Supported by

Procurement
Guideline for
Consulting Engineering Services

The Voice of Consulting Engineering

 Procurement Guideline for Consulting Engineering Services

First Edition, April 2010

Second Edition, March 2011

Published by CESA – Consulting Engineers South Africa

and
Supported by the cidb – Construction Industry Development Board
April 2010

Copyright © Consulting Engineers South Africa 2011

This best practice procurement guideline is meant to be a ‘living’ document and is subject to
periodic review. The contents of this publication are presented in good faith and are intended as
general guidance on matters of interest only. The authors and the organisations to which the
authors belong make no presentation or warranties, either expressed or implied, as to the
completeness or accuracy of the contents.

All information is presented on condition that the person receiving it will make their own
determinations as to the suitability of using the information for their own purposes and on
the understanding that the information is not a substitute for specific technical or
professional advice or services.
Consulting Engineers South Africa (CESA) is the “Proud voice of Consulting Engineers in South Africa”.

Consulting Engineers South Africa (CESA), represents for its members a body that promotes their joint interests and,
because of its standing, provides quality assurance for its clients. Over 480 firms employing just on 22 000 staff are
members of CESA, with a total fee income of almost R17 billion per annum. CESA offers:

• Adherence to quality management systems, and the basic tenets of commercial viability on which CESA members’
businesses depend, underwrite the quality assurance implicit in membership.
• Member firms are committed to continuous education, and to the upliftment of their staff and the communities
they serve. Many firms have affirmative action programmes, contribute to bursary schemes and assist emerging
professionals and construction companies to grow. CESA was instrumental in the development of the Construction
Industry Charter which has been gazetted in terms of the Broad‐based Black Economic Empowerment Act.
• Members carry a required level of professional indemnity insurance, which provides clients with financial recourse in
the event of non‐performance, insufficient design, failure or neglect caused by the engineer.
• Members are required to implement and maintain an approved Quality Management System in terms of CESA’s
Code of Conduct

Mission Statement
Consulting Engineers South Africa is committed to:
• Enhancing the professional and business interests of its members
• Improving the quality of life for all South Africans by the promotion of engineering excellence
• Serving clients with professionalism, integrity and independence of judgment

CESA’s Objectives and Major Functions

CESA’s members commit themselves to the upholding of engineering and professional standards and the
maintenance of quality by its members.
The organisation seeks to promote the interests of its members and their clients by:
• Arranging regular liaison meetings with clients
• Publishing documents relating to the profession
• Compiling advisory notes for members and clients
• Drafting guidelines to members on professional practice matters
• Maintaining peer review and quality management programmes
• Publishing the Directory of Firms and members newsletters
• Organising seminars, workshops and conventions
• Holding Membership of FIDIC (International Federation of Consulting Engineering Associations)

CESA Structure
The activities of the Association are managed by a well‐structured organisation including:
• A President and a Council, elected biennially and annually respectively.
• An Executive Committee to organise and oversee activities.
• A full-time Directorate based in Bryanston, Johannesburg, to administer the Association.
• Twelve Branches that are active in the nine provinces throughout South Africa.

1
Key Focus Areas
CESA has identified the following strategic aims for the future of the organisation:
• To educate members and clients on a preferred business model
• To build partnerships with government and other stakeholders
• To address skills shortages in an expanding economy
• To maintain standards of professionalism and quality management
• To drive sustainable transformation
• To develop an HIV/Aids policy for consulting engineers
• To develop and create an awareness amongst consulting engineers of environmental issues affecting the industry

Professionalism and Integrity of Members

Over and above these functions (and perhaps more importantly), through its rigorous screening of applications and
ongoing membership requirements, CESA ensures the ‘professionalism and integrity’ of its members for the benefit of
Clients and the Public. Just as an Employer takes comfort from employing a professional engineer registered by ECSA
so is a Client able to take comfort from employing a consulting engineering firm vetted and ‘registered’ by CESA.

Screening of Applications for Membership

The ‘rigorous screening of applications and ongoing membership requirements’ ensures that the CESA member:
• Is subject to the CESA Code of Conduct, which gives the Client access to the CESA Disciplinary Committee in the
event of non‐compliance
• Is registered with CIPRO i.e. is a bona fide company, with directors and governance structures in place
• Has been in business for at least 12 months and must be nominated by an existing CESA member i.e. not a ‘fly‐by
night’ venture
• Has at least 50% of the applicant’s ownership/directors/principals registered as professional engineers or technologists
i.e. the main business of the applicant/company is engineering
• May not undertake any contracting work (as in construction contracting), only consulting work i.e. no conflict of
interests
• Has a Quality Management System (QMS) in place or will appropriate and implement the CESA QMS when it joins
CESA i.e. emphasis on quality and business systems
• Has a Business Integrity Management System (BIMS) in place or will appropriate and implement the CESA BIMS
when it joins CESA i.e. conducts its affairs with integrity

This high quality of membership has been recognised in that many Clients insist on CESA membership as a condition
of appointment.

Kindly visit http://www.cesa.co.za/node/14 for more information on CESA membership. Applications and further enquiries
regarding membership can be directed to Ms Gillian Wands at general@cesa.co.za or 011 463 2022.

2
The Construction Industry Development Board (cidb), a Schedule 3A public entity, is the Enabler and regulator
for the SA Construction Industry. It was established by Act of Parliament (Act 38 of 2000) to promote a regulatory and
developmental framework that builds:
• The construction delivery capability for South Africa’s social and economic growth.
• A proudly South African construction industry that delivers to globally competitive standards.

The cidb’s focus is on

• Sustainable growth, capacity development and empowerment
• Improved industry performance and best practice
• A transformed industry, underpinned by consistent and ethical procurement practices
• Enhanced value to clients and society

Construction plays a vital role in South Africa’s economic and social development. It provides the physical infrastructure
and backbone for economic activity. It is also a large‐scale provider of employment. The legacy of Apartheid has,
however, left the South African construction industry with a number of development and transformation challenges.
These include:
• Improving effectiveness of public sector spending on physical infrastructure development and maintenance.
• Improving labour absorption, labour relations and job stability.
• Accelerating sustainable transformation through access to opportunity, finance and training.
• Reducing the impact of HIV and AIDS in construction
• Ensuring international competitiveness.

The aims of the cidb include:

• Promoting sustainable growth of the construction industry and sustainable participation of the emerging sector in the
industry
• Promoting improved performance and best practice of public and private sector clients, contractors and other
participants
• Promoting procurement and delivery management, the uniform application of policy throughout all spheres of
government, uniform and ethical standards all guided by a Code of Conduct
• Establishing the following registers as tools to systematically regulate and monitor the performance of the industry
and its stakeholders
• Register of Contractors(RoC)
• Register of Projects (RoP)
• Register of Professional Service Providers (RoPSP) – which is of particular interest to the Consulting Engineering
profession and supported by CESA.

The cidb Act mandates the Board to:

• Establish a national register of contractors and of construction projects to systematically regulate, monitor and
promote the performance of the industry for sustainable growth, delivery and empowerment.
• Promote improved delivery management capacity and the uniform application of procurement policy throughout all
spheres of government.
• Promote improved performance and best practice of public and private sector clients, contractors and other
participants in the construction delivery process.
• Promote sustainable participation of the emerging sector.
• Provide strategic direction and develop effective partnerships for growth, reform and improvement of the construction
sector.

3
The Board is comprised of private and public sector individuals appointed by the Minister of Public Works on the basis of
their individual industry knowledge and expertise. The Board reports to the Minister. Board members are non‐executive
and rely on the executive capacity of the organisation to implement the cidb mandate (http://www.cidb.co.za/about/
structure/BoardMembers/default.aspx).

Useful cidb documentation/prescripts including the following are conveniently packaged on the website in a folder called
the ‘cidb Toolbox’ (http://www.cidb.co.za/procurement/procurement_toolbox/default.aspx)
• Standard of Uniformity (SFU)
• Code of Conduct
• Practice notes
• Legislation

The cidb Code of Conduct requires certain standards of behaviour including:

(http://www.cidb.co.za/procurement/procurement_toolbox/code_conduct/default.aspx)
• Behave equitably, honestly and transparently.
• Discharge duties and obligations timeously and with integrity.
• Comply with all applicable legislation and associated regulations
• Satisfy all requirements established in procurement documents
• Avoid conflict of interest
• Not maliciously injure/ attempt to injure the reputation of 3rd party

The cidb has a monitoring and sanctioning role in which it is enabled to:
• Conduct investigations
• Sanction offenders
• Suspend offenders from the cidb RoC
• Issue fines to Employers up to R100 000
• Intergovernmental Relations Framework Act – liaises with:
• Treasury
• Public Protector
• Auditor General

4
 Engineering Infrastructure Economic Growth Poverty Alleviation

E ngineering has played a critical role in increasing

the health and quality of life in the last 60 years.

Clean Water and Sanitation

From developing better water supplies, municipal sewer
systems, wastewater treatment plants to the design
of buildings to protect us from natural hazards and
provide health care, to improved agriculture through
water resource development and distribution projects to
rapid and dramatic changes in transportation systems,
engineers have developed the basic infrastructure on
which modern society depends. Engineers continue to
be dedicated to technology development for the common
good and the general public.

Engineers work has helped reduce the death rate

dramatically which is one of the principal reasons that
population has been able to grow so dramatically in
the last 200 years. The improvements in transportation
alone have enabled rapid migration of large numbers
of people all over the world and increased the volume
of raw materials and finished products in international
trade 800 times in the last century. Economic output

Transportation
has increased over 20 times, fossil fuel 30 times and
industrial production 100 times in the last century.

Sanitation chosen as greatest medical advance

since 1840
Sanitation is the most important medical advance in the
past 150 years, according to a poll conducted by the
British Medical Journal.

Clean water supply systems and better sewage disposal

led to fewer outbreaks of diseases such as cholera.
‘Sanitation’ was the top choice of 11,341 people
worldwide who voted in the medical journal’s survey,
receiving 1,795 votes, followed by Antibiotics with 1,642
votes, while ‘Anaesthesia’ took third place with 1,574
votes.

Energy
Making a Difference

Human Settlements

5
 TABLE OF Contents

introduction 8

DEFINITIONS 9

ChapTER 1 PROJECT LIFE-CYCLE 11

Chapter 2 consulting ENGINEERING services 13

Chapter 3 procurement of consulting engineering services 14

3.1 Legal Environment for Procurement of Consulting Engineering Services 14
3.2 Objectives of Procurement 16
3.3 Methods of Procurement 16
3.4 cidb’s Best Practice Guidelines: Competitive Selection 17
3.5 Points to Note 18

Chapter 4 SCOPE 19
4.1 Planning, Studies, Investigations and Assessments 19
4.2 Scope of Services for Normal Project Design Stages 20
4.3 The Scope of Work 21
4.4 Important Considerations 22

Chapter 5 TENDER DOCUMENTATION FOR CONSULTING ENGINEERiNG SERVICES 24

5.1 Model for Uniformity 24
5.2 Guidelines for Compiling the Documentation 24

Chapter 6 VALUE-ADDED SERVICES 25

6.1 The Concepts of Financial Offer and Quality 25
6.2 The Concept of Value 27
6.3 Guidelines for Pricing of Tenders 27
6.4 The Relevance of a Benchmark 30
6.5 The Multipliers 30
6.6 The Concept of “Value Bidding” 32
6.7 Points to Note 32

Chapter 7 EVALUATION OF TENDERS 33

7.1 cidb’s Best Practice Method 33
7.2 Evaluation Criteria 33
7.3 Recommended Approach 33
7.4 Evaluation Procedure 34
7.5 Points to Note 36
7.6 Tables for the Evaluation of Tenders 36

6
Chapter 8 PERFORMANCE MONITORING 47
8.1 Communication and Liaison 47
8.2 Suggested Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Process 47
8.3 Points to Note 48

APPENDICES
Appendix A Integrity Pact
Appendix B The Case for Using Method 4: Financial Offer, Quality and Preference
Appendix C Framework Agreements and Term Contracts
Appendix D The Procurement Cycle - Checklist
Appendix E Examples of International Best Practices in Procurement
Appendix F Example of Scope of Services
Appendix G CIDB Tables to Assist in Compiling Tender Documents
Appendix H Explanatory Notes on Ecsa Guidelines
Appendix I Useful Websites

7
 INTRODUCTION
This Guide reflects what is considered best practice today for Clients and Consulting Engineers – to appropriately invite
and respond to calls for consulting engineering services and to deliver these services in a true value–added context
which will ensure better lives of our communities. It incorporates the requirements of all applicable legislation including
the Construction Sector Charter published in terms of Section 9(1) of the BBBEE Act, 53 0f 2003.

The contents of this Guide focus on suggestions to Clients in requesting services and advice to Consulting Engineers
in framing their responses to these requests. This has been done in order to better inform the procurement process.

CESA consulted extensively with the Construction Industry Development Board (cidb) in compiling the Manual/Guide for
Procurement of Consulting Engineering Services.

Wherever possible the terminology used in the Guide has been aligned to reflect the terminology and methodology
contained in the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA) and cidb documentation. In addition to the Introduction and
definitions, this manual has been laid out in the same order as the typical flow in the procurement process as follows:

CHAPTER 1. PROJECT LIFE‐CYCLE ‐An outline of the typical project life cycle as background.
CHAPTER 2. CONSULTING SERVICES ‐A description of typical consulting services that can be provided by
consulting engineers.
CHAPTER 3. PROCUREMENT OF CONSULTING SERVICES ‐ Legislation and objectives of procuring consulting
engineering services
CHAPTER 4. SCOPE ‐ An expanded description of various elements of scope.
CHAPTER 5. TENDER DOCUMENTATION ‐ Guidelines for preparing tender documentation for consulting engineering
services.
CHAPTER 6. VALUE – ADDED SERVICES ‐ An expansion on the issues surrounding value that is obtained
through consulting engineering services and pricing for these services.
CHAPTER 7. EVALUATION OF TENDERS ‐ Guidelines on the evaluation of consulting engineering services tenders
for services.
CHAPTER 8. PERFORMANCE MONITORING ‐ Aspects related to monitoring consulting engineering services
provision

Cheap Design is Expensive

Cheap design is expensive. Your investment in quality design will enable the most qualified consultant to apply
technical knowledge and relevant project experience to develop a functional and cost‐effective facility designed to
meet your needs.

If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well to add something for the risk you run.
And if you do that, you’ll have enough to pay for something better
John Ruskin

Article courtesy ACEC Nevada

8
 DEFINITIONS
Terminology used in this Manual has been chosen to reflect the terminology used by the cidb, to facilitate cross‐
referencing with cidb documentation. Some of the more important changes are listed below.

In most cases the definitions in this manual coincide with the definitions given in the latest Guideline Scope of Services
and Tariff of Fees for Persons Registered in terms of the Engineering Profession Act, 2000 (Act No. 46 of 2000), as well
as the Revised Standard for Uniformity in Construction Procurement, published in terms of the Construction Industry
Development, Board Act, 2000 (Act No. 38 of 2000)

i. “Bid” see tender below.

ii. “Building Project” means a project comprising building work, together with its associated engineering work,
where the engineer is subject to the authority of another professional acting as the Principal Agent while
financial and administrative matters are dealt with by another professional.
iii. “Client”, means any juristic person or organ of the State engaging a consulting engineer for services on a
project.
iv. “Construction monitoring” means the process of administering the construction contract and overseeing
and/or inspecting the works, to the extent of the consulting engineer’s engagement, for the purpose of
verification that the works are being completed in accordance with the requirements of the contract that
the designs are being correctly interpreted and that appropriate construction techniques are being utilized.
Construction monitoring, to whatever extent, shall not diminish the contractor’s responsibility for executing
and completing the works in accordance with his contract.
v. “Construction industry”, the broad conglomeration of industries and sectors which add value in the creation
and maintenance of fixed assets within the built environment.
vi. “Construction Procurement” means the invitation, tendering, award and carrying out of projects.
vii. “Consulting engineer”, for purposes of these rules only, means any professional registered in terms of the
Act, or a juristic person who employs such professional, engaged by a client on a project;
viii. “Contract”, means the formal agreement between the client and the consulting engineer also called the Form
of Agreement.
ix. “Contract Data”, means the portion of the tender document that relates specifically to the Contract in question
and includes all the applicable conditions and related data in respect of insurances, limits, durations and
programme.
x. “Contractor” means any person or a juristic person under contract to a client to perform the works or part of
it on a project, including a subcontractor under contract to such contractor;
xi. “cost of the works” means the total final amount (or a fair estimate thereof), exclusive of value added tax,
certified or which would, normally, be certifiable for payment to contractors (irrespective of who actually
carries out the works) in respect of the works designed, specified or administered by the consulting engineer,
before deduction of liquidated damages or penalties, including:
• escalation, assuming continuity of the project through to final completion. Where delays occur in the project
cycle the client and consultant should come to an agreement on the escalation that will be applicable to
various stages of services.
• a pro‐rata portion of all preliminary and general items applicable to the Works ;( irrespective of who actually
carries out the works) and
• the costs of new materials, goods or equipment, or a fair evaluation, of such material, goods or equipment
as if new whether supplied new or otherwise by, or to, the client and including the cost or a fair evaluation
of the cost of installation (the sourcing, inspection and testing of such will comprise additional services by
the consulting engineer);
xii. “Electronic Engineering Services” means services related to the provision of electronic systems and
detailing the terminations, signals and interconnections of electronic components as distinct from conventional
electrical HV, MV and LV systems and related reticulation.
xiii. “Emerging Enterprise”, means and enterprise that is owned managed and controlled by previously
disadvantaged persons as defined in Government Gazette No 30692 1 February 2008.
xiv. “Engineering and Construction Works Contract”, means a contract for the provision of a combination of
supplies and services, arranged for the development, extension, installation, repair, maintenance, renewal,
removal, renovation, alteration, dismantling or demolition of structures, including building and engineering
infrastructures

9
xv. “Engineering Project” means a project of which the scope comprises mainly engineering work.
xvi. “Expression of interest”, involves both a request for an Expression of Interest and the Consulting Engineer’s
response to the request. The request is for tenderers to register their interest in undertaking a specific contract
or to participate in a project or programme and to submit their credentials so they may, in terms of the
organization’s procurement procedures, be short listed and invited to submit a tender offer should they qualify
or be selected to do so.
xvii. “Financial Offer” see Tender Price.
xviii. “Form of agreement”, means a standardised document setting out the formal agreement between the client
and the consulting engineer for the providing the scope of services for the specified scope of works
xix. “Form of offer and acceptance”, the documents that formalise the legal process of offer and acceptance.
xx. “Framework contract”, means an agreement between two parties to establish the terms for the provision of
consulting engineering services over a set period of time within a broad scope of work without guaranteeing
any quantum of work.
xxi. “Functionality” see quality.
xxii. “Hurdle” the minimum Quality Criteria score required to proceed to the next stage of the bid evaluation
process
xxiii. “list of returnable documents “ means the document that lists everything the employer requires a tenderer
to submit with his tender submission
xxiv. “Normal services” means the typical services as set out be ECSA that should be provided on a project and
for which payment in terms of the ECSA guidelines tariffs should normally provide adequate remuneration.
xxv. “Pricing instructions” the document that provides the criteria and assumptions which it will be assumed in
the contract, that the tenderer has taken into account when developing his prices, or target, in the case of
target cost contracts
xxvi. “Principal Agent” means the Professional Service Provider appointed as such.
xxvii. “project” means any total scheme envisaged by a client, including all the works and services concerned;
xxviii. “Quality (functionality)” the totality of features and characteristics of a product or service that bear on its
ability to satisfy stated or implied needs.
xxix. “Services Contract”, means a contract for the provision of labour or work, including knowledgebased
expertise, carried out by hand, or with the assistance of equipment and plant
xxx. “Site information”, means the document that describes the site as at the time of tender, to enable the
tenderer to price his tender and to decide upon his method of working and programming.
xxxi. “Scope of Services” means the services which a consulting engineer must provide in relation to the Scope
of Work.
xxxii. “Scope of Work” means the portion of the works for which the consulting engineer is engaged.
xxxiii. “Stage” means one of six stages of the normal services set out below.
xxxiv. “The Act” means the Engineering Profession Act, 2000 (Act No. 46 of 2000);
xxxv. “Total annual cost of employment” means the total annual cost of employment as described in Table 6‐2 of
this document.
xxxvi. “Submission data”, the document that establishes the respondent’s obligations in submitting an expression
of interest and the employer’s undertakings in the processing of the submission
xxxvii. “Supplies contract” means a contract for the provision of materials or commodities made available for
purchase.
xxxviii. “Tender data”, means the document that establishes the tenderer’s obligations in submitting a tender and the
employer’s undertakings in administering the tender process and evaluating tender offers;
xxxix. “Tender notice and invitation to tender” means the document that alerts prospective Professional Services
Suppliers to the nature of the supplies, services and engineering and construction works required by the
employer and contains sufficient information to solicit comparable responses.
xl. “Tender Price”, means the price submitted for the required services including all other payment conditions
and related information in respect of costs and disbursements.
xli. “Threshold”, means a monetary value of a procurement contract established in any legislation governing
procurement or by the executive of an institution, below which a procedure may be used.
xlii. “Works” means the activities on a project for which contractors are under contract to the client to perform
or are intended to be performed, including the supply of goods and equipment;

10
 ChAPTEr 1. PrOJECT LIFE CYCLE
The construction industry within South Africa is a well‐established sector that has nationally delivered infrastructure of
high standard on a par with the developed world. It is an efficient and effective ‘machine’ that delivers infrastructure at
the right quality, within budget and deadline.

