services to similar clients. 4 = Excellent. Response is completely relevant and excellent overall. The response is comprehensive, unambiguous and demonstrates thorough experience, knowledge or skills/capacity/capability relevant to providing similar services to similar clients. Stage 1 — ESPD Shortlist to six bidders, Stage 2 — Issue of ITT to qualified bidders, Stage 2 — Negotiation phase with three bidders, Stage 3 — Negotiation phase with three bidders, Stage 4 — Negotiation phase with three bidders, Stage 5 — Invitation to submit final tender (ISFT), Final stage — Contract award. The University reserves the right to award at any stage detailed above. The University reserves the right to disqualify any bidder at any stage where it is not possible to reach agreement on contractual terms.