Procurement - Workstations, 2026 (2)

Zuschlagskriterien

• Environment

  • •The contracting authority uses the exclusion provisions in PPR § 7-9 fourth paragraph, and has replaced the award criteria in accordance with the second link with climate and environmental requirements in the requirement specification. It is considered that this gives a clearly better climate and environmental effect, and this is justified below.
  • •The contracting authority has held a market dialogue. The market dialogue shows that a separate award criterion for climate and environment, connected to transport, logistics and general environmental descriptions, will, to a limited degree, provide real and verifiable differentiation between the tenders. The tenderers operate to a large degree within the same manufacturer and logistics, and the form of transport is largely affected by the contracting authority ́s concrete ordering and delivery needs. Such an award criteria will therefore mainly be able to provide competition for descriptions and reporting schemes, without ensuring a higher environmental level for the products that are actually delivered.
  • •The contracting authority has identified that the most relevant climate and environmental impacts in this procurement are related to the product lifecycle, including production/raw material use, energy efficiency in use, lifetime, repairability, spare parts access, packaging, collecting and handling model changes in the contract period. It is considered more efficient for this type of IT equipment to set binding and substantiated minimum requirements for the products and the implementation of the contract than to evaluate relative differences between the tenderer's descriptions.
  • •The contracting authority therefore assesses that the climate and environmental requirements in the requirement specifications clearly give better climate and environmental effect than weighting climate and environment as the award criterion. The requirements ensure that all the offered products and deliveries fulfil a fixed minimum level, regardless of which tenderer is awarded the contract.
  • •The contracting authority replaces climate and environment as the award criterion with climate and environmental requirements in the requirement specifications, cf. the Public Procurement Regulations § 7-9 fourth section. The requirements concern, among other things, environmental certification or documented fulfilment of equivalent underlying environmental requirements, update support, repairability, spare parts access, packaging, summary verification, necessary product data for system follow-up and the requirement that replacement products/model changes in the contract period shall fulfil at least the same climate and environmental requirements as the original offered products.
  • •The requirements are assessed as proportional, relevant and connected to the contract object. They are designed as binding requirements that are documented by the tender submission and followed-up in the contract period.

• Quality

  • •Weighting:
  • •The award criteria is weighted 50%.
  • •Orientation:
  • •Tenderers shall fill in the requirement form for the sub-contracts a tender is submitted for. The requirement form shall be submitted as an annex to the tender in Excel format.
  • •Tenderers shall respond to the requirements in the requirement form and enclose documentation when requested. Where a tenderer refers to annexes or other documentation, it shall be clear which annex, which side, which point or part of the documentation supports the response.
  • •Tenderers shall not change requirement numbers, requirement text, requirement type, weighting, sheet structure, formulas or other parts of the requirement form that are not meant to be completed.
  • •Missing, unclear or inadequate responses can have an impact on the evaluation. If the relationship is for non fulfilment of the minimum requirement, this can lead to rejection
  • •Evaluation:
  • •The quality will be evaluated, after a procurement assessment, separately for each sub-contract, based on the tenderer ́s response to the requirement form and associated documentation.
  • •The requirement types, internal weighting and evaluation scale are in the tab "Beskrivelse" in the requirement form.
  • •Points will be given for each evaluation requirement on a scale from 0 to 10, with 10 being the best. The points will be given after the evaluation scale in the requirement form. Other tenders will be awarded a relative point score based on the best offered system.
  • •The contracting authority will assess the qualities, solutions and documentation requirements that are in each requirement. Where a requirement sets a minimum level, the minimum level must be met. Fulfilment, better documented qualities, better suitability for the contracting authority ́s use or other relevant added value within the required requirement can give a higher score.
  • •Concrete, relevant and verifiable responses will be given higher than that for general descriptions, standard market material or undocumented claims. Unclear, incomplete or incomplete verifiable responses can result in a lower score.
  • •The Contracting Authority calculates Quality Score per role/product and weights them in accordance with the evaluation volumes in the price form.
  • •Examples of calculations:
  • •Role of The Evaluation Volume Share of Total Volume Quality Score Weighted Quality Score
  • •Role 1 1 000 45.05 % 8 3.60
  • •Role 2 300 13.51 % 7 0.95
  • •Role 3 300 13.51 % 6 0.81
  • •Role 4 600 27.03 % 9 2.43
  • •Role 5 20 0.90 % 10 0.09
  • •Sum 2 220 100 % 7.88

• Price

  • •Weighting:
  • •The award criteria is weighted 50%.
  • •Orientation:
  • •Tenderers shall fill in the attached price form for the sub-contracts that the tenderer submits a tender for and submit the price form as an annex to the tender in Excel format.
  • •Tenderers shall only fill in cells that are marked for filling in. Tenderers shall not change other cells, formulas, sheet structure or calculation models in the price form. If the tenderer changes formulas, deletes content, makes the price form difficult to check or compare, it can be assessed as a deviation from the tender documentation.
  • •Missing completion of price fields, or filling in, which makes it impossible or disproportionately demanding to calculate the evaluation price, can lead to the tender being rejected.
  • •All prices shall be stated in NOK excluding VAT and include all costs that shall be included in the evaluation price, including freight/delivery, order/invoice fee and procurement commission where relevant. Costs that the tenderer knows will apply, but which are not particularly priced, will be seen as included in the given prices.
  • •The requirements for cost prices, mark-up and documentation of cost prices are stated in point 7.2.11 and the price form.
  • •Evaluation:
  • •The price will be evaluated separately for each sub-contract.
  • •For each sub-contract, the field "Total Sum for evaluation" is used in the price form as a basis for an evaluation of the award criteria Price.
  • •The attached evaluation model, hybrid model with break point 1, will be used for evaluating the price.
  • •The tenderer ́s point score for the award criterion Price is weighted with the award criteria ́s weighting percentage.