Its primary constraint has not been a lack of capacity and skills but rather a lack of investment by government and the
private sector, as well as the complicated procurement regime resulting from a plethora of recent legislation.

The intention of this Manual is to generally guide clients and consulting engineers through this ‘minefield’ with regard to
their role in the construction project life‐cycle and especially the associated procurement aspects.

The project life cycle involves several elements as shown in the figure below.

1
Identification
9 2
Disposal/ Definition
Renewal

8 3
Ops and Maint Feasibility

4
7 Concept and
Construct Viability

6 5
Procure Design

The first 3 steps in the project life cycle are associated with identifying a potential project and defining and selecting the
most appropriate feasible project that can meet the need.

The next 3 steps involve developing the project through to the final design stage and procuring a Contractor to construct
the project.

Thereafter the project is constructed and handed over to the client who will have processes in place to operate and
maintain the resulting facility, as well as a plan to dispose of or renew the facility at the end of its useful life.

11
1. Identification
The first step in the project life‐cycle is to identify the need to a project. This is normally the result of planning, or
operations and maintenance studies that show a need of one form or another that can be met through a construction
project. This step normally involves many processes that are initiated or carried out by the owner of infrastructure.
Such processes may involve the appointment of specialist consulting engineers or other professional service
providers who may assist in identifying the causes and potential solutions to problems and a range of potential
projects that may solve the problem while at the same time not making an unnecessary impact on the physical and
social environment and also ensuring reasonable project sustainability.

2. Definition
Once the potential projects have been identified they will need to be assessed through more detailed planning
and investigation studies in order to define the project in more detail. Inappropriate solutions will be rejected and
a short list of alternative solutions prepared.

3. Feasibility
Once the project has been defined the technical and financial feasibility will need to be determined and the
definition may need to be adjusted to refine the project and select the most appropriate project option subject to
technical and financial constraints.

4. Viability
Once the feasible project has been defined, procurement of normal consulting engineers’ services or any other
services associated with the design and project development can commence. The first stage of these services will
be to develop the concept design in more detail and confirm its technical and financial viability in greater detail.

5. Design
Once the project concept has been finalised detailed design can commence which involves detailing all of the
aspects of the project in sufficient detail to obtain competitive prices for construction.

6. Procurement
When the design is complete the necessary contract documents are prepared and tenders for construction are
solicited. The tenders are evaluated and the Construction Contract is awarded to the wining tenderer.

7. Construction
Construction can now commence and proceeds until practical completion when the owner takes possession of
the constructed project. The construction contract is finalised when the defects liability period has expired and all
defects have been rectified.

8. Operations and Maintenance

The owner now proceeds with operation and maintenance of the project in accordance with nay manuals and
guidelines that are provided and in accordance with the owner’s own processes and procedures.

9. Disposal or Renewal
This is an action or set of actions at the end of an Operations and Maintenance period, to decommission or rebuild
the project, and either close it down or renew it to serve for another period, in an environmentally acceptable
manner.

12
 CHAPTER 2. CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES
The services provided by consulting engineers and other professional services providers involve a myriad of services in
a range of disciplines and fields. These include amongst others:

• Agricultural Engineering • Geotechnical Engineering

• Environmental • Industrial
• Electrical Engineering • Marine
• Civil Engineering Services • Mechanical Engineering
• Chemical • Mining
• Construction Management Services • Structural Engineering
• Construction Project Management Services • Transportation Engineering

There are also numerous other miscellaneous engineering services including:

• Railway Track Design, • Refuelling Systems, • Materials Handling Systems,

• Special Structures, • Asset Management, • Transaction Advisory Services,
• Acoustical Engineering, • Building Wet Services, • Cathodic Protection,
• Fire Protection and Detection • Lightning Protection, • Contractual Advisory Services,
• Airport Design • Landfill Developments • Facade Engineering

The provision of these services can deliver most value in the early steps of the project cycle and therefore functionality
and quality of the proposed service is regarded as much more important than cost in steps 1 to 3 of the Project Cycle
as shown above.

As the project becomes increasingly well defined the required consulting services become easier to define more precisely
and the role of high level expertise reduces while that of more routine skills such as design detailing and correct and
comprehensive contract documentation become more important. This is shown conceptually in the table below.

Step in Project Life Cycle Required Expertise and Key Attributes for Value

1. Identification Strategic concepts and lateral thinking to identify appropriate options.

Operational and value options to define projects that are likely to be feasible and
2. Definition
cost-effective.

3. Feasibility Identification and elaboration of possible alternatives and cost-effectiveness.

4. Concept and Viability Project optimisation subject to budget and environmental constraints.

Quick and effective design detailing and incorporation of latest appropriate

5. Design
technological developments.

Good contract documentation, accurate schedule of quantities and appropriate

6. Procurement
procurement options

Conscientious construction administration and monitoring and effective handling of

7. Construction
contractual issues

8. Operations and Maintenance Asset management and preventative maintenance

Environmentally compliant, dismantling/ demolition or rehabilitation or reconstructing

9. Disposal or Renewal
for further use

13
 CHAPTER 3. PROCUREMENT OF CONSULTING SERVICES
Consulting Engineers form an important major pool of skilled technical resources in South Africa that help to ensure that
design and construction of engineering works are of excellent quality and cost effective. A high standard of engineering
and infrastructure development is vital to the country’s growth, progress and global competitiveness. Through National
Treasury policy statements, Government recognises that “it is necessary that certain minimum requirements of
quality and efficiency be achieved when appointing consultants”. At the same time a basic policy of competitive
selection is to be maintained. In addition the Constitution of South Africa requires that government procurement systems
must be Fair, Equitable, Transparent, Competitive and Cost Effective.

3.1 Legal Environment for Procurement of Consulting Engineering Services

A universally accepted set of objectives or outcomes for a construction procurement system are those based
on the Constitution of South Africa of 1996 (Act 108 of 1996) and which have been adopted by the International
Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) in the development of the ISO 10845 series of standards for construction
procurement.

Table 3-1: Constitutional Procurement Requirements

System Requirement Qualitative Description of Requirement

The process of offer and acceptance is conducted impartially without bias, and provides
participating parties simultaneous and timely access to the same information.
Fair
Terms and conditions for performing the work do not unfairly prejudice the interests of the
parties.

The only grounds for not awarding a contract to a tenderer who complies with all
Equitable requirements are restrictions from doing business with the organization, lack of capability
or capacity, legal impediments and conflicts of interest.

The procurement process and criteria upon which decisions are to be made shall be
publicized. Decisions (award and intermediate) are made publicly available together with
Transparent reasons for those decisions. It is possible to verify that criteria were applied.
The requirements of procurement documents are presented in a clear, unambiguous,
comprehensive and understandable manner.

The system provides for appropriate levels of competition to ensure cost‐effective and
Competitive
best value outcomes.

The processes, procedures and methods are standardized with sufficient flexibility to
Cost‐effective attain best value outcomes in respect of quality, timing and price, and the least resources
to effectively manage and control procurement processes.

The system may incorporate measures to promote objectives associated with a

secondary procurement policy subject to qualified tenderers not being excluded and
Promotion of Other Objectives
deliverables or preferencing criteria being measurable, quantifiable and monitored for
compliance.

The procurement of consulting engineering services accordingly needs to maintain a balance between reasonable
compensation which will ensure continued attractiveness and development of the profession on one hand, while
ensuring competition on the other. A legislative framework exists to promote transformation in the new democracy
of the country.

14
The key Acts affecting procurement are:

Table 3-2: Primary Legislation Regulating Procurement

Act Applicability What it does in Respect of Procurement
Constitution of the All organs of state Provides procurement objectives and establishes government’s
Republic of South policy for preferencing.
Africa, 1996 (Act No Establishes requirements for the award of contracts to be lawful,
108 of 1996) reasonable and procedurally fair.

Public Finance National and provincial Establishes a regulatory framework for supply chain management
Management Act (Act departments and state which includes procurement within national and provincial
1 of 1999) owned enterprises departments and state owned enterprises.

Promotion of All organs of state Establishes fair administrative procedures, permits those affected
Administrative Justice by unfair administrative action to request reasons for such
Act (Act 3 of 2000) administrative action within 90 days of, or when they became aware
of, such actions and requires administrators to respond within 90
days of receipt of such requests.
(Administrative actions are presumed to be have been taken
without good cause where an administrator fails to respond within
the prescribed period.)
Provides for procedures for the judicial review of administrative
actions and remedies in proceedings for judicial review including the
prohibition of an administrator from acting in a particular manner,
setting aside the administrative action, correcting the defective
action and the ordering of the administrator to pay compensation.

The Promotion of The state and all persons Prohibits the state or any person from discriminating unfairly against
Equality and the (natural or juristic person) any person on the grounds of race or gender through the denial
Prevention of of access to contractual opportunities for rendering services or by
Unfair Discrimination failing to take steps to reasonably accommodate the needs of such
Act, 2000 (Act 4 of persons.
2000)

Preferential All organs of state (state Establishes the manner in which preferential procurement policies
Procurement owned enterprises) at are to be implemented
Policy Framework discretion of Minister)
Act, 2000 (Act No 5 of
2000)

Construction Industry All organs of state involved in Establishes the means by which the Board can promote and
Development Board procurement relating to the implement policies, programmes and projects, including those
Act, 2000 (Act 38 of construction industry. aimed at procurement reform, standardisation and uniformity in
2000) procurement documentation, practices and procedures within the
framework of the procurement policy of government, through the
establishment of:
• a national register of contractors (and if required, consultants and
suppliers) to manage public sector procurement risk and facilitate
public procurement;
• a register of projects above a financial value with data relating
to contracts awarded and completed and a best practice project
assessment scheme;
• best practices
Establishes a code of conduct for the parties engaged in
construction procurement.
Establishes a national register for Project Service Providers

Broad‐Based Black Procurement provisions Establishes a code of good practice and scorecard, provided for
Economic apply to all organs of industry specific charters such as the Construction Industry
Empowerment state. Charter, to inform the:
Act, 2003 (Act No. 53 • development of qualification criteria for the issuing of licenses or
of 2003) concessions, the sale of state owned enterprises and for entering
into partnerships with the private sector; and
• development and implementation of a preferential procurement
policy.

15
Table 3-2: Primary Legislation Regulating Procurement (Cont’d)
Act Applicability What it does in Respect of Procurement
Local Government: Municipalities and municipal Establishes a regulatory framework for supply chain management
Municipal Finance entities which includes procurement within municipalities and municipal
Management Act, 2003 entities.
(Act No 56 of 2003)

Prevention and Public and private sector Makes corruption and related activities an offence, establishes
Combating of Corrupt a Register in order to place certain restrictions on persons and
Activities Act, 2004. enterprises convicted of corrupt activities relating to tenders and
(Act No. 12 of 2004). contracts; and places a duty on certain persons holding a position
of authority to report certain corrupt transactions.

Construction Sector All stakeholders operating in Provides framework to address:

Charter (published in the Construction Sector • Broad based black economic empowerment (ownership, control,
terms of Section 9(1) of employment equity, skills development, procurement, enterprise
BBBEE Act, 53 of 2003 development and corporate social investment)
(see above)) • Enhancement of capacity
• Increase in production
It is mandatory for all stakeholders and is effective from 5 June
2009

It is compulsory for organs of state to comply with the principles of this legislation and to comply with the “Standard
for Uniformity in Construction Procurement” (SFU) of the Construction Industry Development Board (cidb).

The procedures of the cidb in its SFU are generic and can be readily aligned with World Bank W70 and other
international documents.

3.2 Objectives of Procurement

The development of skilled Professional Services providers takes many years and significant effort by all involved
in the industry. Therefore, the procurement of professional services should not be viewed as the purchase of
a readily available commodity, but rather the engagement of skilled professionals who should act as trusted
advisors in fulfilling the client’s project and other development objectives.

While services should be offered in a competitive manner, the primary purpose of the competitiveness should be
to ensure long term value for money and not only short term low cost design. Such long term value does not only
encompass value in the project under consideration but also value in developing and having skilled professionals
available in the country to meet its needs rather than having to import all skilled services from external sources.

The procurement of professional services in a reasonably competitive manner has exercised the minds of many
people over the years with no clear resolution in sight. The best method of procurement within a country is
where the selection of the professional service provider is based purely on quality and this is followed with price
negotiations to obtain fair value for money. This however, requires a knowledgeable client and mature consulting
environment, neither of which exists in abundance in South Africa at the present time.

Therefore, procurement needs to be approached with care in a transparent manner that encourages professionals
to develop and maintain the required skills and expertise. The current cidb procurement guidelines can provide
the necessary results provided the process is fair and transparent, as required by the cidb code of conduct.

3.3 Methods of Procurement

Against this background, Consulting Engineering Services can be procured using one of the following methods
as prescribed by the cidb Standards for Uniformity (SFU):

16
Table 3-3: Methods of Procurement
Method Description
1 Financial Offer

2 Financial Offer and Preference

3 Financial Offer and Quality (Functionality)

4 Financial Offer, Quality and Preference

For consulting engineering services, where cost effective and value–added performance is highly dependent upon
innovativeness, expertise and competence, the inclusion of Quality in the criteria for selection is of paramount
importance.

It is therefore recommended that in all but a small minority of cases as outlined in the SFU, Method 4 should be
used – i.e. Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS) with preferencing as dictated the State from time to time.

However this best practice has been frustrated by the “KZN Ruling” which relegates Quality/Functionality to
merely a separate hurdle. The points awarded for Quality cannot be added to the combined total score. See
Appendix B for further details. It is unfortunate that this has moved current South African procurement practice
further away from international best practice; see Appendices B and E for further details

3.4 cidb’s Best Practice Guidelines: Competitive Selection

It is further recommended that the cidb’s Best Practice Guidelines as contained in the SFU, for competitive
selection procedures and as described below, should be followed (mandatory for Public Bodies).

Table 3-4: Procurement Methods: Competitive Selection Procedures

PP2A (Nominated Tenderers that satisfy prescribed criteria are admitted to an electronic database.
procedure) Tenderers are invited to submit tender offers based on search criteria and their position
on the database. Tenderers are repositioned on the database upon appointment or
upon the submission of a tender offer.

PP2B (Open Tenderers may submit tender offers in response to an advertisement by the
procedure) organisation to do so.

PP2C (Qualified A call for expressions of interest is advertised and only those tenderers, who have
procedure) expressed interest, satisfy objective criteria and who are selected to submit tender
offers, are invited to do so.

PP2D (Quotation Tender offers are solicited from not less that three tenderers in any manner the
procedure) organisation chooses, subject to the procedures being fair, equitable, transparent,
competitive and cost effective.

PP2E (Proposal Tenderers submit technical and financial proposals in two envelopes. The financial
procedure) proposal is only opened should the technical proposal be found to be acceptable.

PP2F (Proposal A two staged system: Non‐financial proposals are called for. Tender offers are then
procedure) invited from those tenderers that submit acceptable proposals based on revised
procurement documents. Alternatively a contract is negotiated with the tenderer
scoring the highest number of evaluation points.

PP2G (Shopping Written or verbal offers are solicited in respect of readily available supplies obtained
procedure) from three sources. The supplies are purchased from the source providing the lowest
Financial Offer once it is confirmed in writing.

17
3.5 Points to Note
Quoting cidb Best Practice Guideline A7 (Table A1, SFU): “The procurement of professional services should result
in the award of a professional service contract on the basis of demonstrated competence and qualifications for
the type of services required, at fair and reasonable Financial Offers. Accordingly, the underlying principle is that
professional service contracts are awarded to firms which have both the capacity and capability to provide the
quality of the service at a reasonable Financial Offer and not necessarily to those that are the least costly. The
Constitution requires that the procurement system be cost effective. This implies that best value procurement
outcomes in terms of quality, downstream and life cycle costs, timing and Financial Offer using the least amount
of resources necessary to effectively manage and control the procurement process, should be strived for. Clearly
selection on the basis of quality should not necessarily mean the best quality available but quality appropriate for
the assignment”.

It should also be noted that drawing up tender documents that include Financial Offer and quality as bases for
selection require that the scope of work and required services are adequately described so that comparable
tenders are received. In addition, the process of preparing a tender can also take up a lot of time and effort on the
part of the prospective tenderers.
The cumulative total input cost of all tenderers can be considerable and in many cases for small projects can
exceed the potential fee, with a negative effect on the finances of the service provider and on the overall economy
of the project.

Therefore, as a guideline the potential fee to be earned by the consulting engineer on a project should preferably
be 20 times greater than the cost of preparing an individual tender. In other words the cost to prepare a tender
should not exceed approximately 5% of the potential fees to be earned. This makes economic sense bearing
in mind that the fees earned must cover all staff costs involved in executing the assignment, plus overheads,
expenses and profit. This means that tenders should not be solicited for small projects and where a consulting
engineer is responsible for drawing up the contract documentation the following procedure should preferably be
adopted:

• Preferably consider grouping small projects together.

• Requesting proposals for term contracts where the consulting engineer can support the client on a
partnership basis for all small to medium projects (typically less than R3 million) over say a three year period.
The advantage of this approach is that it assists with identification and implementation of projects over the
three year period and also provides less cyclical and more effective employment of scarce engineering
resources within the consulting engineering firm and the country. See also Appendix C.
• Listing manuals and procedures as requirements so that long‐winded technical proposals are not required,
only details of the proposed staffing and track record.

Appendix D, “The Procurement Cycle – Checklist” sets out the key steps to be taken by the Client (inviting
tenders) and the Consulting Engineer (submitting tenders) to ensure an orderly and compliant procedure over the
full procurement cycle.

While this chapter advocates the most suitable methods of procurement for South Africa, by highlighting the
role of quality, it is worthy of note to compare this with International best practice, exemplified in Appendix E,
where contract award is frequently finalised by negotiations with the highest scoring tenderer.

18
 CHAPTER 4. SCOPE
The scope of services and scope of work for which a consulting engineer or any other professional service provider
is appointed need to be clearly defined to ensure proper pricing and a clear and unambiguous understanding of
what needs to be done.

It is important to distinguish between the scopes of services and the scope of work as set out in the definitions
above. This is because in many instances the both elements are not set out explicitly in the tender documents
resulting in uncertainty and inappropriate pricing and expectations. This is described in more detail below.

Besides describing the services, the scope should list the “Deliverables to be produced by the Consulting
Engineer”, i.e. the products of the Consulting Engineer’s work, in form of studies, reports, designs, drawings and
documents. In other words, the objective of the scope of services must be to reduce to a minimum the level of
uncertainty concerning the services required, for which the Consulting Engineer must develop an understanding
of what is required in order to submit a Financial Offer.

4.1 Scope of Services for Planning, Studies, Investigations and Assessments

There are many steps related to identifying or defining and determining the overall feasibility of a project that need
to be undertaken prior to appointing a consulting engineer for normal project services. In many instances, with
well‐resourced clients, these identification and feasibility steps will be carried out internally as part of the client’s
normal project identification and project definition processes. For example, within a road authority, roads requiring
rehabilitation or resealing or complete reconstruction may have been identified and the projects defined as part of
the road management system. In the case of a water authority, water demand or operational problems may result
in the need for a new purification plant being identified and defined in broad terms.

As indicated earlier the first 3 steps of the project cycle involve planning and studies. The typical services relate
to carrying out these studies and investigations as well as the preparation and submission of reports embodying
preliminary proposals or initial feasibility studies and will normally be remunerated on a time and cost basis. The
typical services will involve:

i. Consultation with the client or client’s authorized representative.

ii. Inspection of the site of the project.
iii. Preliminary investigation, route location, planning and a level of design appropriate to allow decisions on
feasibility.
iv. Consultation with authorities having rights or powers of sanction as well as consultation with the public and
stakeholder groups.
v. Advice to the client as to regulatory and statutory requirements, including environmental management and
the need for surveys, analyses, tests and site or other investigations, as well as approvals, where such are
required for the completion of the report, and arranging for these to be carried out at the client’s expense.
vi. Searching for, obtaining, investigating and collating available data, drawings and plans relating to the
works.
vii. Investigating financial and economic implications relating to the proposals or feasibility studies.
viii. Clause (vii) does not normally apply to civil and structural services on Building Projects, where these
services are provided by a Quantity Surveyor, except as far as the interpretation of cost figures the
Engineer’s scope of work is concerned.

Deliverables will typically include:

• Collation of information.
• Reports on technical and financial feasibility and related implications.
• List of consents and approvals.
• Schedule of required surveys, tests, analyses, site and other investigations.

Once the project has been properly identified and its location, form, size and function are defined, then procurement
can proceed for normal project services outlined below.

