4.10.20.5. Ranking and Methodology for Standing Offers

Attention! As the transition to CanadaBuys is ongoing, Supply Manual references to ABE are to be interpreted as a generic system reference only. Users of the SAP Ariba environment should adapt their activities accordingly.

Buyers are advised to consult the tools available on CanadaBuys for guidance and procedures on completing procurement transactions in the SAP Ariba environment.

  1. One Standing Offer:
    Where only one standing offer will be authorized for use as the result of a competitive RFSO, the resulting call-ups are considered competitive and the competitive call-up authorities can be used.
  2. Multiple Standing Offers:
    If more than one standing offer will be authorized for use based on a reasonable expectation of business activity such that a single offeror would lack the capacity to meet the demands, clear ranking methodologies and call-up procedures must be described in the RFSO, so that suppliers are aware of these when preparing their offer. The two models of ranking methodology are described below:
    1. right of first refusal basis:
      The call-up procedures require that when a requirement is identified, the identified user will contact the highest-ranked offeror to determine if the requirement can be satisfied by that offeror. If the highest-ranked offeror is able to meet the requirement, a call-up is made against its standing offer. If that offeror is unable to meet the requirement, the identified user will contact the next ranked offeror. The identified user will continue and proceed as above until one offeror indicates that it can meet the requirement of the call-up. In other words, call-ups are made based on the "right of first refusal" basis. When the highest-ranked offeror is unable to fulfill the need, the identified user is required to document its file appropriately. The resulting call-ups are considered competitive and the competitive call-up authorities can be used.
    2. proportional basis:
      The call-up procedures require that call-ups be issued on a proportional basis such that the highest-ranked offeror receives the largest predetermined portion of the work; the second highest-ranked offeror receives the second largest predetermined portion of the work, etc. (for example, 50 percent to the highest-ranked offer, 30 percent to the next highest-ranked offer and 20 percent to the third highest-ranked offer). This predetermined distribution of the resulting work is to be described in the RFSO so that potential offerors are aware of these when preparing their offer. It is also known as "collective best value". The highest-ranked standing offer represents the best value for Canada, and its offeror receives the largest portion of the work. A clear advantage in terms of distribution of expected business volume should be given to the highest-ranked offeror (for example, 20 percent or more than the next offer) and the same for the others. The determination of what constitutes a clear advantage is the responsibility of the contracting officer and may vary by commodity, service or by business case. The resultant call-ups are considered competitive and the competitive call-up authorities can be used.
      Where individual standing offers are to be authorized based on the proportional basis approach, the contracting officer should inform the authorized user of his/her obligation to monitor call-up activities to ensure work is allocated in accordance with predetermined work distribution.
    3. In both cases above, contracting officers should clearly state in the RFSO the expected number of standing offers that are intended to be authorized for use. If the intention is that multiple standing offers will be authorized for use, the RFSO should state the basis upon which call-ups will be issued, whether right of first refusal, proportional or another method. If call-ups must be issued against standing offers under the proportional basis approach, the breakdown must be stated (for example, 50 percent, 30 percent and 20 percent) in the RFSO.
    4. In addition to the above, when the intention is that multiple standing offers will be authorized for use, contracting officers could include a condition that only those standing offers, which are within, for example, 10 percent of the best-priced offer, will be considered. The method of such calculations should be explicitly described in the RFSO.
  3. Non-competitive call-ups:
    In other instances, more than one SO will be authorized for use but no ranking is established. This would occur, for example, when prices are sought for a full range of items contained in a catalogue where items and ranking of offers is impossible. The authorized call-up authority may choose whichever SO to use. For some requirements, the contracting officers may set parameters to guide the authorized users in the selection of one of the standing offers. Call-ups made against these standing offers are non-competitive and only the non-competitive call-up authorities can be used.
Feedback about this web site