Tender for external project officer
This page will provide additional information to the tender Mpact vzw has published in order to contract an external project officer for the SMALL project.
Below we will publish the answers to questions posed and/or changes to the tender invitation.
Some questions were translated to make them understandable.
Q: Is experience in other European projects enough to qualify for replying to the tender, according to points 2.41 and 2.45.
A: Yes, we will accept applications from parties with experience in European project, it will however be advantageous to have Interreg experience.
2.41 Tenderers must have managed a large-scale European project before, preferably Interreg North-Sea region.
2.45 Tenderers must have experience in managing communication activities in a large-scale European project before. (f.e. Interreg, Horizon 2020, …).
Q: Could you please confirm that the submission deadline for this tender is 14/04/2023 12am (CET), matching the indicated deadline in e-Notifications?
A: I can confirm the submission deadline is indeed 14/04/2023 12am (CET).
Instruction point 2.9 falsely states a different date, this should be 14/04/2023 12am (CET).
Q: Can you confirm the submission should be delivered over e-mail, not the e-notificiation portal.
A: This is confirmed, only submission delivered over e-mail to email@example.com will be taken into consideration.
Question 4: (translated from Dutch)
Q: In the document “1076405_SMALL tender- specification project and requirements from external PO” we have I identified some “open tasks” like
- Leads project partners through OMS and functions as helpdesk.
- General helpdesk for the consortium
- Holds bilateral meetings with partners when needed.
- Represents the project at international conferences (when required).
A: More information on the project outputs and KPI’s are to be found in the project proposal that was attached to the tender invitation. Candidates are required to do a calculation and estimation of how many newsletters to be sent out and events to be attended to reach these project targets mentioned in the proposal. The same counts for how they will interact with the consortium.
Question 5: (translated from Dutch)
Q: Are we correct to assume the partner meetings & monthly progress meetings will be held physically at different locations?
- The partner meetings that will take place 2x a year will take place in person and each time in another partner country/city.
- The monthly meetings and the meetings with the WP leaders will take place through digital channels
Question 6: (translated from Dutch)
Q: Are the meetings between Mpact and the PO to be considered as physical meetings?
A: The meetings between Mpact and the external PO will mostly happen through online channels. If it is deemed necessary by either Mpact or the external PO to meet physically, this should be arranged.
Question 7: (translated from Dutch)
Q: Can we assume a data-sharing platform is in place? We believe the management of this platform is not a task for the PO, correct?
A: A data sharing platform is already created and in use for the SMALL project. The external PO is also required to manage this platform.
Question 8: (translated from Dutch)
Q: Could you provide more information about the OMS system? F.e. is this already in place, who manages this system?
A: The Online Monitoring System from Interreg NSR is an already existing platform that is curated by the joint secretariat. The project lead is the managing authority of the SMALL project space on the OMS. The external PO is required to support the partners in the use of this platform (e.g. reporting happens in the online monitoring system). There are Fact Sheets made available on this topic by Interreg NSR.
Q: Our question concerns the specific role the external party has in relation to the other work packages. WP4 and WP5 specifically focus on project management and communication, WP4 largely describing the role normally taken on by the project lead. Is the external party expected to (partially) take over these work packages?
A: Yes, the tasks within WP 4 and 5 that are required to be taken over by the external PO are listed in the requirements list attached to the tender invitation.
Q: In addition, WP1 and WP3 contain communication deliverables and therefore have a connection to the role the external party is asked to take on. How does Mpact see the collaboration with these 2 work packages and the external party? (In addition to the requested follow-up the PO is responsible for)
- WP 1: External PO will mainly have a consulting and guiding role in this WP.
- WP 3: The external PO will be responsible for the high-level communication strategy of the project and will also create a concrete plan for this. However, the external PO will also be supported by other partners who are responsible for sub-communication activities (e.g. expert roundtables). For such sub-activities, the PO’s role will be mostly on consulting level rather than operational level. Mpact has written out a specific collaboration strategy that will be shared with the candidates who will make it to the 2nd round.
Q: Mpact served as the SMALL project’s initial project manager. How does Mpact itself perceive its relationship to the new outside party? Are tasks and responsibilities clearly stated up front, or is the external party expected to assume complete responsibility for the project management? Is it required to outline a vision and a plan for collaboration with Mpact in the tender?
- Mpact remains the project lead and the final decision-maker of the SMALL project. This is why we have decided to stay involved in the project lead tasks. The tasks and responsibilities for the external party will be stated up front, but can be negotiated and adjusted throughout the project lifetime.
- It will most certainly be of value to have your vision on how your party will manage the active involvement of Mpact as project lead.
Q: One of the technical questions concerns Fair Working Practices and asks from which values the external party would start when delivering projects. Are these mainly HR-related internal working values, or is it also possible to add more externally oriented values the company upholds when delivering their work? (For example, values like authenticity)
A: It is possible to add more externally oriented values to the HR related values
Q: In the Gantt Chart, which was also delivered in the attachments, a communication plan is mentioned that has already been delivered. Is this the case, or does the communication plan still need to be developed?
A: A first draft of the communication strategy was delivered. This needs to be finalized. Besides that, we also require an operational communication plan from the external PO.
Q: Each technical question cannot exceed 1,000 words in length. However, several inquiries ask for an attachment. Is the requested word limit of 1,000 words inclusive or exclusive these attachments?
A: The limit on the amount words is exclusive to the attachments.
Q: Would it be possible to deliver the Word-version of the documents, more specifically, the technical requirements and pricing schedule?
A: We will try to make this available for all, and publish the correct link here.
Q: For the ESPD form the contracting authority needs to indicate if and for which selection criteria (A to D) in the ESPD form information is required from the economic operator. If required, the economic operator can answer the question in the grey field with ´yes´, after which the fields for criteria A to D appear. If not required, the global indication below the grey field can be used by the economic operator. We could not find information on these specific ESPD selection criteria required in the tender documents. Could you kindly specify if global indication for all selection criteria suffices or if selection criteria from A to D need to be used?
A: Answer pending.