19
 4.2 Scope of Services for Normal Project Delivery Stages
After the Client has established the project definition and requirements, the execution of the assignment can
be separated into six broad Stages. The 6 typical project design stages are shown in the figure below:

Figure 4‐1: Project Design and Implementation Stages

2. Concept & Viability / Preliminary Design

3 Design Development/ Detailed Design

4 and Procurement

6 Close Out

These individual stages are elaborated upon in more detail below:

Stage 1: Inception ‐ Establish client requirements and preferences, assess user needs and options, appointment
of necessary consultants, establish the project brief including project objectives, priorities, constraints, assumptions
aspirations and strategies

Stage 2: Concept Viability/ Preliminary Design ‐ Prepare and finalise the project concept in accordance with
the brief, including project scope, scale, character, form and function, plus preliminary programme and viability of
the project)

Stage 3: Design Development/ Detailed Design ‐ Develop the approved concept to finalise the design, outline
specifications, cost plan, financial viability and programme for the project)

Stage 4: Documentation and Procurement ‐ Prepare procurement and construction documentation, confirm
and implement the procurement strategies and procedures for effective and timeous procurement of necessary
resources for execution of the project.

Stage 5: Contract Administration and Inspection ‐ Manage, administer and monitor the construction contracts
and processes including preparation and coordination of procedures and documentation to facilitate practical
completion of the works

Stage 6: Close‐out ‐ Fulfil and complete the project close‐out including necessary documentation to facilitate
effective completion, handover and operation of the project)

More detailed examples of the scope of service pertinent to each Stage are contained in Appendix F that also
shows the typical scope of services associated with carrying out the duties of the Principal Consultant where it is
appropriate to appoint the consulting engineer to carry out these duties.

20
 4.3 The Scope of Work
The scope of work is the portion of the works for which the consulting engineer is engaged or the document that
specifies and describes the supplies, services, or engineering and construction works which are to be provided
and any other requirements and constraints relating to the manner in which the contract work is to be performed.

For example a client wishing to construct a Casino complex consisting of three distinct components being the
Building, a Parking Area and an access road, may appoint a consulting engineer to undertake Stages 3‐6 of
the normal engineering services for the Parking Area. In this case the scope of services can be defined as set
out in Appendix A while the scope of work may only involve the Parking Area. Some thought will have to go into
preparing the scope of work as it interfaces with other works such as stormwater runoff from the building and the
interface with the access road and gate house.

The scope of work for each service provider should be carefully determined to ensure that no overlaps and
duplication in terms of scope of work exist. In some cases the consulting engineer will be required to appoint
specialist sub‐consultants in which case the consulting engineer will ensure that no duplication in terms of scope
occurs.

A few examples of scope of work are provided below for clarity.

Table 4‐1: Examples of Scope of Work

Buildings The work in respect of site boundaries and fencing, foundations, electrical, air conditioning, wet
services, fire protection, structural, roofing, waterproofing, stormwater, etc should be clearly
allocated. If the design is to be undertaken by a multidisciplinary professional team (Architect,
Quantity Surveyor, Engineer, etc.) the responsibilities of the consulting engineer in such a team
must be clearly indicated.

Roads The beginning and end of the road should be indicated, whether the scope includes structures,
hydrological analysis and drainage, stormwater, roadside furniture, pavement layer works, traffic
analyses, selection of borrow pits, road marking, signage etc. It should also be indicated who will
be responsible for liaison with interested and affected parties and for ensuring public participation.

Structures The scope of work should be clearly indicated in respect of site investigations, foundations,
interaction with other structures and facilities, design review, and similar.

Electrical The scope of work should be clear in respect of bulk services provision, power lines, substations,
power connections and liaison with utilities, backup power, earthing, lightning protection, security
services, access control, data and telephony, lighting, electrical reticulation and switchboards, etc.

Mechanical Clarify, if air conditioning, wet services, pumps, lifts, escalators, fire protection etc. are to be
performed by one or more specialist engineers.

Dams The Scope of Services and Scope of Work should be described, in detail to enable tendering
consultants to identify the level of accreditation of design staff to be identified. The Scope of Work
should be clear in respect of geological and hydrological investigations to be undertaken prior
to preliminary and detail design, plus the extent of design to be undertaken by contractors, and
likewise the Scope of Work in the electrical and mechanical disciplines.

Municipal The Scope of Services and Scope of Work should be clearly described for the consulting
Services engineer to accurately identify the range of services to be designed by him (e.g. Roads,
Stormwater Drainage, Sewerage, Water Supply, etc.) and which are to be designed by
others, including the extent of simultaneous working and coordination required. The extent of
construction to be undertaken by emerging contractors or using labour‐based methods should
also be clear.

21
 4.4 Important Considerations
The anticipated Professional Services Providers Register to be published by the cidb will have to be taken into
account when compiling the Scope of Services.

The examples of Scope of Services provided in Appendix F, are comprehensive, but generic. Items should be
extracted from the generic scope or modified in each stage of the project in which the Client requires services
to be performed by the Consulting Engineer. These examples also show additional services where the client
requires the Consulting Engineer to perform PA/PM duties in addition to the consulting engineering services
(especially if the Consulting Engineer is the sole consultant). In such cases the selected duties from the PA/PM
scope must be added to those of the Consulting Engineer, for the Consulting Engineer to act as Principal
Consultant in addition to acting as Consulting Engineer.

If it is necessary for the Client’s Scope of Services to be more specific to the discipline(s) of the Consulting
Engineer (e.g. Civil, Structural, Electrical or Mechanical) then suitable items should be added to the generic
scope, either alongside the generic items or in place of them, as appropriate.

In the preparation of the Scope of Services a number of key factors, common to every Scope, need to be borne
in mind and taken into account when framing the tasks required in each Stage:

Table 4‐2: Key Factors in Developing Scope

Obligations of the The tasks required and listed by the Client should clearly all fall within the
parties obligations of the Consulting Engineer (the successful tenderer). If a listed task
falls within the Client’s obligations but requires a Consulting Engineer to perform
it, it should be described as being “on behalf of the Client” to avoid implying it is
solely the Consulting Engineer’s obligation and accord with the obligations of the
parties as stated in the intended contract for the services

Health and Safety
Legislation such as the OHS Act lays down comprehensive actions to be taken by
parties responsible for safety. This includes the Client, who may wish to delegate
specific actions or tasks to an OHS practitioner. The previous practice where the
Client simply nominated the Consulting Engineer as the Safety Agent is no longer
permitted due to conflict of interest.

Sustainability Environmentally sustainable design and energy efficiency are becoming a

common underlying requirement in every project, with obligations on the Client and
consulting engineer. The Client’s sustainability policy should be made known to the
consulting engineer, who in turn should be tasked with advising the Client on the
project sustainability and/or assisting to set sustainability targets.

Information available
The execution of the assignment will be based on information available at its
commencement, which may have to be augmented in order to perform the
services required. It is important that the extent of information available to the
consulting engineer, and information yet to be obtained by him, be clearly identified
at the outset, to avoid any misconceptions. Where the client is unable to define the
scope accurately, for example if the assignment is an investigation or study whose
nature and extent are unknown, then it is important to tell the tenderers what the
client has allowed for, by way of budget or estimate of manhours

In all cases the Scope of Services must reflect the Client’s full intentions and be sufficiently described so as to
enable the tendering Consulting Engineer to identify all the tasks required of him, in a manner which will enable
him to estimate the times to be spent by his personnel allocated to each task and hence to quantify his tender.

22
Failure by the Client to prepare the Scope of Services in sufficient detail and with sufficient clarity will cause the
tendering Consulting Engineer to make assumptions and/or misinterpret the Client’s requirements, and price
unnecessarily for risks which could be avoided with a sufficiently detailed scope. Misinterpretation could result
in the consultant pricing too low or too high. Either way, will not be in the interests of the Client, the Consulting
Engineer, or the project.

It frequently arises that clients need to procure consulting engineering services before being able to write a
specific Scope of Work and Scope of Services for the project or projects. These circumstances favour “Framework
Agreements” through which a consulting engineer’s services are retained for a set period and the consulting
engineer is employed as required for suitable projects within the period. Alternatively using “Term Contracts”
consulting engineers can be individually appointed in advance to execute selected projects when their scopes
can be defined (see Appendix C).

23
 CHAPTER 5. TENDER DOCUMENTATION FOR CONSULTING
ENGINEERING SERVICES
The purpose of this chapter is to guide consulting engineers and clients in the drawing up of documentation for
the procurement of consulting engineering services in line with the principles and documentation of the cidb. An
aim of this guide is to achieve reasonable uniformity in respect of documentation and content in the interests of
a more efficient industry.

5.1 Model for Uniformity

The Construction Industry Development Board (cidb) and in particular the SFU, has been in the forefront of
initiatives for uniformity in procurement documentation and the guidelines which follow have drawn on the
recommended sequences and standardised documents contained in the cidb’s “Construction Procurement
Toolbox”. These items have been adapted to be generic to consulting engineering services and to construction
services and to be relevant to the compiler, be he/she client or consulting engineer.

The procurement of services takes place within the process of offer and acceptance which results in a contract being
entered into. Procurement documents provide tenderers with the necessary inputs to allow them to complete their
tender submissions. These submissions are in turn inputs into the contract to be concluded following acceptance
of a tender offer. Uniformity in the documentation is based on the principle that there be a complete separation in
the component documents making up the tender enquiry – namely, conditions of tender, conditions of contract,
specifications or scope and methods of measurement and payment. This allows for instance, different contract
conditions, or also payment conditions to be used without affecting the remaining component documents.

5.2 Guidelines for Compiling the Documentation

A full listing in a standard sequence taken from Section 4 of the SFU is attached as Appendix G. It should be
noted that in all Professional Service provider documentation, quality or functionality should play a prominent role.

The completion of tender enquiry documentation which is complete and appropriate to its purpose is critical to the
project’s success, in terms of efficiency and cost effectiveness of the procurement process.

It recommended the references below be consulted for further information regarding procurement documentation
endorsed by the cidb:

i. Revised Standard for Uniformity in Construction Procurement (SFU)

ii. cidb Construction Procurement Best Practice Guideline C3 – Adjudication
iii. Standard Professional Services Contracts by cidb, NEC, and FIDIC
iv. General Conditions of Contract GCC 2010, BCC, NEC and FIDIC
v. Other references:
i. PROCSA Form of Agreement
ii. CESA Short Form of Agreement

Consulting Engineers should note that when their assignment includes tender documentation for construction
services, the cidb prescripts herein applying to tender documentation for procuring professional services, apply
equally to the procurement of construction services.

24
 CHAPTER 6. VALUE – ADDED SERVICES
The purpose of this chapter is to guide the consulting engineer towards an appropriate and effective method of
determining the Financial Offer to be quoted in his tender.

Through emphasis on clarity of the client’s requirements to be priced for and the “value” to the client of the
services being offered, the consulting engineer will be better equipped to demonstrate when and how acceptance
of his Financial Offer will give the most value to the client.

Clearly, acceptance of the lowest financial offer quoted will deny the client the opportunity of assessing the value
added to the project through other offers.

6.1 The Concepts of Financial Offer and Quality

In accordance with the Constitution a procurement process shall be Fair, Transparent, Competitive and Cost
effective. Consulting Engineers are accustomed to tendering under competitive conditions with submission of a
tender Financial Offer, but unlike products or goods which are well known and well defined in terms of size and
quality, tendering for delivery of professional services involves intangibles, in form of activities and deliverables
which are specific to the project and need to be carefully described in the Scope of Services and Scope of Work.

Even when this is accepted, the tendency is often for clients to rely on the Financial Offer alone, neglecting quality
(Treasury uses “functionality” and cidb uses “quality”), and award contracts to the tenderers with the lowest
Financial Offer. Clients need to remember that they are not procuring “products” from consulting engineers, but
“services” to develop or produce a product, in form of the project. Such projects invariably have costs associated
with them which go far beyond the purchase price – such as operating, maintenance, or other life cycle costs.

The methods which only use the financial offer as a basis for evaluating tenders for professional services is not
appropriate for consulting engineering services as it encourages shortcuts and cannot be used where there are
no clear and binding specifications for the quality of the work to be provided. It inevitably leads to poorer quality
services with resulting higher life cycle costs.

It is also not sufficient to ask for a tender based on a price alone and then to assume that professionals will deliver
a quality service because they are “professionals”. It is well known that remuneration systems should reward
desirable performance. Therefore, if the desirable performance is a low price then this will be delivered, but always
with a concomitant reduction in quality. Examples of this would be to design a building by only analysing the most
critical elements and copying the result to all less critical elements, or in the case of a road neither optimising the
alignment nor maximising the use of available materials and instead adopting the simplest alignment from the
point of view of design and using only commercially available materials for the pavement.

If the Scope could be defined accurately and the quality specified for every item in the schedule, such as in a
conventional construction contract, then competition based on price alone will be acceptable. However, this is
difficult to achieve in a request for professional services in the construction industry in view of the uncertainties
associated with the Scope during the project development process.

The tender Financial Offer must therefore reflect a reasonable effort to be expected from the consulting engineer
to optimise all such costs. This is seldom, if ever, reflected in the lowest Financial Offer received for services as
described above. The words quoted by John Ruskin are as relevant today as they were over a hundred years ago:

“It is unwise to pay too much, but it is worse to pay too little. When you pay too little, you
sometimes lose everything because the thing you bought was incapable of doing the thing
you bought it to do.”

John Ruskin (1819‐1900) i

25
 To put the matter in perspective, if one considers the total life‐cycle costs of a project as 100%, this will comprise:

“Engineering design” typically represents 1 to 2 percent of the overall lifecycle cost of a project, with construction
accounting for approximately 6 to 18 percent of the cost. All the rest ‐ 80 to 93 percent of the lifetime asset cost
‐ is accounted for by operations, annual and capital maintenance and decommissioning. Depicted on Chart 6‐1
below.

Note: the Consulting Engineer’s fee can be of the order of 10% of project cost, but this will be less than 2% of
total life‐cycle costs. This 2% can dictate the outcome of 98% of the total costs!

Chart 6‐1: Typical Life‐Cycle costs

While one should not necessarily always accept the lowest Financial Offer, accepting a higher Financial Offer
also has limits. Consider the graph in Fig. 6‐1 below:

Figure 6‐1: Price – Quality Curve

26
 There is a direct relationship between Financial Offer and Quality or Effort, but it is not a linear one. At “A” The
pressure on the financial offer with no quality emphasis will generate less engineering effort. This will result in
sub‐optimal designs and higher life‐cycle costs. Put simply, the client “gets what he pays for”.

At “B” the consultant has no constraints whatsoever on his engineering input and this can result in maximum
quality and minimum life‐cycle costs. However the price for this will come at a premium. Note that the graph is
asymptotic towards B, ie significant further increases in financial offer will not render significantly better quality or
lower life‐cycle costs. In other words, focus on quality alone can result in waste.

The optimum position to be targeted is at “C”, where engineering input is not constrained by lowest price
considerations alone, and it is recognised that consideration of quality will allow the tendering consulting engineer
to offer the client the full benefit of his experience, calibre of staff, soundness of methodology, innovation and
enterprise.

In the context therefore of professional consulting engineering services the concept of “financial offer” is inextricably
linked to that of “quality” of the service. Together these aspects determine the “Value” contained in and around
the tender financial offer. Also refer Practice Note 8, version 2, SFU, as clients may wish to make multidisciplinary
appointment.

6.2 The Concept of Value

Accepting that the procurement of the services is done in a manner which is fair, transparent, competitive and cost
effective, the client or employing authority needs the assurance that the services being procured for the financial
offer tendered will be commercially viable; in other words, the services will add sufficient value to the intended
project to justify the award of a contract at the tendered Financial Offer.

This introduces the concept of the “Value” of the services offered in the consulting engineer’s tender, which has
many interpretations in the context of consulting engineering services and can best be expressed as “the optimum
combination of financial offer and quality”. “Value” should:

• Secure for the client value‐for‐money services,

• Achieve minimum life cycle costs (i.e. long term value for money) and
• Should ensure that the project will fulfil its intended purpose.

Adequate opportunity must be given in the procurement process to enable the consulting engineer to show
convincingly that:

• Value‐for‐money services are offered

• Minimum life cycle costs are critical to the success of the project and
• The Financial Offer will demonstrate the value of the inputs which are offered.

In summary, the Client must receive value for the money he will pay, and the consulting engineer must be paid
adequately for the value he will provide.

It follows therefore that Value is a factor which should be quantified in the consideration of tenders by clients and
employing authorities. This too is open to various interpretations; however the most straightforward method to
quantify Value is the determination of the Tender Score in terms of Preference, Quality and Financial Offer being
individually assessed and then scored in a manner appropriate to the nature, size, and complexity of the project.
This is described more fully in Appendix B.

6.3 Guidelines for Pricing of Tenders

The success of a project depends at the outset upon the acceptance by the client or employing authority and
the consulting engineer of the Financial Offer tendered and the contractual conditions attached thereto. The
consulting engineer needs to be sure his interests are protected and the client comfortable with the financial
arrangements in the contract. Without these there will be no basis upon which good relations between the parties
– essential for a smooth‐running contract and a successful project – can be built.

27
This section is devoted to assisting the consulting engineer to realistically and appropriately develop the tender
Financial Offer, while at the same time providing a useful indication to the client of the financial commitments and
risks facing the consulting engineer. For the consulting engineer there are essentially three “golden rules” to be
followed:

6.3.1 Golden Rule No 1 ‐ Know the project requirements

It can safely be stated that in the procurement of consulting engineering services, no two projects are
exactly the same, i.e. each project is unique. Therefore the offer of services to execute the assignment must
be tailored to suit the project. This is where the consulting engineer can demonstrate his understanding of
the project requirements and differentiate his services such that the client can accept his financial offer with
confidence and with knowledge of the value to be added.

Central to understanding the requirements of the project is a clear and unambiguous Scope to be supplied
by the client. These terms must state all the client’s requirements for the project including scope of services,
scope of work, deliverables, standards and constraints. The Scope must be sufficient for the consulting
engineer to identify all the task areas and sub‐tasks required, in order to price realistically for them, with
minimum assumptions, with clear understanding of the risks, and without any omissions.

If the client is using a procurement system based on prequalification and short listing of tenderers, a call
for Expressions of Interest will be followed by requesting priced proposals (tenders) from the shortlisted
firms. The prequalification criteria will not be project‐specific and only request details of similar experience
and capacity in order to select pre‐qualified tenderers. Thereafter a request for proposals including a clear
scope will be issued for pricing.

Procedures whereby a client uses a generic set of criteria or blanket functionality requirements to admit
potential tenderers to a standing list or panel and thereafter invite only priced proposals as and when the
Scope can be detailed are also acceptable for smaller, repetitive projects.

The consulting engineer should demonstrate his knowledge of, and familiarity with the project and its
technology, through selection of staff ideally suited to the tasks and by displaying the necessary track
record. Where required, the consulting engineer can also expand upon the value to be added through a
write up of methodology or plan of work indicating innovative techniques, value‐added procedures and
optimal use of resources. It is vital for the consulting engineer to give these aspects close attention, since
this is where evaluation of the tender on grounds of quality will focus. The consulting engineer would be
wise to take carefully the client’s quality evaluation criteria for the project into account, towards maximising
his quality score.

Lastly, if the Scope is unclear in any area, the consulting engineer is advised to seek clarity from the client.
Clarification opportunities are frequently given in the tender period, but if not, the rule should be “if in doubt
– ask!”

6.3.2 Golden Rule No 2 ‐ Know your costs involved

The approach most frequently used to determine the financial offer is termed Cost‐Based Pricing. Crucial
to this exercise is a clear understanding of the costs involved. The generation of an accurate manpower
schedule or resources programme is ideal, but it will fail as a basis for financial offer determination if correct
costs are not known. The following items should be considered, in a “zero‐based” budget approach:

• For consulting engineers, costs generally comprise two components – Staff Costs, and Company
Overhead. Together these add up to the total costs of operating the firm. Staff Costs must include the
person’s total remuneration (“cost to company”). A multiplier is then applied to cater for all Company
Overhead costs, including cost of unproductive (unbillable) time. The value of the multiplier for
officebased staff, excluding unproductive time, is typically of the order of 2, i.e. total costs = Staff
costs x 2. The overhead multiplier should however be checked at regular intervals within the firm. To
these total costs can then be added a percentage for profit, selected for the tender. The total of these
“costs plus profit” per annum divided by the number of productive billable hours per year will give the
chargeable hourly rate for the person concerned.
• Note that office‐based staff usually attracts a higher overhead than site‐based staff.

28
 • A useful guide to the value of the multiplier is the historic “cents per hour per hundred Rand of
salary” method recommended to determine hourly based Time Charges by consulting engineers.
Depending on the person’s seniority/responsibility in the firm these ranged from 16.5c, 17.5c to 22
“cents per hour for each R100 or part thereof of annual salary plus bonus” of the person (for the
latest figures kindly refer to Clause 4.4 of the ‘Guideline Scope of Services and Tariff of Fees for
Persons registered in terms of the Engineering Profession Act, 2000’ available on the ECSA website
at http://www.ecsa.co.za/documents/20090101_TimebasedFees.pdf). It is emphasised that this is a
comparative guide – there is no substitute for knowing one’s own true costs.
• If contract staff, not in‐house, or subconsultants are proposed, their total cost to the company should
be determined plus a mark‐up for administration and profit. Again an hourly rate should be arrived at.
• Reimbursable expenses need to be estimated for the above resources, in form of travelling,
accommodation, printing/reproduction, communications and similar costs, based on the tasks
involved, the scheduled manpower and the programme.
• The cost of special services such as surveys, investigations and tests should be estimated and
itemised, to be included if necessary in the tender Financial Offer.

