Archived Content
Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.
This update is to be read in conjunction with the original Policy Notification 37.
Since its introduction on September 11, 1998, the JITAP has proven itself as an effective and timely instrument for dealing with urgent amendment requests. There is now a clearer understanding of what information is required and how it should be organized. The format as described below should now be used as the standard for submitting future requests under the JITAP:
SUBJECT:
- Project Name/Reference;
- Request For An Amendment of $X;
- For Approval of the Minister or the Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM).
BACKGROUND:
- Project Description;
- Client;
- Original Contract Information:
- supplier(s) identification;
- contract award date;
- current contract value;
- method of procurement (e.g. competitive, sole source, SPEC);
- list of previous bidders, ranked, with bid price.
PREVIOUS AMENDMENTS:
- value and purpose of each previous amendment;
- accountability issues (e.g. client request).
PROPOSED AMENDMENT:
- Value and purpose;
- Accountability issues, if any (e.g. Is the requirement due to a newly raised client request?; Is the Crown accountable due to delay?; Is the accountability shared between the Contractor and the Crown?);
- If the scope of work is increasing, why amend rather than re-compete? How have we assured fair & reasonable value?
IMPLICATIONS OF NOT RECEIVING IMMEDIATE AUTHORITY TO PROCEED:
- Impacts on the project, the client, political implications, if any, etc.;
- Give quantitative impacts as well as the qualitative impacts.
COSTS AND TAXES:
- Costs and Funding Detail [e.g. original contract amount of $X, previous amendments OF $X; proposed amendment of $X; anticipated final contract amount of $X (tax included or extra)].
OTHER:
- Any other extenuating circumstances or pertinent facts.
APPROVAL SIGNATURE BLOCK FOR MINISTER:
- the Deputy Minister (DM), Audit and Review Branch (ARB), and the Director General (DG)/Regional Director General (RDG) who submitted the JITAP are always cc'd after approval is received;
- informally, a verbal response is provided by the ADM's office to the point of contact in the sector/region.
In order to ensure prompt approval of a JITAP request, to the highest extent possible, it is advised that particular attention be paid to the following areas of information:
- Ensure information on the initial contract is adequate;
- Ensure previous amendments provide sufficient detail;
- Contract Award dates must be clearly identified;
- Companies to whom the contract was awarded must be clearly identified;
- Other bidders and their bids must be identified to demonstrate that the contract in question remains the contract with the best value after the amendment history has been taken into account.
Along with the JITAP submission, there needs to be a specific internal communications obligation attached to JITAP. As soon as a requirement becomes known by a contracting officer, it must be communicated by telephone - inside a Sector/Region, by appropriate steps, to the Director General (DG)/Regional Director General (RDG); by the DG/RDG, to the office of the ADM/SOSB. The ADM will communicate with the Deputy Minister's office and/or Minister's office.
The Supply Policy Directorate will be monitoring the effectiveness of this new approach. If it proves to be successful in providing all the necessary information grouped in a logical manner, and in further tightening of the JITAP turnaround times, then a new form will be promulgated reflecting these changes.