It is important in this phase to comply with three key requirements, which at first glance appear conflicting:
• Ensure nothing is omitted,
• Offer only what is asked for
• Adequately assess the influence of factors beyond one’s control.

For this purpose the tasks can be broken down by:

• Function (e.g. technical, administrative) or
• Stage (inception, concept and viability, design development, etc.) or
• Activity (meetings, design, checking, training,) as best suits the tender.

A useful guide to determine your costs is provided in the following table:

Table 6‐2: Calculating Charge‐out Rate

Unbillable Hours
Auditing and Accounting
Marketing
Transport
Interest and Finance Charges Company Overheads
Admin Salaries = multiple of staff cost
Head Office Charges added to Staff Cost Company Overheads
Maintenance and Depreciation +
Rates, Electricity and Water etc Staff Cost
Insurances ie Total Cost
Rentals and Leases divided by billable hours
Skills Levies = rate/hour
Allowances add for Profit
Overtime = Charge‐out Rate/hour
Staff Cost
Subscriptions
= Cost to Company
Company Contributions
or
(Medical Aid, Pension, UIF)
Total cost of Employment
Leave Pay
Bonuses
Basic Salary

6.3.3 Golden rule no 3 ‐ Know the Client’s situation

The consulting engineer who has mastered a knowledge of the project and knowledge of his costs may
consider it irrelevant to “know the client”. In reality this is not so; no two clients can be said to be identical
in all respects – there will be differences in structure, strategies, resources, policies, and procedures for
procuring consulting engineering services.

29
 It is therefore valuable for the consulting engineer to know the client insofar as this can affect the manner in
which he performs his assignment. For example, the following typical aspects within the client’s ambit need
to be considered:

• Capability to produce, and adhere to, a clear and sufficient Scope

• Ability to fund, or to timeously procure funding for the project
• Adequate resources to administer the contract
• History of payment of fee invoices on time
• Sufficient technical capability for reviews and to grant approvals
• Need to be offered training or mentoring
• Experience in frequent use of consulting engineering services
• Ability to responsibly evaluate and award consulting (and construction) contracts

These aspects can materially influence the level of Financial Offer to be aimed at in the tender concerned
and the consulting engineer tendering will need to make adjustments for items such as the following:

• Profit mark‐up
• Pricing for contingencies or risk
• Pricing for work not called for but necessary, in expectation of not done by client
• Pricing for unrealistically tight (or slack) deadlines
• Pricing for work assumed, but not confirmed required
• Adding a margin in lieu of qualifying the tender
• Provision for productivity delays to be expected in executing the work for the client

The aspects above are discussed further below

6.4 The Relevance of a Benchmark

A benchmark is useful for both the Client , who needs to have a yardstick against which to compare all tender
Financial Offers received and so test these against a norm, and also for the Consulting Engineer, who seeks an
indication as to the adequacy of his Financial Offer for the project services. For this purpose it is beneficial to both
parties to use a “benchmark” for evaluating the Financial Offer.

An appropriate benchmark is the Guideline Scope of Services and Tariff of Fees prepared by the Engineering
Council of South Africa (ECSA) and published annually in the Government Gazette. This has for many years been
used to calculate a recommended fee which is equitable in normal circumstances, using a recognised scope of
services in various stages and engineering disciplines.

The fee calculation is based on a percentage of the cost of the project (which is not a ‘ceiling fee’); the lower the
project cost the higher the percentage, and vice versa. Furthermore the ECSA percentage‐based fees can be
adjusted by recommended factors to cater for complexity of the work, for partial services, and for high material
cost relative to engineering effort, e.g. railways and certain types of road. The ECSA recommendations also
include hourly rates for work done on a “Time and Cost” basis, for various levels of engineering practitioner.

The ECSA benchmark is most effective when determined for the estimated or given cost of the project in question,
to give a “Benchmark/Yardstick Fee”. This can be then further adjusted up or down with a multiplier to take
into account the particular project circumstances as seen by the tendering consulting engineer, and so give a
”Yardstick Fee” appropriate to the tender Financial Offer being quoted by him.

6.5 The Multipliers

Typical circumstances for which a multiplier can be used in answering typical circumstantial questions are
discussed below:

The multiplier should be at the Consulting Engineer’s discretion, say in the range 0.60 to 1.60 as follows:

30
Table 6-3: Multiplier range
Multiplier Circumstances
0.6 – 1.0 “favourable” circumstances

1.0 ”normal” or “reasonable” circumstances;

1.0 – 1.6 “negative” circumstances

Typical questions to be asked by the Consulting Engineer are:

• Is Scope complete and clear?
• Is the client well versed in procuring consulting engineering services?
• Does client have adequate resources for competent tender evaluation?
• Does the consulting engineer have a record of successful projects with the client?
• Can hours be saved from earlier similar work done or previous experience?
• Is the staff proposed reasonably priced, ideally suited to the project and able to meet the task durations
assumed?
• Is the consulting engineer better placed than most for specialist services?
• Is the project location clearly advantageous for the consulting engineer?
• Will the risks perceived be easy to manage or be very difficult to handle?
• Is the level of complexity of the project normal or will it be very complex?
• Does the consulting engineer have a low order book and need the work?
• Will the project start date and duration require tender Financial Offer adjustment, if no provision for
escalation?

By selecting and applying a suitable multiplier for each circumstance, a particular “Adjusted Benchmark Fee”
can be determined for each case. The average of the sum of all the particular fees used can give an indication of
the “Yardstick Fee” for the tender being submitted by the consulting engineer.

Table 6-4: Example: Calculating an “Adjusted Benchmark”

Specific Circumstances Benchmark Multiplier
Favourable (0.6 – 1.0), Reasonable (1.0), Negative (1.0 – 1.6) F R N

Scope complete and clear 1.0

Informed Client 0.9

Previous appointments 1.2

Savings – previous experience 0.6

Project location 1.0

Staff – cost suitable and competent 0.8

Risks – perceived to be easy or difficult to manage 1.3

Project complexity level – low, normal or high 1.0

Consulting Engineer has low order book and needs the work 0.7

Average Multiplier (for this example) 0.94

31
6.6 The Concept of “Value Bidding”
Value Bidding, developed in the USA, represents an unusual treatment of competitive bidding theory which
refocuses the traditional bidding model from fee‐based selection criteria to one with value‐based selection criteria.

The system uses an established market research methodology, “conjoint analysis”, to establish the probability
of winning, considering client priorities, competitors’ attributes and market conditions. The resulting analytical
model enables engineers to analyse market conditions, client preferences, track competitors, while maximising
the probability of winning, thereby maximising profit and optimising Financial Offer.

The model relies heavily on assumptions and requires a dedicated effort to apply it. Its greatest value probably
lies in pricing consulting services for large and complex projects. A reference on the subject is given at end of this
chapter.

6.7 Points to Note

Understanding how a tender Financial Offer is made up is of benefit to both client and consulting engineer. Clients
need to be made aware of the “Value” offered by tenderers in terms of a combination of quality and Financial Offer.

The definition of Scope of Services which is appropriate for the project and sufficient to tender upon are in the
client’s and consulting engineer interest. If professional assistance is required to achieve this, the engagement of
a consulting engineer by the client is advised.

To submit a fair Financial Offer, the consulting engineer needs to know:

• the project
• this costs and
• the client.
This applies especially if the Scope is vague in the risks to be assumed.

Prequalification to a consultants’ panel using generic criteria followed by pricing only from panel members will
only ensure value for the client when a proper definition of Scope accompanies the RFP.

The use of a recognised “Benchmark” as a yardstick, against which both client and consulting engineer can
evaluate the Financial Offer, is considered essential. The ECSA recommended guideline fees as gazetted should
be used for this purpose.

There is no such thing as a “discounted fee” – rather a benchmark fee adjusted up or down for various projectspecific
circumstances relating to the scope of services to be offered.

Reference:
“Addressing Pricing: Value Bidding for Engineers and Consultants” by C S Sturts and F H Griffis. Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, June 2005.

32
 CHAPTER 7. EVALUATION OF TENDERS
This chapter sets out recommended steps to be taken in framing enquiry documents suited to evaluation, and
steps to evaluate tenders, with Quality consideration being an essential part of the evaluation process (as taken
from the SFU).

7.1 cidb’S Best Practice Method

A standardised method for Evaluation of Tenders, again following the cidb documentation (Table 2, SFU), is
mandatory. The method that is generally appropriate for consulting engineering services is Method 4 that is
outlined below:
Method 4: 1. Score Quality, rejecting all offers that fail to score minimum points for quality, stated in
Financial Tender Data
Offer plus 2. Score tender evaluation points for financial offer.
Quality and 3. Confirm tenders eligible for preferences claimed and if so score tender evaluation points for
Preference 4. preferencing
5. Calculate total tender points
6. Rank tender offers from highest number of tender evaluation points to lowest
7. Recommend tender with highest tender evaluation points for award unless compelling
reasons not to do so

7.2 Evaluation Criteria

It is essential for the enquiry documents to state clearly the evaluation criteria and scoring systems that will be
used in the tender adjudication process. If the tender document states that a criterion will be used to evaluate
the tenders then clarity must be provided on exactly how that criterion will be adjudicated and weighted relative
to other criteria.

Section 4.4.3 of the SFU, Tender Data, requires the Client to provide information, usually in the Tender Data
section of the documents, on the following items:

• The method to be used in evaluation of tenders

• The weighting between financial offer (NFO), quality (NQ) and preference (NP)
• Quantified descriptions of the preferences, including conditions associated with granting of preferences, and
the manner in which preferences will be scored. It is recommended that clients and consulting engineers in
the construction sector make use of the Construction Scorecard as contained in the Construction Industry
Charter, which was promulgated on 5 June 2009 http://www.publicworks.gov.za/PDFs/documents/Charters/
Construction_Charter_Version_6‐Final%20‐26‐01‐06.pdf
• Details of the quality criteria and sub‐criteria which are to be evaluated, and the manner in which quality is
to be scored

To ensure a fair, equitable transparent and cost effective procurement system, the:
• quality of the outputs or deliverables of the service must satisfy client requirements and expectations
• service must come with the reasonable skill and care that is normally used by professionals providing such
services and
• advice is independent of any affiliation, economic or otherwise, which may cause conflicts between the
service provider’s interests and those of the client.

7.3 Recommended Approach

For Consulting Engineering services, the nature of the project can influence the criteria selected for Quality. For
example, for “Repeat” or Straightforward” projects, the work can probably be carried out by less well qualified and
less experienced staff while quality in terms of cost‐effective design will still be important. Therefore, the Quality
criteria will lean towards the firm’s previous experience and cost effective design capabilities. In the case of
feasibility studies or other projects requiring strategic and complex or innovative thought processes and designs,
the staff qualifications and experience as well as the firms experience and capacity to undertake the work will all
be very important.

33
 Similarly, the weighting of the Quality relative to the Financial Offer may be less for simple projects than for more
complex projects.

It is recommended that all tenders for engineering services contain a minimum number of quality points to qualify
to have the tender evaluated any further and that all tenderers that do not meet the minimum offer be excluded
from further evaluation and informed as such.

Overall, the relationship between Financial Offer and Quality plus Preferences is also dependent on the value
of the project as specified in the Preferential Procurement Framework Act. By way of example, for consulting
assignments valued at less than R500 000, a ratio of 80:20 is mandatory; for higher value assignments, the
mandatory ratio is 90:10.

These aspects are illustrated by means of the tables below which are based on recommendations in the cidb
publications referenced at end of this chapter concerning Evaluation of Quality in Tender Submissions, but with
certain differences as follows:

• The differences relate to the Scoring against the Ratings, ‘Very Good/ Good/ Satisfactory/ Poor’ being
100/90/70/40 by the cidb, but 100/70/50/0 in this CESA Guide.
• This is firstly because the “Poor” rating implies the offer is “unsatisfactory”. The descriptions of “Poor”
also state inter alia “the technical approach and/or methodology is unlikely to satisfy project objectives or
requirements….etc.” On these grounds CESA recommends the tender should not be awarded the contract
because it will not meet the client’s requirements. Hence a zero is used.
• Secondly, “Good” and “Satisfactory” mean nearly the same in terms of acceptability, so the rating for “Good”
is decreased from 90 to 70. At the same time this sets “Very Good” at 100 apart from the other criteria,
which is appropriate because this is within the bounds of excellence.
• Finally, it is important to note that the actual result of applying the stated weighting of Quality relative to the
Financial Offer also depends on the relative values of the two criteria. For example, if all quality scoring is
in a very narrow range of – say – 80 to 85 and the financial scoring gives a much higher range of say 50%
to 100% then the financial scoring will far outweigh quality even with a high relative weighting for quality.
• Clearly it is essential for reviewers to have had experience in such evaluations. If the necessary resources
do not exist within the client organisation, specialists or other consulting engineers not connected with the
tender should be retained to assist with evaluations.

7.4 Evaluation Procedure

The first step in the evaluation procedure is to evaluate the score for quality offered by prospective tenderers using
3 quality reviewers (appropriately professionally and technically qualified officials ‐ see Treasury Regulations) and
adjusting these scores if required due to major scoring differences as shown in Table 7.6.

The next step is to reject all tenders that do not make the minimum quality score (if one has been specified) and
inform them of this fact in writing.

If a two‐envelope procedure is being used, the third step is to inform all qualified tenderers of the time and date
when the Financial Offers will be opened and evaluated, and to announce these offers at that meeting. With a
single envelope procedure, the third step is to evaluate the Financial Offers which have crossed the “Quality
hurdle”.

The next step is to calculate the final evaluation score in line with the cidb SFU as summarised below for
Method 4: Financial offer, Quality and Preferences evaluations.

The following definitions and formulas apply for the Public Sector or Organs of State:

NT = WC + NP where,
NT = Total score awarded to the tenderer under consideration (max 100).
WC = Score for Quality and financial offer (max 90/80).
NP = Score for Preferencing (max 10/20).
WC = W3 X [1 + (S ‐ Sm)]
Sm

34
 W3 = the number of tender evaluation points available for quality and financial offer and equals 90/80,
S = the sum of percentage scores for quality and financial offer of the submission under consideration.
Sm = the sum of percentage scores for quality and financial offer of the submission scoring the
highest number of points.

Scoring financial offers

NFO = W1 X A where,
NFO = the percentage score achieved for financial offer,
W1 = The percentage score given to financial offer and equals
(refer to Table 7‐2 or 7‐3 for level of project percentage score according to the nature of projects)
A = PM /P
Pm = the comparative offer of the most favourable tender offer
P = the comparative offer of the tender offer under consideration.

Scoring preferences
NP = NOP X EP/100 where,
NP = number of preference points achieved,
NOP = maximum tender evaluation points provided for in the Regulations pertaining to the Preferential
Procurement Policy Framework Act (Act 5 of 2000) (100 ‐ W3 evaluation points),
EP = the percentage of equity ownership by HDIs within the business enterprise.

Scoring Quality (functionality)

WQ = W2 X SO /100 where,
WQ = the percentage score achieved for quality,
W2 = the percentage score given to quality and equals to (100 – W1)
SO = the score for quality allocated to the submission under consideration.

The following definitions and formulas apply for the Private Sector

NEV = Total evaluated score.

N m = Score for Price.
NQ = Score for Quality.
NP = Score for Preferencing.
W1 = Weight assigned to price.
W2 = Weight assigned to quality.
And
Nm = W1 x Pm /P
where Pm is the lowest price received from qualified tenderers and P is the tender under consideration.
(calculated to 2 decimal places)
NQ = W2 x S/Ms
where MS is the maximum possible quality score and S is the quality score for the tender under
consideration. This formula simplifies to: NQ = S if W2 and Ms are the same as suggested in the tables
below.
And
NEV = Nm + NQ + NP
Finally rank tender offers from the highest number of tender evaluation points to the lowest and award the
work to the tenderer scoring the highest number of tender evaluation points, unless there are compelling
and justifiable reasons not to do so.

35
 7.5 Points to Note
It is recommended that only a few appropriate criteria be selected for judging a consulting engineer to limit
duplication ie select mutually exclusive criteria.

The involvements of women and black persons should not be evaluated in the form of quality in public contracts.
This must be addressed in the preferencing points allocated.

The indicators in Tables 7‐1 to 7‐6 below which are used to score tendered offer against Quality criteria illustrate
the attributes of the consulting engineer which will bring enhanced value to the client’s project.

At the time of writing, the evaluation procedures have been frustrated by the “KZN Ruling” which relegates
Quality/ Functionality to a separate hurdle. The points awarded for Quality cannot be added to the combined total
score for Price and Preference. See Appendix B.

In these circumstances, a higher than normal hurdle level should be considered when Quality is of paramount
importance in the services being tendered for, clearly depending on the particular nature of the project.

References:
cidb Best Practice Guideline No. A4, Evaluating Quality in Tender Submissions
cidb Inform Practice Note No. 9, Evaluation of Quality in Tender Submissions

7.6 Tables for the Evaluation of Tenders

Table 7-1: Nature of Projects

This table gives guidelines for determining the nature of the project. Five project types, Feasibility Studies and
Investigations, Innovative, Complex, Straightforward and Repeat projects are defined in the table. The Descriptions show
that for all except Repeat projects, the experience and capability of the tenderer will be key.

Nature of Project Description

Feasibility studies and
investigations
These projects may be large or small and require specialised skills depending on the
nature of the study / investigations. While some of the inputs may be readily identifiable
or known, this may not be true of the outputs. These projects may require skills other than
normal engineering such as economics, environmental, sociological etc. The deliverable is
most probably a report with recommendations on the way forward.

Innovative projects
Innovative projects may also be large or small and require a very high degree of
specialised skills or knowledge in a specific field. The work will be technically complex
and will call for considerable innovation, creativity, expertise and / or skills. The need for
specialist advice may often only be identified by the already appointed consulting engineer
once a project has commenced and a client should respect his consulting engineer’s
advice in this regard. Some examples of specialist assignments are certain geotechnical
investigations, forensic engineering, mediations, etc.

Complex projects Complex projects may also be small or large but are of such a nature that they require
a higher level of technical skills and greater resources. Both inputs and outputs may
not be readily identifiable or known. These projects may require skills other than normal
engineering, such as management, policy and social development, strategic planning and
research. The consulting engineer must be able to present a high level of technical skills
and resource for the particular application.

Straightforward projects These are projects where the tasks are of a straightforward nature involving mainly
standard technologies, in terms of which inputs are relatively well known and outputs can
be readily defined. Larger projects may require the consulting engineer to have a greater
capacity and resources to undertake the work.

Repeat projects These are projects where the tasks are also of a straightforward nature involving mainly
routine and periodic maintenance activities typical to a Client’s obligation to maintain
assets that require inputs from Professional Service Providers. These projects may entail
the appointment of a PSP for a fixed term period.

36
Table 7-2: Quality Criteria and Points Scale ‐ 20 Points for Preference
This table shows an example of Quality Criteria and Points Scale for small projects, using a Quality plus Financial Offer /
Preference ratio 80:20. Note that the more complex the project, the higher the proportion of points for Quality. Also, of the
9 Quality Criteria, it is recommended that not more than 6 criteria, suited to the project type, be selected to avoid double
counting from overlap between the 9 criteria. Within the 6 selected criteria, the allocation of points can be varied as shown
to give the client’s weighting to each criterion, but always totalling the maximum Points for Quality for that project type.
Quality Criteria Feasibility Innovative Complex Straight‐ Repeat Projects
studies Projects Projects forward
and Projects
investigations
Maximum Points for 20 20 20 20 20
BBBEE
Maximum points for 80 80 80 80 80
Quality and Financial
Offer

Maximum Points for 15 15 20 30 30

Financial Offer
Maximum Points for 65 65 60 50 50
Quality
1. Adequacy of 10 10 10 5 5
proposed work plan
and methodology
2. Qualifications and 20 20 15 10 15
Competence of key
staff in relation to
the scope of work
3. Demonstrated 10 10 10 10 10
experience (past
performance)
incomparable
projects
4. Approach proposed 10 10 10
to attain the
employer’s stated
objectives (including
training)
5. Demonstrated 10 10 10 10
experience with
respect to specific
aspects of the
project
6. Sound knowledge 10
of the employer’s
policies or work
procedures (or both)
7. QA systems which 5 5 5 5
ensure compliance
with employer’s
stated requirements
8. Organisation, 10 5
logistics and support
resources
9. Demonstrable 5
managerial ability
appropriate to size
and nature of the
work

37
Table 7-3: Quality Criteria and Points Scale ‐ 10 Points for Preference
This table indicates an example of the Quality Criteria and Points Scale for large projects. Note the 90:10 Quality plus
Price / Preference ratio. The allocation of points for Quality and selection of Quality Criteria are similar to the above Table.
Quality Criteria Feasibility Innovative Complex Straight‐forward Repeat Projects
studies Projects Projects Projects
and
investigations
Maximum Points for 10 10 10 10 10
BBBEE
Maximum points for 90 90 90 90 90
Quality and Price
Maximum Points for 15 15 20 35 35
Financial Offer
Maximum points for 75 75 70 55 55
Quality
1. Adequacy 10 10 10 10 5
of proposed
work plan and
methodology
2. Qualifications 25 25 20 10 10
and Competence
of key staff in
relation to the
scope of work
3. Demonstrated 15 15 20 15 15
experience (past
performance)
in comparable
projects
4. Approach 5 5
proposed to attain
the employer’s
stated objectives
(including training)
5. Demonstrated 10 10 10
experience with
respect to specific
aspects of the
project
6. Sound knowledge 10 10
of the employer’s
policies or work
procedures (or
both)
7. QA systems 10 10 10
which ensure
compliance with
employer’s stated
requirements
8. Organisation, 10 10
logistics and
support resources
9. Demonstrable 5
managerial ability
appropriate to size
and nature of the
work

38
Table 7-4: Indicators to be used when Scoring Tenderers on Quality Criteria
This table shows how the nine Quality Criteria shown in these example tables can be rated. Four ratings for scoring, Poor,
Satisfactory, Good and Very Good are used and a description of each of these ratings for each of the nine Quality Criteria
is presented. Here it will be noted a score of zero is recommended against a “Poor” rating. For the nine Quality Criteria the
Evaluation Indicators use descriptors such as “unlikely to satisfy project requirements”, key staff not adequately qualified”,
limited experience”, “limited knowledge”, “does not have a Q.A. system”’ and similar, which justifies the unacceptability of
the criterion concerned.
Criteria Rating Scoring Evaluation Indicators
1 Adequacy of Very Good 100 The important issues are approached in an innovative and
proposed work efficient way, indicating that the tenderer has outstanding
plan and proposed knowledge of state‐of‐the‐art approaches
methodology
Good 70 The approach is specifically tailored to address the specific
project objectives and methodology and is sufficiently flexible to
accommodate changes that may occur during execution

Satisfactory 50 The approach is generic and not tailored to address the specific
project objectives and methodology. The approach does not
adequately deal with the critical characteristics of the project

Poor 0 The technical approach and/or methodology is poor / is unlikely

to satisfy project objectives or requirements. The tenderer has
misunderstood certain aspects of the scope of work and does
not deal with the critical aspects of the project

2 Qualifications and Very Good 100 The tenderer demonstrates that key staff are exceptionally well
competence of the qualified and competent in the application of their skills that
key staff (assigned relate to the scope of the project
personnel) in
relation to the Good 70 The tenderer demonstrates that key staff are adequately
scope of work qualified and competent in the application of their skills that
relate to the scope of the project

Satisfactory 50 The tenderer demonstrates that key staff are reasonably well
qualified and competent in the application of their skills that
relate to the scope of the project

Poor 0 The tenderer was not able to demonstrate that key staff are
reasonably well qualified and competent in the application of
their skills that relate to the scope of the project

3 Demonstrated Very Good 100 Key staff have outstanding experience in comparable projects
experience (past
performance) Good 70 Key staff have adequate experience in comparable projects
in comparable
projects
Satisfactory 50 Key staff have reasonable experience in comparable projects

Poor 0 Key staff have limited experience in comparable projects

39
4 Approach Very Good 100 An innovative approach is presented that illustrates the
proposed to attain tenderer’s approach has been tailored to be relevant and meet
the employer’s the client’s objectives in all aspects
stated objectives
(including training) Good 70 The approach presented illustrates that the tenderer will adopt
an approach that meets the client’s objectives

Satisfactory 50 The tenderer proposes a generic approach that will meet the
client’s objectives in most aspects

Poor 0 The approach presented does not meet the client’s expectations
and will not result in the objectives of the project being fully
realised
5 Demonstrated Very Good 100 Key staff have outstanding experience in specific aspects of the
experience with project that were defined as key components of the assignment
respect to specific in the SOW
aspects of the
project Good 70 Key staff have adequate experience in specific aspects of the
project that were defined as key components of the assignment
in the SOW

Satisfactory 50 Key staff have reasonable experience in specific aspects of the

project that were defined as key components of the assignment
in the SOW

Poor 0 Key staff have limited experience in specific aspects of the

project that were defined as key components of the assignment
in the SOW

6 Sound knowledge Very Good 100 The tenderer has outstanding knowledge of the employer’s
of policies and work procedures
the employer’s
policies or work Good 70 The tenderer has adequate knowledge of the employer’s
procedures (or policies and work procedures
both)
Satisfactory 50 The tenderer has reasonable knowledge of the employer’s
policies and work procedures

Poor 0 The tenderer has limited knowledge of the employer’s policies

and work procedures

7 Quality assurance Very Good 100 The tenderer is certified to maintain an internationally accepted
systems which quality assurance system
ensure compliance
with stated Good 70 The tenderer’s quality assurance system meets the quality
employer’s assurance requirements set by the employer for the project
requirements
Satisfactory 50 The tenderer employs a reasonable quality assurance system

Poor 0 The tenderer does not have a quality assurance system

40
8 Organisation, Very Good 100 The tenderer convincingly illustrates that extensive
logistics and organisational, logistic and support resources will be available
support resources for execution of the project

Good 70 The tenderer convincingly illustrates that sufficient

organisational, logistic and support resources will be available
for execution of the project

Satisfactory 50 The tenderer reasonably well illustrates that sufficient

organisational, logistic and support resources will be available
for execution of the project

Poor 0 The tenderer fails to illustrate that sufficient organisational,

logistic and support resources will be available for execution of
the project

9 Demonstrable Very Good 100 The tenderer illustrates extensive knowledge and experience
managerial ability in the project management of projects of similar size and
appropriate to the complexity
size and nature of
the work Good 70 The tenderer illustrates adequate knowledge and experience
in the project management of projects of similar size and
complexity

Satisfactory 50 The tenderer illustrates reasonable knowledge and experience

in the project management of projects of similar size and
complexity

Poor 0 The tenderer illustrates limited knowledge and experience in the

project management of projects of similar size and complexity

41
This refers specifically to the Quality criterion no. 2, “Qualifications and competence of Key Staff” (assigned personnel). It is
completed by the client
Table 7.5. Refers when issuing
specifically tenderscriterion
to the Quality for the project, and indicates,and
no. 2, “Qualifications for six typical staffofpositions,
competence Key Staffthe Preferred
(assigned and Minimum
personnel)”.
points required by
It is completed forthe
each of six
client attributes
when issuingoftenders
qualifications
for the and experience.
project, In addition
and indicates, for sixsuggested points
typical staff valuesthe
positions, arePreferred
shown for each
and
project
Minimum type described
points in the
required example
for each at attributes
of six top of theof table below.) and experience. In addition suggested points values are
qualifications
shown for each project type described in Table 4.1 in the example at top of the table.
Table 7-5. Examples of Qualification and Competence of Key Staff 
 
Required
Required Years experience after Professional
for Qualification Years experience after Professional
for Qualification qualification registration
project qualification registration
Nature of project project
Nature of project

Offer

Offer

Offer
Y/N Pref Min Pref Min Pref

Offer

Offer

Offer
Y/N Pref Min Pref Min Pref
Feasibility
studies and Y Deg Deg 15 10 Y
investigation
Innovative Y Deg Deg 15 10 Y
Projects
Project Leader

Complex Y Deg Tech 10 8 Y

Projects
Straight Y Deg Tech 8 5 N
forward
Projects
Repeat Y Deg Tech 5 5 N
Projects
Feasibility
studies and
investigation
Innovative
Design Engineer

Projects

Complex
Projects
Straight
forward
Projects
Repeat
Projects
Feasibility
studies and
investigation
Innovative
Materials Engineer

Projects

Complex
Projects
Straight
forward
Projects
Repeat
Projects

42
 Involvement in comparable
Years experience after Involvement in comparable
Years experience after projects – state number in past ten
registration projects – state number in past ten
registration years
years
Project value of comparable
Project
projectsvalue of comparable
in past six years – state
projects in past six years – state
R’000
R’000

Offer

Offer

Offer
Pref Min Pref Min Pref Min
Offer

Offer

Offer
Pref Min Pref Min Pref Min

10 7 5 3 ?

10 7 3 1 ? ?

5 3 5 2 ? ?

N/A N/A 5 2 ? ?

N/A N/A 5 2 ? ?

43
 Required
Years experience after Professional
for Qualification
qualification registration
project
Nature of project

Offer

Offer

Offer
Y/N Pref Min Pref Min Pref

Feasibility
studies and
investigation
Contracts Engineer

Innovative
Projects
Complex
Projects
Straight
forward
Projects
Repeat
Projects
Feasibility
studies and
investigation
Resident Engineer

Innovative
Projects
Complex
Projects
Straight
forward
Projects
Repeat
Projects
Feasibility
studies and
Asst Resident Engineer

investigation
Innovative
Projects
Complex
Projects
Straight
forward
Projects
Repeat
Projects

44
 Involvement in comparable Project value of comparable
Years experience after
projects – state number in past ten projects in past six years – state
registration
years R’000

Offer

Offer

Offer
Pref Min Pref Min Pref Min

45
The table below represents a worked example for a Complex project, in the 90:10 Points System range taken from Table
7‐3, showing the evaluation results of 3 Reviewers, using the same 5 of the 9 Quality Criteria, and the same weightings, as
in Table 7‐3.
The Ratings between Reviewers should not differ by more than one step from each other. In the Initial Assessment however,
in Quality Criterion 1, Reviewer 3’s rating of “Poor” differs markedly from “Good” and “Very Good” of Reviewers 1 and 2.
Similarly, in Quality Criterion 3, Reviewer 2’s rating of “Satisfactory” differs markedly from “Very Good” of Reviewers 1 and 3.
Because of these “outliers” tabled by Reviewer’s 3 and 2, such significant deviations merit discussion and further consideration
by the Reviewers, towards increased consensus. The second sheet of this table shows this has been done. Although some
Ratings changed in the re‐assessment, there were finally no outliers.

Table 7-6. Assessment Example: Complex Project. Bid Value in The 90:10 Points System Range

Reviewer 1 Reviewer 2 Reviewer 3 Points

Initial Assessment of Quality Average
Weight for
Criteria Score
Quality
Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score

Adequacy of proposed
1. work plan and proposed 10 VG 100 G 70 P 0 56.67 5.7
methodology
2. Qualifications and competence
of key staff
20 G 70 S 50 G 70 63.33 12.6
(assigned personnel) in
relation to the scope of work
3. Demonstrated experience (past
performance) in comparable 20 VG 100 S 50 VG 100 83.33 16.7
projects
5. Demonstrated experience with
respect to specific aspects of 10 S 50 P 0 S 50 33.33 3.3
the project
7. QA systems which ensure
compliance with stated 10 P 0 S 50 P 0 16.67 1.7
employer’s requirements

Maximum points for Quality 70.0 Points for Quality of tenderer under consideration 40

Reviewer 1 Reviewer 2 Reviewer 3 Points

Final Assessment of Quality Criteria Average
Weight for
(after panel discussion) Score
Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Quality

Adequacy of proposed work plan

1. 10 VG 100 G 70 G 70 80.0 8.0
and proposed methodology

2. Qualifications and competence

of key staff (assigned personnel) 20 G 70 S 50 G 70 63.33 12.6
in relation to the scope of work
3. Demonstrated experience (past
performance) in comparable 20 G 70 S 50 G 70 63.33 12.7
projects
5. Demonstrated experience with
respect to specific aspects of the 10 S 50 P 0 S 50 33.33 3.3
project
7. QA systems which ensure
compliance with stated 10 P 0 S 50 P 0 16.67 1.7
employer’s requirements

Maximum points for Quality 70.0 Points for Quality of tenderer under consideration 38.3

46
 CHAPTER 8. PERFORMANCE MONITORING
Since its establishment in 1952, the S.A. Association of Consulting Engineers (today known as Consulting
Engineers South Africa – CESA) has been committed to upholding and advancing the standard of services
offered by its member firms. It is currently a requirement that every member firm shall have its own Quality
Management System (QMS) which complies with the international standard for quality ISO 9001: 2008. Many
firms have obtained ISO certification of compliance with the standard, including CESA itself.

To strengthen the integrity of members and combat fraudulent practices in the Construction Sector, CESA has
recently introduced the Business Integrity Management System (BIMS) into its Code of Conduct, to which
members are required to adhere.

Clients and employing authorities frequently wish to know that the performance of consulting engineers employed
by them do indeed meet the CESA standards. CESA encourages the use of a performance evaluation mechanism
by clients as this can indicate to the client whether his choice of consulting engineer was correct. Some clients
maintain a database recording the performance of their consulting engineers, which assists them in their selection
processes. With feedback from the client monitoring the consulting engineer’s performance, evaluations can
enhance the standard of services in the industry in the longer term.

The focus of this chapter is on the presentation of a suggested standard evaluation system, which can be used or
adapted by clients to monitor a consulting engineer’s performance to meet the objectives above. Table 8‐1 show
a typical Consulting Engineering Performance Scorecard as recommended by CESA.

8.1 Communication and Liaison

If the consulting engineer is to provide the client with the standard of service required then it is essential that there
be good and ongoing communication between the parties. This process should begin at the award of the contract
to the successful tendering consulting engineer. At this time the brief to the consulting engineer must be confirmed
by the client, with confirmation of the requirements given in the tender Scope or if these are to be modified, with
negotiation and contractual agreement on the terms of the contract.

The Scope must inter alia include items such as all technical requirements, financial conditions, budget constraints,
programme requirements and approval processes. The consulting engineer is advised to prepare his own list of
questions beforehand, towards ensuring a brief which is complete. The need for a comprehensive brief appropriate
to the project cannot be overstated – it will form the basis of the working relationship between the parties and
minimise the risk of misunderstandings which can lead to problems or disputes later.

The client should also advise the consulting engineer of his intention to monitor the latter’s performance. It is
highly likely that the consulting engineer’s own quality management system requires completion by the client of a
“Client’s Satisfaction Questionnaire” during and/or at end of the assignment. In such cases it is desirable for the
parties to collaborate on the framework of the evaluation system so that it meets the requirements of both parties.
Table 8‐2 shows a typical Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire from the Quality Management System of a smaller
Consulting Engineering firm.

Where the client finds serious or repetitive cases of inadequate performance or transgressions of the CESA Code
of Conduct by a member firm, this should be reported to the Executive Director of CESA who will investigate the
matter and take action against the member if necessary. Alternatively, complaints against individuals (not firms)
registered with the Engineering Council of South Africa may be lodged by the client with ECSA.

Clearly, the implementation of a process of regular performance monitoring should avoid the need for such drastic
steps.

8.2 Suggested Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Process

The process suggested is based on the client’s consideration of key activities by the consulting engineer and
using a scorecard system to evaluate the consulting engineer’s performance.

47
 The scoring system uses categories of evaluation that have been found through research to be important to
clients and uses selected sub‐categories as shown in Table 8‐3. Clients could modify or add sub‐categories to
suite their own particular needs, if required and still divided by the total maximum possible score to come up with
a comparable percentage final rating.

8.3 Points to Note

Strictly speaking this chapter on monitoring the performance of consulting engineers is not part of the procurement
process. It is however relevant to include it as a sequel to procurement, because arising from the emphasis on
quality in the evaluation of tenders submitted by consulting engineers, the monitoring of their performance will
assist to ensure that the highest standards of quality are maintained. The facility of client feedback giving ongoing
opportunity for improvement in the quality of services is furthermore vital in this process that will maximise benefits
of services to our society.

The recommended methods for monitoring as described above represent an initiative of CESA – Consulting
Engineers South Africa, delivered in the interests of the procurement of professional services by the client body.

Many consulting engineering firms will have in their QMS a procedure to record Client Satisfaction, as required
by ISO 9001:2008 and this can be used for monitoring the Consulting Engineering Performance in place of Table
8-1. A typical Client Satisfaction Survey form is included here as Table 8‐2.

Table 8-1: Consulting Engineering Performance Scorecard

Performance Rating Scale
1 2 3 4 5
Very Poor Improvement Satisfied Above Average Excellent
Required

Guide for Scoring ‐ Criteria for Evaluation

Very Poor Client extremely unhappy; not prepared to use firm again unless vast improvement.
Improvement Client not happy and dissatisfied, but would use firm again, provided key issues addressed.
Required
Satisfied Client generally satisfied he has received value for money; would use the firm again.

Above Average Client received more than contracted value, firm went beyond brief. Would re‐use them.

Excellent Client highly impressed; firm went the extra mile, adding significant value. Would definitely
prefer to use the firm again.

Item Description (Qualitative Criteria) Score

1 Quality of Design

1.1 Creativity / Innovation and Appropriateness

1.2 Understanding Client & Legal Requirements

1.3 Documentation and Drawings

1.4 Environmental Issues / sustainability.

1.5 Health and Safety Issues

1.6 Life Cycle Costs

48
Item Description (Qualitative Criteria) Score
2 Adherence to Time Constraints

2.1 Completion of Work Stages

2.2 Response to Queries

3 Recognition of Cost

3.1 In Designs

3.2 Protecting Client Interests

3.3 Accurate Costs and Forecasts

3.4 Scope control

4 Project Administration

4.1 Record Keeping

4.2 Legal and Financial

4.3 Programme

4.4 Minutes and Reporting

4.5 Handling Variation Orders and Claims

5 Communication and Interfaces

5.1 Jurisdictions / Stakeholder Consultations

5.2 Client, other Consultants and Contractors

5.3 Managing investigations, monitoring and testing

6 Construction and Post Construction

6.1 Monitoring during construction

6.2 Documentation and ‘As-Built Drawings’

6.3 Oversight during maintenance period

6.4 Contract Administration

7 General

7.1 Staff competency

7.2 Head Office Support

7.3 Discipline A

TOTAL SCORE

FINAL RATING : [AVERAGE SCORE = Total Score/number of line items scored]

49
Table 8-2: Client Satisfaction Survey

Client Contact

Consulting Engineer Contact

Project Number and

Description

We would be grateful if you could spare a few minutes to complete this Client Satisfaction Survey to help us ensure
that our standard of professional services exceeds expectations whenever possible.
Please tick the appropriate box to indicate your degree of satisfaction where:

1 2 3 4 5
Very Poor Improvement Satisfied Above Average Excellent
Required

Guide for Scoring ‐ Criteria for Evaluation

Very Poor Client extremely unhappy; not prepared to use firm again unless vast improvement.
Improvement Client not happy and dissatisfied, but would use firm again, provided key issues addressed.
Required
Satisfied Client generally satisfied he has received value for money; would use the firm again.
Above Average Client received more than contracted value, firm went beyond brief. Would re‐use them.
Excellent Client highly impressed; firm went the extra mile, adding significant value. Would definitely
prefer to use the firm again.

Service Attributes 1 2 3 4 5 Comments and Suggestions

Communication and
Interfaces

Contract And Project

Administration

Technical Competency

Project Time
Management Budget
Quality
Support
and
Feedback
Do you have any comments or suggestions that would help us improve our quality of professional services?

Signature of Client: Date:

50
Table 8‐3: Guide for Scoring ‐ Criteria for Evaluation
Note Each Category E to A has 8 aspects. Those aspects appropriate to the project
should be used to evaluate each of the Activities in each Project Stage on Table
8‐1 and 8‐2. The Score for A, B, C, D, or E is then assigned to each activity on the
above mentioned tables.
E. Very Poor Did not identify project objectives, omitted to deal with all aspects of the brief.
(Max score = 1) Key staff very inexperienced, unable to deal with all aspects of the project.
Key staff insufficiently skilled and not competent to undertake the work.
Virtually no knowledge of client policies/procedures, minimum support and communication.
No Quality Management System evident, adherence to Quality inadequate.
No proper organisational, logistic and support resources deployed to the project.
Virtually no knowledge and experience in management of similar type projects.
Failed to meet all critical deadlines and budgets, minimal senior staff involved.
In Summary: Client extremely unhappy; not prepared to use firm again unless vast improvement.

D. Improvement required Did not satisfy project objectives, critical aspects of brief not dealt with properly.
(Max score = 2) Key staff lacked sufficient competence, did not apply their skills correctly.
Key staff lacked adequate experience to deal with key aspects of the project.
Limited knowledge of client policies/procedures ‐ insufficient support, poor communication.
Not enough organisational, logistic and support resources deployed for project.
Limited knowledge and experience in management of similar type projects.
Failed to meet some deadlines, some budgets exceeded, insufficient senior staff involved.
In Summary: Client not happy and dissatisfied, but would use firm again, provided key issues addressed.

C. Satisfactory Used a generic approach to the brief, critical aspects inadequately dealt with.
(Max score = 3) Key staff reasonably well qualified and competent to apply skills to the project.
Reasonable knowledge of client’s policies and work procedures, support and communication evident.
Use of an in‐house QMS, generally able to meet most client requirements.
Indication of sufficient organisational, logistic and support resources available and deployed.
In Summary: Reasonable knowledge and experience in management of similar type projects.

B. Above Average Approach tailored to meet project objectives, with flexibility to meet changes.
(Max score = 4) All key staff adequately qualified and competent to apply skills to project scope.
Key staff showed adequate experience in comparable projects, applied to this project.
Adequate knowledge of client’s policies and work procedures, supported by good communication.
Consulting Engineers QMS meets the client’s quality assurance requirements for the project.
Sufficient organisational, logistic and support resources convincingly used.
Adequate knowledge and experience in management of similar type projects, competently applied.
All deadlines met and budgets held, clear evidence of senior staff involvement.
In Summary: Client received more than contracted value, firm went beyond brief. Would reuse them.

A. Excellent Important issues handled innovatively and efficiently, in a state‐of‐the‐art manner.

(Max score = 5) Key staff exceptionally well qualified and competently applied their skills to the project.
Key staff showed outstanding experience in comparable projects, to benefit of this project.
Outstanding knowledge of client’s policies and work procedures, excellent support and
communication
Consulting Engineer’s QMS internationally certified and meets all client’s QA requirements.

Extensive organisational, logistic and support resources convincingly used.

Extensive knowledge and experience in management of similar type projects, expertly applied.

Deadlines and budgets met with significant time/cost savings, strong involvement of senior staff.

In Summary: Client highly impressed; firm went the extra mile, adding significant value. Would definitely prefer to
use the firm again.

51
 APPENDIX A: INTEGRITY PACT
Introduction
Developed by Transparency International (TI) during the 1990s, the integrity pact is a tool aimed at preventing corruption
in public contracting. The pact is essentially an agreement between a government or government department (at the
national, sub‐national or local level) and all bidders for a public contract. It stipulates rights and obligations to the effect
that neither side will: pay, offer, demand or accept bribes; collude with competitors to obtain the contract; or engage in
such abuses while executing the contract.

TI has seen the pact tried and tested over ten years in hundreds of contracts in over 15 countries. What makes it a
unique tool is the introduction of an independent monitoring system under the leadership of civil society, which ensures
increased accountability of public resources.

What is an integrity pact?

1. A written agreement between the government/government department and all bidders to refrain from bribery
and collusion
Bidders are required to disclose all commissions and similar expenses paid by them to anyone in connection with the
contract. If the written agreement is violated then the pact describes the sanctions that shall apply. These may include:
• Loss or denial of contract;
• Forfeiture of the bid or performance bond and liability for damages;
• Exclusion from bidding on future contracts (debarment); and
• Criminal or disciplinary action against employees of the government.

2. A monitoring system that provides for independent oversight and increased government accountability of
the public contracting process
In most cases, monitors are members of civil society or experts appointed by (and reporting to) the TI Chapter and
its civil society partners. The independent monitoring system aims to ensure that the pact is implemented and the
obligations of the parties are fulfilled. The monitor performs functions such as:
• Overseeing corruption risks in the contracting process and the execution of work;
• Offering guidance on possible preventive measures;
• Responding to the concerns and/or complaints of bidders or interested external stakeholders;
• Informing the public about the contracting process’s transparency and integrity (or lack thereof).

Why use an integrity pact?

• Companies can abstain from bribing safe in the knowledge that
A. their competitors have provided assurances to do the same, and
B. government procurement, privatisation or licensing agencies will follow transparent procedures and
undertake to prevent corruption, including extortion, by their officials
• Governments can reduce the high cost and distorting impact of corruption on public procurement, privatisation or
licensing in their programmes, which will have a more hospitable investment climate and public support.
• Citizens can more easily monitor public decision‐making and their government’s activities.

Integrity pacts in practice

Integrity Pacts have already been successfully utilised in several countries worldwide including Argentina, Colombia,
Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Latvia, Mexico, South Korea, Pakistan, and United Kingdom.

Article taken from Transparency International (the global initiative against fraud and corruption) website at http://www.
transparency.org/global_priorities/public_contracting/integrity_pacts

52
 APPENDIX B: THE CASE FOR USING METHOD 4: FINANCIAL
OFFER, QUALITY AND PREFERENCE
In October 2009, a court in KZN ruled that that when evaluating government or quasi‐government tenders, the points
awarded for Quality (aka Functionality) could not be added to the points awarded for Price and Preference to arrive at
the Total Points awarded for the tender.

The ruling effectively said that the PPPF Act (which disallowed Quality, Price and Preference scores to be combined)
takes precedence over the PPPFA Regulations (which allowed Quality, Price and Preference scores to be combined).
This set the cat amongst the pigeons because this is directly opposed to what the cidb prescribes in its Method 4
contained in its Standard for Uniformity (see http://www.cidb.org.za/Documents/KC/cidb_Publications/Stand_Codes_
Other/Stand_codes_gg33239_28May2010.pdf) ie evaluators must add the points for Quality, Price and Preference
and the tender is awarded to the tenderer with the highest number of Price plus Preference points (excluding points for
Quality).

National Treasury issued a circular on 13 September 2010 (see below) saying that Quality can be used a ‘hurdle’ which
tenderers must first overcome before their tenders are considered under the Price and Preference criteria. For example,
tenderers must achieve a quality rating of 70% before their Price and Preference points are added together and the
tender is awarded to the tenderer with the highest number of points.

The circular goes on to say that persons in the construction sector are obliged to follow the prescripts of the cidb which
in turn must follow the laws of SA. This means that unless the cidb can get an exemption to the KZN Ruling it must
also require that Quality/Functionality be evaluated on a ‘hurdle’ basis and thereafter all qualifying bidders are to be
evaluated on Price and Preference where highest score ‘wins’ the bid.

The cidb facilitated a workshop on 16 September 2010 amongst construction sector stakeholders which reached
unanimity on the following points:
• cidb SFU Method 4 should be retained in the long term as its withdrawal will have a major impact upon certain
types of procurement
• The drafting of the Act left a lot to be desired and no reason could be found why method 4 could not be applied
at face value
• One cannot apply Method 4 as the combining of Quality points to Price and Preference points has been disallowed
by the KZN Ruling.
• Support for cidb’s approach to restricting the use of Method 4 to certain types of procurement if necessary
• Support for cidb approaching the Minister to apply for an exemption to the application of a formula which leads
to negative results
• Agreed that an amendment had to be made to the SFU, which as a minimum withdraws the requirements relating
to the invalid Preferential Procurement Regulations
• Support for a range of interventions including the granting of exemption from the Act for Method 4 to amending
the Act.

It was clear at the workshop that stakeholders firmly believe that the score for Quality must be combined with the scores
for Price and Preference so that tenderers are encouraged to develop their Quality aspects beyond the bare minimum,
which point of view CESA strongly supports.

In the interim clients and consulting engineers will have to implement National Treasury’s ruling to the effect that:

Quality must be used a ‘hurdle’ which tenderers must first overcome before their tenders are
considered under the Price and Preference criteria. For example, tenderers must achieve a quality
rating of 70% before their Price and Preference points are added together and the tender is
awarded to the tenderer with the highest number of points.

It is recommended that Clients specify a higher ‘hurdle’ score for Functionality/Quality to ensure that bids/tenders are not
won on Price and Preference alone, with scant regard for the quality of engineering services delivered.

53
 APPENDIX C: FRAMEWORK AGREEMENTS AND
TERM CONTRACTS
It frequently arises that clients need to procure consulting engineering services before being in a position to identify
specific projects and hence being unable to write a detailed, project –specific Scope of Services and Scope of Work. In
these circumstances the procurement of consulting engineering services by means of a “Framework Agreement” or
“Term Contract” provides a more feasible approach, which can give a more expeditious means of appointing a consulting
engineer. The Framework Agreement is designed to allow the client to invite tenders from consulting engineers to carry
out work on an “as instructed” basis over a set term. Generally The Framework Agreement is between two parties that
establishes their terms for services over a set period of time, within a broad scope of work, without guaranteeing any
quantum of services. The rationale behind using such agreements is that it saves the client from having to procure
from the market each time a service, covered by the Framework Agreement, is required. This results in savings in
procurement time and costs whenever a delivery requirement (also called a Task Order or Call‐off contract) is to be
made for a specific project.

Framework Agreements are only entered into with consulting engineers who have the resources and capability to
carry out the services envisaged and must include the means by which the consulting engineer is remunerated for the
instructed work. Hence the evaluation of tenders for Framework Agreements must be based on quality as well as price
– and not price alone. The Client’s quality criteria and basis of remuneration of the consulting engineer must accordingly
be clearly indicated in the tender document. An example is given below :

Client: A major Metropolitan Municipality

Purpose: Creation of a pool of consulting engineers to be allocated Task Orders
Required: Framework Agreements with selected consulting engineers, for 3 years
Scope of Services: 26 different “Service Areas” described – e.g. OHS Assessments, Gravel road maintenance and
construction, Urban roads (large works), Traffic engineering, Electrical engineering (Buildings) etc., etc.
Scope of Work: Described in general terms for each Service Area
Quality criteria: Tenderers satisfying the following specific criteria per Service Area become eligible :
• Suitable in‐house capabilities
• 50% of Directors and Members professionally registered
• Primary business is consulting engineering
• Minimum total turnover and turnover within Framework scope
• Professional Indemnity insurance

Further particular Quality criteria

• Tenderer’ s experience in relation to the Service Area
• Adequacy of resources for the service
• Knowledge of issues pertinent to the service
• Experience of tenderer for the last 5 years
• Value added by tenderer (Aspects by client, responses by tenderer)

Pricing Requirements
• Key staff categories required by client, e.g. Principal Consultant (Rate/hr), Professional (Rate/hr), Salaried staff
(Cents/hr/R00 of TACE), Site staff (TACE {Total Annual Cost of Employment} X Factor)
• Client’s allocation of staff to each Service Area
• Client’s formula to reduce prices to a common comparative base

Returnable Schedules Include

• Experience of Principal Consultant
• Experience of tenderer, last 5 years
• Value added: responses by tenderer to aspects named by client
• Tender Assessment schedule, formula by client

54
Of the four forms of contract endorsed by the cidb, the NEC is the most suitable for use as a Framework document.
Subsequent to the Framework Agreement it can be used for different types of contract for Task Orders – notably Target
Contracts.

A type of contract similar to the Framework Agreement can also be used where a client has determined the project types
to be delivered in an ensuing period (say two or more financial years), but the Scope of Services and Scope of Work in
each case cannot yet be clearly defined. Tenders are invited for the “Provision of Professional Engineering Services”
for the period concerned. To be eligible, a tenderer must inter alia have a local office, plus specified key personnel (e.g.
Project Leader, Project Engineer, Resident Engineer etc.) and carry a stated minimum P.I. insurance cover.

The Scope of Services is the Normal Services set out in the ECSA Guideline Tariff of Fees plus certain Additional
Services. This approach does not utilise subsequent Task Orders or Call‐off contracts; appointments for the ensuing
projects can be made directly, based on successful responses to this tender. A typical example is given below:

Client: A major Metropolitan Municipality

Purpose: To procure Professional Engineering Services for 8 projects
Required: Agreements with selected consulting engineers selected for the projects
Scope of Services: Normal Services + some Additional Services of the ECSA Guideline Tariff of Fees (described)
Scope of Work: Description of each of 8 projects envisaged, e.g. Basic Sanitation, Extension to Water and Sewer
systems,
Rehabilitation of streets, Major Road widening, etc. In addition specifications given for ancillary services such as
laboratory services, GIS services, Contract documentation, Construction Supervision, Design criteria, Client approvals.
Quality criteria: For each project, names of staff available in each category named by client plus comparable projects in
last 5 years entered on schedule
Pricing requirements: Based on Percentage‐based fees in ECSA Guideline Tariff using Activity schedules to be priced
for each project, consisting of:
1. Estimated contract amount (given)
• Primary fee
• Secondary fee
• Markup + or – on Primary and Secondary fees by tenderer
2. Extra over fees for stated additional services (e.g. Resident Engineer) with unit/rate/quantity/amount
3. Recoverable Expenses for stated items (e.g. printing) with unit/rate/quantity/amount
4. Provisional cost sums named by client (e.g. laboratory services) with % markup by tenderer
5. Total of Subtotals (1) to (4)

Tenders are evaluated on the basis of Quality + Price + Preference.

55
 APPENDIX D: THE PROCUREMENT CYCLE – CHECKLIST

Item No. Task Principal Actions By Guidance

1 Establish what is to be procured
1.1 Identify the 1. Clarify what is to be procured Client Get confirmation to proceed
Service

1.2 Prepare broad 1. Develop a title for identification of the project Client Have scope approved
Scope of Work 2. Describe Employer’s objective for the
services
3. Describe the services, what must be
provided
4. Describe extent of the services, including
deliverables

1.3 Estimate financial 1. Estimate cost of service for budget Client Ensure budgetary provision
value of proposed purposes (allow for VAT, Escalation and is made in appropriate
procurement Contingencies) year(s)

1.4 Commence 1. Go/no go decision, based on scope and Client Obtain approval to proceed
procurement estimates to
process 2. Obtain procurement reference number. comply with MFMA
If in a major capital project, do an evaluation

2 Decide on Procurement Strategies

2.1 Confirm the 1. Identify specific goals to be pursued Client Comply with relevant policy,
preferential 2. Identify broad implementation procedures of Organisation, Provincial,
procurement National
policy

2.2 Confirm contract 1. Choose appropriate Type of Procurement Client See cidb Best Practice
and Pricing PP2A‐F depending on nature of the Guide
strategies assignment A1, Procurement of
2. Choose suitable form of contract for pricing Professional Services.
fees e.g. Lump sum, Time Charge, % fees Consider if Normal,
with markup etc. Framework, or Term
Agreement desirable

2.3 Agree Targeting 1. Select best methodology to implement Client Unbundling into smaller
strategy preferential procurement policy, to comply contracts. Support
with PPPFA. emerging firms J.V.s
2. Define goals and method of preferencing Established/emerging firms

2.4 Agree Targeting 1. Select best methodology to implement Unbundling into smaller
strategy preferential procurement policy, to comply contracts. Support
with PPPFA. emerging firms, Joint
2. Define goals and method of preferencing Ventures Established/
emerging firms

2.5 Finalise 1. Obtain approval of final procurement Client Confirm in line with official
Procedure procedure to invite Tenders and conclude procurement policies
Agreements

56
Item No. Task Principal Actions By Guidance
3 Invite Tender Offers
3.1 Prepare tender 1. Include documents to prequalify Client Employer can accept/reject
documents respondents, to obtain tender offers and offers but to wait 6 months if
set terms and conditions of the contractual no tenders accepted, before
Agreement reinviting bids
2. Compile documents in accordance with Must allow tenderers to
standards. identify tasks required and
3. Describe Scope of Services in fullest to
detail, and ditto, Scope of Work, to reduce price them.
unnecessary risk. Include both technical,
4. List Returnable documents and include financial, and commercial
Returnable Schedules, also Pricing information.
instructions and schedules. State Method 4 for
5. Complete Tender Data with ref. to Evaluation
Conditions of Tender, including tender Generally 8 or 12 weeks
validity period. max.
6. Complete Contract Data section, incl. Understand which risks
obligations of Employer and Consulting assumed by Employer and
Engineer, for Agreement. Consulting Engineer.
7. State applicable Tender Evaluation Incl. Scoring: Quality, Price,
Criteria. Pref. Total Quality + Price
8. Decide and state Quality criteria with points 80/90 unless Quality
weighting to each criterion and maximum score is a “ hurdle”
Quality points for Project. Minimum requirements
9. List Key Staff and expand their quality each
criteria. position.
10. Draw up Preferencing Schedule, as cidb Annex D,E, Forms 1 ,2, or 4
SFU.
11. Follow standard sequence and colour of
sections.
3.2 Approval of 1. Review docs. Show amendments, give Client By authorised person(s)
Tender Docs. approval
3.3 Confirm Budget 1. Confirm financial provision for the services Client By authorised person(s)
exists
3.4 Invite Tenders 1. Issue/advertise Tender Notice, including Client Provide a reasonable period
dates for Briefing (state if compulsory), for tenderers to obtain
Closing date and address for delivery, plus clarifications and prepare
contact for clarifications realistic offers
3.5 Hold Briefing and 1. Chair/conduct Briefing meeting and Site Client Issue minutes and List of
Site Inspection (if Inspection attendees to all who drew
required) 2. Note queries and need to issue Addenda documents.
to tender. Issue Addenda, answers to
3. Set closing date to receive queries all.
4 Preparation and submission of Tender
4.1 Receive all 1. Confirm in principle decision to proceed Con. Management decision
documents 2. Do Risk Assessment, decide tender Eng. (policy)
strategy, incl. JV partners and/or Specialist Consider special
Subconsultants. capabilities or resources
3. Attend Briefing meetings and Site required, w.r.t. Scope.
Inspections Heads of Agreement with JV Note queries raised, get
Partners, Subconsultants. minutes.
Agree Task, Responsibility
areas.

57
Item No. Task Principal Actions By Guidance
4.2 Prepare Tender 1. Appoint “Bid Manager” and assign tasks to Con. Inc. tasks to JV and
team. Eng. subconsultants
2. Draw up programme for preparation of Allow float and time for
tender. approvals.
3. Study Scopes of Services and Work, list all Assign tasks to team
tasks. members. e.g. Tax, BBBEE
4. Study List of Returnable Docs., get all certificates, etc.
schedules. Includes relevant location,
5. Study Evaluation criteria, prepare relevant experience, appropriate key
information pertinent to Client’s Quality staff skills.
requirements. Revise strategy
6. Consider Addenda and clarifications qualifications
issued. Know the Project, Costs
7. Study Pricing Instructions, follow “Golden and
Rules”. Client.
8. Calculate Price in elemental/breakdown Compare total with %
form, with task/time/rate and total price to Fees, also ECSA rates,
be considered. (“Benchmark Fee”)
9. Derive final Tender Price after adjustment Adjusted Benchmark =
and comparison with Yardstick, % Yardstick. No such thing
deviation from ECSA as a
10. Complete Form of Offer and Schedule of “Discount”.
Deviations. Client Quality, Price,
11. Pre‐calculate Tender score (cidb Method 4) Preferences

4.3 Assemble, deliver 1. Confirm complete ‐ all Client requirements Con. Check Instructions to
tender met. Eng. Tenderers
2. Obtain all necessary in‐house and JV Including Price and
approvals. Qualifications
3. Print and assemble documents with copies Include own and JV copies
required. Provide delivery backup if
4. Deliver in good time. Late delivery required.
inexcusable!

4.4 Actions in Tender 1. Conclude detailed agreements with JV Con. Also subconsultancy
Period Partners. Eng. agreements.
2. Prepare justification for qualifications in If called for clarification,
tender negotiation
3. Put Project Manager, team members on Include in forward resource
standby. planning.

58
Item No. Task Principal Actions By Guidance
5 Receive Tenders
5.1 Open and record 1. In public or in presence of minimum 2 Client See cidb Best Practice
tenders officials and record pertinent details, Guide
confirm all returnables are received and A3 Evaluating Tender
notify all interested parties. Includes: Offers.
2. Open in presence of tenderer’s agents if Also prefs. Claimed,
permitted. completion time stated.
3. Withdrawn or late tenders left unopened (Available on request to
and returned. tenderers if not given in
4. Announce names of tenders opened and public)
prices, if cidb Standard Conditions of Disclose after tender
Tender followed, see clause F 3.4.2 awarded.
5. Non‐ disclosure of Evaluation and Award Includes corrupt, fraudulent
information. acts.
6. Grounds for rejection or disqualification. Also places obligation on
7. Clarification of any tenders (clear the tenderer to disclose and
ambiguity), can include rates breakdown clarify.
and arithmetical corrections. Announce names of
8. If a 2‐envelope system, open only tenderers.
technical bids.

5.2 Confirm tenders 1. Compare submissions against List of Client Identify which missing/
complete Returnables incomplete.
2. Request tenderers to complete incomplete Only those documents
docs and record what is incomplete in required for tender
each tender. evaluation purposes.

5.3 Confirm which 1. Test for responsiveness includes : Client Done prior to Evaluation.
tenders are 2. Tender Conditions met, tender fully signed Affects scope, risks,
responsive or not. 3. Check for material deviations from tender competitive?
terms. Corrections not allowed.
4. Reject tenders with unacceptable
deviations.
5. Confirm compulsory briefings, inspections
attended Confirm any tenderer’s alterations
are permitted. Confirm conditions for any
alternative offers are met. Confirm the
tender covers Client’s Scope of Work.
Confirm tenderer has observed Pricing
instructions. Note reasons for declaring a
tender non‐responsive.

6 Evaluation of Tenders
6.1 Reduce tenders 1. Review Price and correct discrepancies , Client Amount in words governs
to comparative see Standard Conditions of Tender clause Ignore non‐firm prices,
offers F 3.11. discounts.
2. Notify tenderers, invite to confirm offer
or corrected total. Identify parameters in
Returnable Docs. that affect Price e.g. life
cycle costs, escalation, contract period and
quantify impact on Price tendered. Reduce
all tender offers to a common base.

59
Item No. Task Principal Actions By Guidance
6.2 Of tender offers 1. Judge reasonableness of all financial Client Unrealistic = not
offers economically
2. Ascertain reasons for unrealistic offers possible to execute
(interview?) assignment at that price.
3. Reject tenders with unreasonable financial
offers

6.3 Review claims for 1. Confirm tenderers eligible for Preferences Client Review any Targeted
Prefs. claimed. Declaration.
2. Confirm tendered contract participation Affidavits, to confirm
goals are reasonable. Reject claims where Targeted Enterprise.
tenderers not eligible for such preferences. Women and Black persons
to be

6.4 Points for 1. Score to 2 decimal points according to Client See clause 4.5 of cidb
Financial offer criteria in Tender Data specific wording. SFU for public sector
2. Use formula for Method 4, (Financial Offer, construction
Quality and Preferences) for Public or procurement.
Private sectors Public sector mandatory,
see cidb SFU proforma
Form 2.

6.5 Award points for 1. Assemble and brief minimum 3 reviewers. Client Agree scoring, VG, G, S, P
Quality Score each Quality criterion in tender. VG 100, G 70, S 50, P 0.
2. Determine average scores and overall Gives Quality points for
Quality points. tender.
3. Check for “outliers”, if so re‐determine Reviewers confer, then
scores. rescore.

6.6 Award points for 1. Score for Targeted Enterprise status Client See cidb Best Practice
Preferences (Appendix D) and Direct Participation of Guide clause 5.6
T.E. and/or labour (Ann. E)

6.7 Total Points and 1. Follow applicable Method (Method 4 Client Either Financial Offer +
rank above) or combine scores Quality + Quality + Preference, or
Tenders Financial Offer if required, or combine combine scores Quality +
scores Quality + Financial Offer if required, Financial Offer.
or use Quality as Hurdle for eligible Comply with Client Policy.
Financial Offers Set high hurdle for high
Quality

6.8 Risk Assessment 1. Confirm that highest ranking tenderer: Client Bank rating A, B, C
a. Can participate unrestrictedly in public acceptable.
procurement.
b. Has required competence, resources
and equipment,
c. Has legal capacity to enter into contract
agreement,
d. Is not insolvent or have any conflicts of
interest,
e. Rates not unacceptably high or low to
Employer,
f. Gives no risks from Employer’s
Contract Data,
g. Gives no risks from Returnables
submitted.

60
Item No. Task Principal Actions By Guidance
6.9 Evaluation Report 1. Use Headings and Forms in Ann. 1 of cidb Client Report Contents :
and Best Practice Guideline A3 Summary,
Recommendation 2. Refer report to Person(s) authorised to Overview of tender
confirm or amend Report evaluation,
Tender Evaluation Forms,
Reasons for tenders
eliminated,
Recommendations for
Award.

7 Acceptance of successful tender

7.1 Confirm Award 1. Complete Form of Acceptance Use NEC or cidb
to the 2. Advise unsuccessful tenderers. Professional
Successful 3. Prepare Contract Agreement Services Contract.
Tenderer

References:
cidb Standard for Uniformity in Construction Procurement (Board Notice 86 of 2010) incl. Ann. F: Standard
Conditions of Tender

cidb Best Practice Guideline A1 ‐ The Procurement Cycle

cidb Best Practice Guideline A3 ‐ Evaluating Tender Offers

cidb Best Practice Guideline A7 ‐ The Procurement of Professional Services

cidb Inform Practice Note 6 ‐ Competitive Selection of Professional Service Providers

cidb Inform Practice Note 8 ‐ Remunerating Professional Service providers

cidb Inform Practice Note 15 ‐ Framework Agreements

61
APPENDIX E: EXAMPLES OF INTERNATIONAL BEST PRACTICES -
PROCUREMENT OF CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES

World Bank FIDIC Hong Kong The United States

Government Government (eg
Florida Department
of Transportation)
Publication Consultant Quality Based Selection and Professional Services
Guidelines Selection FIDIC remuneration of ‐ Summary of
– II and III. Methods Engineering and Procedures
of Selection associated
Consultants.

Method of II Quality‐ and Cost‐ Quality‐Based Quality‐ and Cost‐ a. By law, consultant
Selection Based Selection Selection (QBS) Based Selection services for federal
(QCBS) Others (QCBS) work are procured
III Others a. The two envelope by Qualification
a. Quality‐Based method Two Stage Process Based Selection
Selection (QBS) b. The cost weighted (QBS)
b. Selection under a method b. The vast majority
Fixed Budget c. The budget of the individual
c. Least‐Cost method States also require
Selection d. Design competition the QBS system
d. Selection Based with prices for consultant
on Consultants’ e. Price negotiation services.
Qualifications
e. Single‐Source
f. Selection

Quality a. Consultant’s a. Professional a. Consultant’s a. Professional

Criteria specific competence and experience: 10 – qualifications
experience: 5 to 10 experience 20% necessary for
points b. Managerial ability b. Response to brief: satisfactory
b. Methodology: 20 to c. Availability of 15 – 25% performance of the
50 points resources c. Approach to cost required services
c. Key personnel: 30 d. Professional effectiveness: b. Specialized
to 60 points independence 15 – 20% experience
d. Transfer of e. Professional d. Methodology and and technical
knowledge: 5 to 10 integrity work programme: competence in
points f. Quality assurance 15 – 20% the type of work
e. Participation by system e. Ability and required.
nationals: 5 to 10 g. Fairness of fee experience of key c. Capacity to
points structure Staff: 30 – 40% accomplish work in
Total: 100 points f. Past performance: the required time
For short listing 10 – 20% d. Past performance
FIDIC apply more on contracts with
specific Quality Government
Criteria, see overleaf. agencies and
private industry.
e. Location of offices
f. Subcontracting
plans

62
 World Bank FIDIC Hong Kong The United States
Government Government (eg
Florida Department
of Transportation)
FIDIC Short listing factors:

• Relevant experience on similar
assignments
• Methodology
• Capacity to complete the work
• Technical and Managerial skills to • Proven past performance on client
match the size and type of project contracts
• The number of qualified • Access to support resources
professional and managerial
personnel committed to the project
team
• location of the firm’s office, or local • Quality assurance system
knowledge in relation to the work

Weighting the quality Except for the type of FIDIC recommends a. Multidisciplinary Firms are ranked
and cost services specified in that the weighted projects, inc. according to
Section III, the weight value of the price complex Feasibility qualifications
for cost shall normally should be 10 percent studies and
be in the range of 10 as an absolute Investigation‐stage
to 20 points, but in no maximum. consultancies:
case shall exceed 30 80% technical :
points out of a total 20% fee.
score of 100 b. Less complex
Feasibility
Studies and
Investigation stage
consultancies,
and Design
Construction
consultancies of
above average
complexity: 70%
technical : 30%
fee.
c. Technically
straightforward
Design and
Construction
consultancies:
60% technical :
40% fee

Award of The firm obtaining the The firm with the Similar to the World The number one
Contract highest total score highest technical Bank, the firm ranked consultant is
shall be invited for score is invited to obtaining the requested to provide
negotiations. negotiate an highest total score a fee proposal for the
appropriate fee shall be invited for project.
negotiations.

63
Quality Based Selection (QBS) World Wide
The QBS system is advocated and/or used effectively by the following organizations around the world:
• The Association of Consulting Engineers Australia
• The Australian Council of Building Design
• Asian Development Bank
• Association of Consulting Engineers of Canada
• Inter‐American Development Bank
• The International Federation of Consulting Engineers
• Association of Japanese Consulting Engineers
• American Council of Engineering Companies
• The World Bank
• American Public Works Association
• Associated General Contractors of America
• Association for Consultancy and Engineering ‐ UK
• The German Government prohibits selection of most
consulting services on a price basis, and requires
QBS with fees negotiated on published schedules.
64
• The Government of New South Wales ‐ Australia,
based on its independent study, concluded that QBS
is the appropriate procurement system for public
works projects.
• Since 1972, the United States Government requires
by law that consultant services for federal work are
procured by QBS. The vast majority of the individual
States also require the QBS system for consultant
services.
• The Regional Municipality of Ottawa‐Carleton serving
the National Capital of Canada enjoys efficient
project delivery from the consulting industry through
QBS procurement.
• The Government of Japan advocates QBS for
consulting services.
 APPENDIX F: EXAMPLES OF SCOPE OF SERVICES
1. Stages Typically Included as Services for Normal Project Delivery Stages (ECSA)

STAGE 1. Inception
Establish client requirements and preferences, assess user needs and options, appointment of necessary
consultants, establish the project brief including project objectives, priorities, constraints, assumptions aspirations
and strategies
Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
i. Assist in developing a clear project brief • Agreed scope of services and scope of work
ii. Attend project initiation meetings • Signed agreement
iii. Advise on procurement policy for the project • Report on project, site and functional requirements
iv. Advise on the rights, constraints, consents and • Schedule of required surveys, tests, analyses, site and
approvals other investigations
v. Define the scope of services and scope of work • Schedule of consents and approvals
required
vi. Conclude the terms of the agreement with the client.
vii. Inspect the site and advise on the necessary
surveys, analyses, tests and site or other
investigations where such information will be
required for Stage 2 including the availability and
location of infrastructure and services
viii. Determine the availability of data, drawings and
plans relating to the project
ix. Advise on criteria that could influence the project life
cycle cost significantly (financial design criteria)
x. Provide necessary information within the agreed
scope of the project to other consultants involved

STAGE 2. Concept and Viability / Preliminary Design

Prepare and finalise the project concept in accordance with the brief, including project scope, scale, character, form
and function, plus preliminary programme and viability of the project)
Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
i. Agree documentation programme with principal • Concept design
consultant and other consultants involved • Schedule of required surveys, tests and other
ii. Attend design and consultants’ meetings investigations and related reports
iii. Establish the concept design criteria • Schedule of required surveys, tests and other
iv. Prepare initial concept design and related investigations and related reports
documentation • Process design
v. Advise the client regarding further surveys, analyses, • Preliminary design
tests and investigations which may be required • Cost estimates as required
Establish regulatory authorities’ requirements and
incorporate into the design
vi. Refine and assess the concept design to ensure
conformance with all regulatory requirements and
consents
vii. Establish access, utilities, services and connections
required for the design
viii. Coordinate design interfaces with other consultants
involved
ix. Prepare process designs (where required),
preliminary designs, and related documentation for
approval by authorities and client and suitable for
costing

65
STAGE 2. Concept and Viability / Preliminary Design (cont’d)
Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
x. Provide cost estimates and life cycle costs as
required
xi. Liaise, co‐operate and provide necessary information
to the client, principal consultant and other
consultants involved
Note:
In the event that the consultant, who undertakes Stage 1 or Stages 1 and 2, is not appointed for the remaining
Stages, the deliverables emanating from Stages 1 and 2 should be made available to the consultant appointed
to undertake the remaining Stages.
STAGE 3. Design Development / Detail Design
Develop the approved concept to finalise the design, outline specifications, cost plan, financial viability and
programme for the project)
Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
i. Review documentation programme with principal • Design development drawings
consultant and other consultants involved • Outline specifications
ii. Attend design and consultants’ meetings • Local and other authority submission drawings and
iii. Incorporate client’s and authorities’ detailed reports
requirements into the design • Detailed estimates of construction costs
iv. Incorporate other consultant’s designs and
requirements into the design
v. Prepare design development drawings including draft
technical details and specifications
vi. Review and evaluate design and outline specification
and exercise cost control
vii. Prepare detailed estimates of construction cost
viii. Liaise, co‐operate and provide necessary information
to the principal consultant and other consultants
involved.
ix. Submit the necessary design documentation to local
and other authorities for approval

STAGE 4. Documentation and Procurement

Prepare procurement and construction documentation, confirm and implement the procurement strategies and
procedures for effective and timeous procurement of necessary resources for execution of the project.
Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
i. Attend design and consultants’ meetings • Specifications
ii. Prepare specifications and preambles for the works • Services co‐ordination
iii. Accommodate services design • Working drawings.
iv. Check cost estimates and adjust designs and • Budget construction cost
documents if necessary to remain within budget • Tender documentation
v. Formulate the procurement strategy for contractors • Tender evaluation report
or assist the principal consultant where relevant • Tender recommendations
vi. Prepare documentation for contractor procurement • Priced contract documentation
vii. Review designs, drawings and schedules for
compliance with approved budget
viii. Assist in calling for tenders and/or negotiation of
prices and/or assist the principal consultant where
relevant
ix. Liaise, co‐operate and provide necessary information
to the principal consultant and the other consultants
as required

66
STAGE 4. Documentation and Procurement (cont’d)
Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
x. Assist in the evaluation of tenders
xi. Assist with the preparation of contract documentation
for signature
xii. Assess samples and products for compliance and
design intent

STAGE 5. Contract Administration and Inspection

Manage, administer and monitor the construction contracts and processes including preparation and coordination of
procedures and documentation to facilitate practical completion of the works

Typical Activities Typical Deliverables

i. Attend site handover • Schedules of predicted cash flow
ii. Issue construction documentation in accordance • Construction documentation
with the documentation schedule including, in the • Drawing register
case of structural engineering, reinforcing bending • Estimates for proposed variations
schedules and detailing and specifications of • Contract instructions
structural steel sections and connections • Financial control reports
iii. Carry out contract administration procedures in • Valuations for payment certificates
terms of the contract • Progressive and draft final account(s)
iv. Prepare schedules of predicted cash flow • Practical completion and defects list
v. Prepare pro‐active estimates of proposed variations • Electrical Certificate of Compliance
for client decision making • Where a quantity surveyor is included in the project
vi. Attend regular site, technical and progress meetings team in building works, activities (iv), (v), (viii), (x) and
vii. Inspect works for conformity to contract (xii) and related deliverables will not be required from
documentation the engineer.
viii. Adjudicate and resolve financial claims by
contractor(s)
ix. Assist in the resolution of contractual claims by the
contractor
x. Establish and maintain a financial control system.
xi. Clarify details and descriptions during construction
as required
xii. Prepare valuations for payment certificates to be
issued by the principal agent
xiii. Witness and review of all tests and mock ups
carried out both on and off site
xiv. Witness and review of all tests and mock ups
carried out both on and off site
xv. Check and approve contractor drawings for design
intent
xvi. Update and issue drawings register.
xvii. (xvii) Issue contract instructions as and when
required
xviii. Review and comment on operation and
maintenance manuals, guarantee certificates and
warranties
xix. Inspect the works and issue practical completion
and defects lists
xx. Assist in obtaining statutory certificates

67
 STAGE 6. Close‐Out
Fulfil and complete the project close‐out including necessary documentation to facilitate effective completion,
handover and operation of the project)

Typical Activities Typical Deliverables

i. Inspect and verify the rectification of defects
ii. Receive, comment and approve relevant payment
valuations and completion certificates
iii. Prepare and/ or procure operations and maintenance
manuals, guarantees and warranties
iv. Prepare and/ or procure as‐built drawings and
documentation
v. Conclude the final accounts where relevant.
• Valuations for payment certificates
• Works and final completion lists
• Operations and maintenance manuals, guarantees and
warranties
• Operations and maintenance manuals, guarantees and
warranties
• As‐built drawings and documentation
• Final accounts

2. Additional Services as Principal Consultant

The Consulting Engineer generally has the resources and capability to act as Principal Consultant to the Client
in addition to the consulting engineering function and is frequently appointed as such. In such a case some
or all of the following services will need to be added.

STAGE 1. Inception as Principal Consultant

Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
i. Assist in developing a clear project brief. • Project brief
ii. Attend project initiation meetings. • Agreed scope of work
iii. Advise on procurement policy for the project. • Agreed services
iv. Advise on the rights, constraints, consents and approval • Project procurement policy
v. Define the scope of services and scope work required. • Signed agreements
vi. Conclude the terms of the agreement with the client. • Integrated schedule of consents and approvals
vii. Advise on the necessary surveys, analyses, tests and • Project initiation programme
site or other investigations where such information will be • Record of all meetings
required for Stage 2 including the availability and location
of infrastructure and services
viii. Determine the extent of information, data, drawings and
plans relating to the project available at commencement
ix. Provide necessary information

STAGE 2. Concept and Viability as Principal Consultant

Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
i. Assist the client in the procurement of the other consultants • Signed consultant/client agreements
ii. Advise the client on the requirement to appoint a health • Indicative project documentation and construction
and safety consultant programme
iii. Communicate the project brief to the other consultants and • Approval by client to proceed to Stage 3
monitor the development of the concept and viability
iv. Agree the format and procedures for cost control and
reporting by the otherconsultants
v. Prepare a documentation and indicative construction
programme
vi. Co‐ordinate the concept and viability documentation for
presentation to the client for approval
vii. Facilitate the approval of the concept and viability by the
client
viii. Facilitate the approval of the concept and viability by
statutory authorities

68
STAGE 3. Design Development as Principal Consultant
Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
i. Agree and implement communication processes and • Additional signed client/consultant agreements
procedures for the design development of the project • Detailed design and documentation programme
ii. Assist the client in the procurement of the necessary other • Record of all meetings
consultants including the clear definition of their roles and • Approval by client to proceed to Stage 4
responsibilities
iii. Prepare, co‐ordinate, agree and monitor a detailed design
and documentation programme
iv. Conduct and record consultants’ and management
meetings
v. Facilitate input required by the health and safety consultant
vi. Facilitate design reviews for compliance and cost control
vii. Facilitate timeous technical co‐ordination
viii. Facilitate client approval of all Stage 3 documentation

STAGE 4. Tender Documentation and Construction Procurement as Principal Consultant

Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
i. Recommend and agree the procurement strategy for • The procurement strategy
contractors, subcontractors and suppliers with the client • Procurement programme
and other consultants • Tender/contract conditions
ii. Prepare and agree the project procurement programme • Record of all meetings
iii. Advise the client, in conjunction with the other consultants • Obtain approval by client of tender recommendation(s)
on the appropriate insurances • Contract documentation for signature
iv. Co‐ordinate and monitor the preparation of the
procurement documentation by the consultants in
accordance with the project procurement programme
v. Manage the procurement process and recommended
contractors for approval by the client
vi. Agree the format and procedures for monitoring and
control by the cost consultants of the cost of the works
vii. Co‐ordinate and assemble contract documentation for
signature

STAGE 5. Contract Administration and Inspection as Principal Consultant

Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
i. Arrange the site handover to the contractor • Signed contracts
ii. Establish the construction documentation issue process • Approved construction programme
iii. Agree and monitor the issue and distribution of • Approved contractual claims
construction documentation • Construction documentation schedule
iv. Instruct the contractor on behalf of the client to • Payment certificates
v. Appoint subcontractors • Progress reports
vi. Conduct and record regular site meetings • Record of meetings
vii. Monitor, review and approve the preparation of the • Certificate(s) of practical completion
construction programme by the contractor
viii. Regularly monitor the performance of the contractor
against the construction programme
ix. Adjudicate entitlements that arise from changes required to
the construction programme
x. Receive, co‐ordinate and monitor approval of all contract
documentation provided by the contractor(s)
xi. Agree the quality assurance procedures and monitor
the implementation thereof by the other consultants and
contractors
xii. Monitor the preparation and auditing of the contractor’s
health and safety plan and approval thereof by the health
and safety consultant

69
STAGE 5. Contract Administration and Inspection as Principal Consultant (cont’d)
Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
xiii. Monitor the preparation of the environmental management
plan by the environment consultant
xiv. Establish procedures for monitoring scope and cost
variations
xv. Monitor, review, approve and issue certificates.
xvi. Receive, review and adjudicate any contractual claims
xvii. Monitor the preparation of financial control reports by
other consultants
xviii. Prepare and submit progress reports
xix. Facilitate and expedite occupation certificates
xx. Coordinate, monitor and issue the practical completion
lists and the certificate of practical completion

STAGE 6. Close out as Principal Consultant

Typical Activities Typical Deliverables
i. Co‐ordinate and monitor the rectification of defects • Completion certificates
ii. Manage the procurement of operations and maintenance • Record of necessary meetings
manuals, guarantees and warranties. • Project closeout report
iii. Manage the preparation as‐built drawings and
documentation
iv. Manage the procurement of outstanding statutory
certificates
v. Monitor, review and issue payment certificates
vi. Issue the completion certificates
vii. Manage the agreement of the final accounts
viii. Prepare and present the project closeout report

70
 APPENDIX G: cidb TABLES TO ASSIST IN COMPILING
TENDER DOCUMENTS
Table B‐1: Documents Relating to the Tender
T1 Tendering procedures
T1.1 Tender Notice and invitation to Tender Alerts tenderers to the nature of services required by the
client; should contain sufficient information to enable an
appropriate response.
T1.2 Tender Data States applicable conditions of tender and establishes
the rules applying from the time tenders are invited to the
time a tender is awarded.
T2. Returnable documents
T2.1 List of Returnable Documents Ensures that everything the client requires a tenderer
to submit with his tender is included in his tender
submission.
T2.2 Returnable Schedules Contains documents the tenderer is requested to
complete for the purpose of evaluating tenders and other
schedules which upon acceptance become part of the
subsequent contract.

Table B‐2: Documents relating to the Form of Agreement

C1. Agreements and Contract Data
C1.1 Form of Offer and Acceptance Formalises the legal process of offer and acceptance
C1.2 Contract Data States applicable conditions of contract and associated
contract specific data, which collectively describe the
risks, liabilities and obligations of the contracting parties
and the procedures for administration of the contract.
For consulting engineering services this would be
an Agreement, as opposed to General Conditions of
Contract used for construction services.
C2. Pricing Data
C2.1 Pricing Instructions Provides criteria and assumptions, which it will be
assumed (in the contract)
C2.2 Activity Schedule or Schedule of Tasks Records the Financial Offers to provide the services,
which are described elsewhere ‐ in the Scope section.
C3. Scope of Services and Scope of Work
C4. Site Information
This is generally not required in procurement of consulting engineering services, being applicable to construction
services contracts only. However to ensure uniformity in tendering, available information on prior studies, existing
services etc should be included.

Note: For ease of identification of the various sections each section should be colour coded with different
coloured pages or separated with coloured paper as suggested by SANS 10403 (see tables below).

T1.1 ‐ Tender Notice and Invitation to Tender ‐ White forms

This is a statement alerting tenderers to the request for proposals which should include the closing date and
delivery address for tenders as set by the client as well as any other references or markings to identify the
tender.
It should be in a form which can be published as an advertisement to tenderers.
Note that the Public and Municipal Finance Management Acts require minimum periods between
advertising and closing dates.

71
T1.2 ‐ Tender Data ‐ Pink forms
This establishes the rules to apply from the time tenders are invited to when they are awarded. The rules:
• bind client and tenderer to behave in a certain manner
• include requirements for a compliant tender,
• require provision of feedback on the outcomes of the process.
• state the tendering procedures to be observed
• state documentation to be submitted with tenders
• indicate how the client will conduct the process of evaluating tenders
• indicate that tender offers may only be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria stipulated in the
procurement documents.
For consulting engineering services Quality criteria used in evaluation of tender offers should form an integral part of
the tender offer and hence the outcome of the procurement.
T2.1 ‐ List of Returnable Documents ‐ Yellow forms
This List is to ensure that everything the client requires a tenderer to submit with his tender is included. It
indicates exactly what is wanted and is useful in determining at the outset if a tender is responsive to the client’s
requirements.

It is costly and time consuming to prepare tenders; therefore only information which is essential for evaluation
purposes of the tender concerned should be listed. It is always possible to obtain further information from short‐
listed tenderers.
T2.2 ‐ Returnable Schedules ‐ Yellow forms
This section must contain documents which the tenderer must complete for the evaluation of tenders and other
schedules which upon acceptance become part of the subsequent contract. The Municipal Finance Management
Act specifically requires particulars concerning company details, tax clearance, and disclosure relating to individuals
connected with the tenderer being in service of the state.

The inclusion of the cidb‘s Compulsory Enterprise Questionnaire will enable these and other legal requirements to
be satisfied.
C1.1 ‐ Form of Offer and Acceptance ‐ Yellow forms
This formalises the legal process of offer and acceptance and contains
• firstly the offer to provide the services for a Financial Offer,
• secondly the Client’s acceptance, thus creating a contract, and
• thirdly a schedule of deviations recording changes agreed between receipt of offer and award of contract.

The cidb’s Standard for Uniformity in Construction Procurement provides wording for the Form of Offer and
Acceptance to be used with the schedule of deviations. This schedule serves as a record of the outcomes of any
negotiations between offer and acceptance. Note this applies only to deviations from the tender documents as
issued by the client prior to closing date.

A tenderer’s covering letter should not be included, but any matter in such letter constituting a deviation and the
subject of agreement reached during the offer/acceptance process, should be included, and any other matter arising
from the process which is agreed by the parties as being an obligation of the contract, must be included.

The start date of the contract should be identified in this section, but this must be aligned with the contract start date
defined in the Agreement, see Section C.1.2
C.1.2 ‐ Contract Data ‐ Yellow forms
Reference must be made here to the contract conditions in the Agreement applying to the services being procured.
This should preferably be one of the standard industry agreements applicable to consulting engineering services,
such as published by Consulting Engineers South Africa (CESA) or FIDIC, or the NEC.

Note that for consulting engineering services in South Africa, the cidb Standard Professional Services Contract
may also be employed. Note also that if a standard form of agreement is used it may be referenced, and need not
be included in the contract documents.

72
C.1.2 ‐ Contract Data ‐ Yellow forms (cont’d)
The Contract Data must :
• Identify applicable standard of contract plus all contract‐specific variables appendices etc.
• be divided into two parts – Data provided by client and Data by the consulting engineer (if required)
• not provide for variations and additions which change the intended usage of the identified standard form of
contract
• provide for Financial Offer adjustments (usually if the contract period exceeds one year)
• include interest on monies due to the consulting engineer, to deter late payment.
• where payment is on a basis of time + cost, or cost + a fee, include mechanisms to allow audit of costs and
Financial Offers
• allow realistic delivery periods and time frames for completing the work
• provide for cost‐effective dispute resolution procedures, preferably through mediation, adjudication,
or arbitration (with litigation as a last resort) The procedures advocated by the cidb in its Construction
Procurement Best Practices, or in the standard contract conditions of the bodies above, should be referred to
in this regard.
C1.3 ‐ Form of Guarantee/ Securities ‐ White forms
For consulting engineering services a guarantee should not normally be required since the client’s interests can
be protected by the Professional Indemnity Insurance policy of the consulting engineer. The client may however
state the minimum level of professional indemnity insurance cover to be provided by the consulting engineer for the
project in question.
C1.4 ‐ Adjudicator’s Contract – White forms
Dispute resolution by means of Adjudication is most frequently applied in construction contracts but Adjudication
can be used in procurement of consulting engineering services, particularly for large, complex or multidiscipline
assignments.

The adjudicator is appointed by both parties, who share the costs of adjudication, therefore the Adjudicator’s
contract should be included in the contract document between client and consulting engineer. Adjudication can be
done by an individual, or a single or three person Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB).

The formalities for appointing the Adjudicator or DAB should if possible be completed when the contract is signed.
The actual appointment of the person(s) should preferably be done at start of the contract, for adjudication to be
most effective, as opposed to waiting until a dispute manifests itself, then having to develop the contract and agree
whom to appoint.

Typical forms of contract for the Adjudicator are to be found in cidb Practice Guide No. C3, or in the
documentation issued by the SAICE (GCC), FIDIC, JBCC, or NEC.
C.2.1 ‐ Pricing Data/ Instructions ‐ Yellow forms
The pricing data contains the pricing assumptions describing the criteria and assumptions which the tenderer has
used in developing his Financial Offers.

The cidb Standard Conditions of Tender address issues such as Taxes in rates, VAT, currencies, nonerasable ink
and correction of arithmetic errors.

For consulting engineering services the above requirements apply in principle; Pricing Data is defined in the cidb
Standard Professional Services Contract as data that establishes criteria and assumptions taken into account when
developing the Contract Price and the record of the components that make up the Contract Price.

Other Professional Services Contracts provide for payment mechanisms according to the risk allocation options
adopted by the client. For instance the NEC 3 Professional Services Contract allows risk allocation Options A, C,
E, and G and the compiler is referred to the guidance notes and flow charts which accompany the NEC3 PSC for
details.

The Councils for the various built environment professions are empowered through legislation to publish annually in
the Gazette, after consultation, guideline professional fees. For consulting engineering services there are two

73
C.2.1 ‐ Pricing Data/ Instructions ‐ Yellow forms (cont’d)
documents of reference – the Guideline Scope of Services and Tariff of Fees for persons registered in terms of the
Engineering Profession Act, 2000, and the Indicative Time Based Fee Rates.

In the context of tendering, consulting engineers are not bound by the gazetted fees and are free to Financial Offer
for their services as they deem fit. The gazetted fees are nonetheless referred to, in order to provide a benchmark
against which to compare tender Financial Offers received and to gauge the ”Value” of the Financial Offers..

C2.2 ‐ Activity/Work Schedule ‐ Yellow forms

For consulting engineering services this is generally in the form of activity schedules or schedules of tasks to
be undertaken in each Stage of the assignment. The pricing data must reflect the selected pricing strategies.
Commonly accounted strategies as described in the cidb’s Compiler guidance notes of the Construction
procurement Toolbox can be used as a guide.

C3 ‐ Scope of Services/ Scope of Work ‐ Blue forms

As stated above, “Scope of Services” describes the types of services to be provided by a consulting engineer
responsible for design and/or construction monitoring of the project being constructed.

Where “Scope of Work” is used in context of consulting engineering services, this applies to the manner and extent
to which the services are applied to the project in question.

The Scope of Services to be provided by a consulting engineer is described in detail in Chapter 3 of these Guidance
Notes. This is based on nationally recognised stages of planning, design and construction of the project, with listing
of key tasks required of the consulting engineer both as design professional and additionally as principal consultant
of the client. For both cases, typical deliverables are also listed (also refer Section 4.4.7 of the SFU)

C4 ‐ Site Information ‐ Green forms

This section is used for engineering and construction works contracts only, and is compiled specifically for the
project. Consequently it is not dealt with here (however to ensure uniformity in tendering, available information on
prior studies, existing services etc should be included).

74
 APPENDIX H: EXPLANATORY NOTES ON ECSA GUIDELINES
1. Introduction
This section is based on a paper drafted by the Association of Consulting Engineers of Namibia (ACEN) in July 2007. It
has been amended for the Engineering Profession Act (46/2000): Engineering Council of South Africa: Guideline Scope
of Services and Tariff of Fees for Persons registered in terms of the Act (also commonly known as the ‘ECSA Fee
Guideline’ and hereafter referred to as the ‘Guideline’). The section aims to raise awareness of the correct use of the
Guideline and clarify the calculation and payment of Professional Fees.

The Guideline is updated annually by the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA) according to the recommendations
of one of its Committees established for this purpose. The recommendations typically entail the revision of the fees in
line with official inflation indices and minor changes to definitions and legal requirements in response to complaints and
suggestions received during the preceding year.

The latest and previous copies (back to 2003) of the Guideline can be found on the ECSA website at
http://www.ecsa.co.za/index.asp?x=rates. For information regarding Fees etc prior to 2004, Consulting Engineers
South Africa (CESA) can be contacted at 011 463 2022 or general@cesa.co.za.

2. Consulting Engineers’ Fees

It is essential that the Client and Consulting Engineer agree the basis and method of calculation of the fee and scope
of services and scope of work at the time of appointment of the Consulting Engineer. Such agreement must include the
commercial terms setting out the timing and method of payment.

The Guideline describes the following categories for the payment of Fees as follows:
1. Percentage based fees (see http://www.ecsa.co.za/documents/Guideline_Scope_Services_Tariff_fees2010.pdf)
2. Fees for services that are additional to those provided for in (1) above
3. Indicative time based fees (see http://www.ecsa.co.za/documents/Indicative_Timebased_fees_2010.pdf)
4. Disbursements (see http://www.ecsa.co.za/documents/Disbursement_2010.pdf)

The fees described in the Guideline are purely an indication to provide a guideline to determining a fee to be paid for
engineering services, which experience over many years has proved are fair and equitable to all parties. The actual fee
may be determined on any competitive basis and should, in any event, be negotiated and adjusted, up or down, between
the Client and Consulting Engineer at the time of appointment and to suit the circumstances of the particular project.

Where the location, size, character, form and function of the works has been defined through previous studies and
investigations that have either formed part of the client’s normal business practices or have been the subject of previous
separate appointments paid for on a time and cost basis the remuneration can be determined using the guideline tariffs
that are based on the cost of the works.. This provides a convenient way to express the fee payable if the scope of work
is somewhat uncertain. The typical range of percentage fees applicable to different size projects and services provided
are shown in the graph below.

The graph shows that the fee can range from 6% for a large project up to 20% for a small project. The fee can also fall
within the shadowed area on either side of the band depending on the complexity factors that are expanded upon in
paragraph 4.1. These factors are normally converted into multipliers that range from 0.3 to 1.5 and that are applied to
modify the overall percentage fee and agree on a fair and reasonable fee for the service to be provided.

75
3. General Principles for Percentage Based Fees

The principles listed below apply to all the fee tables in the Guideline (essentially pages 25 – 33).
• The ‘cost of the works’ is the estimated cost of the works until the project is completed when the final cost of works
is known and becomes the ‘cost of works’. If the project is not completed for whatever reason the ‘cost of works’
remains the estimated cost of works for calculation purposes
• The estimated cost is normally the cost estimate for the agreed Consulting Engineer’s scope of the work prepared
by the Consulting Engineer and submitted to the Client, or a figure agreed between the Client and Consulting
Engineer. Where no agreement can be reached on the estimated cost it may be necessary to obtain advice from
an independent third party.
• The Fee is calculated as the sum of the Primary Fee plus the Secondary Fee (given percentage x cost of works)
• The Primary Fees are used as given in the tables and are not interpolated between values
• The purpose of the Primary Fee is not to act as a basic or upfront payment. The sole purpose of the Primary Fee
is to balance out the fees where one bracket joins the next; the Primary Fee simply serves to smooth the fees at
the point of each bracket (prevents sharp jumps in fees)
• Note that the factors by which the Fee is multiplied according to the high or low demands of the category of work,
do not apply when the fee is paid on a lump sum or time basis.
• Since the Fee relates to a professional service, Value Added Tax at 14% must be added.
• Fees for carrying out initial studies and investigations during the report stage of a project prior to the commencement
of the actual project are normally calculated on a time and cost basis and are paid to the
• Consulting Engineer over and above the normal fee.
• The Consulting Engineer is entitled to recover expenses and costs (disbursements) incurred during the rendering
of the service. Such expenses and costs typically include travel, accommodation, and subsistence, and costs of
document and drawing production and copying.
• The Consulting Engineer may also recover costs related to the employment of specialist sub‐consultants, surveys
and investigations and land acquisitions, way leaves and servitudes. Provided that the need for such costs must
be agreed with the Client before they are undertaken.
• The Consulting Engineer is entitled to add an administration charge, typically 10%, to the above expenses and
costs.
• Where the Consulting Engineer provides “additional” services over and above the normal services described in
the Guideline, he/she is entitled to adjust the fee or to charge additional fees on whatever basis may be agreed
between the Client and Consulting Engineer and as described in the Guideline.

76
4. The overall fee process

These steps are discussed further below:

5. Categories of projects

The Guideline divides engineering services into two basic groups:

• Services relating to Building projects
• Services relating to Engineering projects

In addition each group is further broken down into the specific divisions of Civil, Mechanical, Electrical and Electronic
Engineering services.

For the Engineering services there is an additional fee payable for reinforced concrete and steel portions of the work.

77
Each category has a separate fee schedule. For each category a table of factors is provided which are applied to the
basic fee to cater for various different situations, such as work making high or low demands, fragmented work, works in
different categories, alterations and the like.

In general, a Building Project is normally classified as such where the project is of a building nature and a multidisciplinary
professional team is involved. The professional team may, for example, include a Project Manager, Architect, Engineer(s),
Quantity Surveyor, and one of the professionals is appointed as the Principal Agent. Each professional has a clearly
defined scope of service based on the scope of work under his control.

Engineering projects normally involve projects of a purely engineering nature where the Consulting Engineer(s) ‘s scope
of service and responsibility includes the entire scope of works. Certain types of project, such as industrial projects, are
normally classified as engineering projects, but may be classified as building projects, depending on the makeup of the
professional team.

Each category with the appropriate Guideline fee schedule is listed below:

6 Cost of Works
Note that professional fees are always calculated on the cost of works excluding VAT.

6.1 Civil, Structural, Mechanical, Electrical or Electronic Engineering Services for Engineering Projects
In this case the Engineer is responsible for the whole scope of the works. The Cost of the Works includes the
following:
• The total final amount ( or the agreed estimate thereof), exclusive of VAT, certified or normally payable to
contractors in respect of works designed, specified or administered by the consulting engineer. Note that it does
not matter who actually performs the work, only that it must have been specified designed or administered by the
consulting engineer. Therefore, for example, the cost of the work may include the value of builders work specified
by the consulting engineer related to the electrical works.
• The cost of the works is determined prior to deduction of penalties, retention and the like.
• Escalation if this is included in the payments to the contractor(s), but this may be affected by discontinuity in the
project cycle.
• Fair evaluation if the contractor receives free labour or free or second hand material etc.
• The cost of any specialist work etc for which the consultant is responsible that is not paid elsewhere.
• A pro rata portion of all preliminaries, profit and attendance that may be applicable to the scope of works forming
part of the consulting engineer’s scope of service.

78
 6.2 Structural and Civil Engineering Services for Building Projects
Here the Engineer is not responsible for the whole scope of the works. The Cost of the Works includes the
following:
• The total final amount ( or the agreed estimate thereof), exclusive of VAT, certified or normally payable to
contractors in respect of works designed, specified or administered by the consulting engineer. Note that it does
not matter who actually performs the work, only that it must have been specified designed or administered by the
consulting engineer.
• The cost of the works is determined prior to deduction of penalties, retention and the like.
• Escalation if this is included in the payments to the contractor(s), but this may be affected by discontinuity in the
project cycle.
• Fair evaluation if the contractor receives free labour or free or second hand material etc.
• The cost of any specialist work etc for which the consultant is responsible that is not paid elsewhere.
• Temporary works specified
• Excavations and foundations if specified
• Reinforced concrete, formwork, structural members etc if specified inclusive of cladding, decorative work, builders
work and inserts
• Cladding, decorative work, builders work and inserts, if specified.
• The cost of any specialist work, such as drilling etc for which the consultant is responsible that is not paid
elsewhere.
• A pro rata portion of all preliminaries, profit and attendance that may be applicable to the scope of works forming
part of the consulting engineer’s scope of service.

6.3 Mechanical, Electrical or Electronic Engineering Services for Building Projects

The Engineer is responsible for portion of the overall scope of the works. The Cost of the Works includes the
following:
• The total final amount ( or the agreed estimate thereof), exclusive of VAT, certified or normally payable to
contractors in respect of works designed, specified or administered by the consulting engineer. Note that it does
not matter who actually performs the work, only that it must have been specified designed or administered by the
consulting engineer. Therefore, for example, the cost of the work may include the value of builders work specified
by the consulting engineer related to the electrical works.
• The cost of the works is determined prior to deduction of penalties, retention and the like.
• Escalation if this is included in the payments to the contractor(s), but this may be affected by discontinuity in the
project cycle.
• Fair evaluation if the contractor receives free labour or free or second hand material etc.
• The cost of any specialist work etc for which the consultant is responsible that is not paid elsewhere
• A pro rata portion of all preliminaries, profit and attendance that may be applicable to the scope of works forming
part of the consulting engineer’s scope of service.
• The cost of builders work specified by the Engineer required in connection with the works

7 Interim Accounts
The following table indicates how the fee may be apportioned over the various stages of a typical project. The actual
proportions may vary according to the circumstances of the particular project and should be discussed and agreed
between the Client and the Consulting Engineer.

Stage of Services Typical percentage points for each stage

Civil Engineering Projects:
• Inception 5
• Concept and Viability 25
• Design Development 25
• Documentation and Procurement 15
• Contract Administration and Inspection 25
• Close‐Out 5

79
 Stage of Services Typical percentage points for each stage
Structural Engineering Projects:
• Inception 5
• Concept and Viability 25
• Design Development 30
• Documentation and Procurement 10
• Contract Administration and Inspection 25
• Close‐Out 5
Civil Building Projects:
• Inception 5
• Concept and Viability 25
• Design Development 25
• Documentation and Procurement 15
• Contract Administration and Inspection 25
• Close‐Out 5
Structural Building Projects:
• Inception 5
• Concept and Viability 25
• Design Development 30
• Documentation and Procurement 15
• Contract Administration and Inspection 20
• Close‐Out 5
Mechanical, electrical and electronic projects:
• Inception 5
• Concept and Viability 15
• Design Development and Documentation and 30
Procurement 40
• Contract Administration and Inspection 10
• Close‐Out

Where not all the stages of the normal services are provided by the consulting engineer, the fee is, subject to
clause 4.1 (7), calculated as a percentage of the total fee calculated in terms of this clause, which percentage is the sum
of the percentage points appropriate to each stage as set out in the above table against those stages of the services
provided by the consulting engineer, typically plus 10 percentage points to allow the engineer to become familiar with
the project.

The following principles apply for all categories:

• Interim fees may be claimed on any basis as agreed between the Client and Consulting Engineer, either on
the basis of a fixed cash flow, progress payments, or after each stage of the service is completed using the
percentages in the above table, or any other method that may be agreed.
• Interim payments during the preliminary design an design and tender stage are often based on the percentages
from the table and only claimed at the end of each stage, while the interim fees during the construction stage are
usually based on the proportion of work completed.
• Prior to construction, fees should be based on the estimated contract amount (excluding contingencies, and
escalation) calculated in accordance with the principles relating to the ‘cost of works’ as defined above. For
electrical and mechanical appointments relating to building works, this would in effect be the value of the
provisional sum allowed for these works plus allowance for PandG items. A pro rata share of preliminaries, profit
and attendance, and the value of builders’ work, if applicable.
• On award of the tender the value of the accepted tender, the value of a negotiated tender or failing award, an
agreed revised estimate should be used.
• The fees for reinforced concrete and structural steelwork should be factored into the overall fees at the appropriate
stage.
• Where the Consulting Engineer’s scope of service does not include all the stages described in the above table,
the fee is reduced according to the above table, and the resultant “partial” fee is increased by ten percentage
points.

80
 • If, at any time during the project, the whole or part of the works is cancelled, postponed, or abandoned for a
period of more than six months, the consulting engineer should be remunerated for all the stages, or part thereof,
completed, plus a surcharge of ten percent of the full fee which would have been payable had his services been
completed in terms of his original appointment.
• Throughout the Guideline the following terminology is used:
• The Basic Fee is the fee obtained by multiplying the Secondary Fee by the cost of works and adding the
Primary Fee
• The Basic Fee may be increased or decreased by various factors depending on the type of work included
in the service.
• The Basic Fee is based on the current estimated value of the works and may change throughout the course
of the contract
• An Interim Fee is a fee calculated for interim purposes based on the Final Fee before the final contract
amount is known.
• The Full Fee is the final value of the fees calculated in the same way as the Basic Fee except using the final
contract amount obtained at the end of the construction period.
• The sum of the Interim Fees may not exceed the Full Fee.
• It must be stressed that in all cases these fees refer to the percentage based fees appropriate to the project.

8 Adjustment of Normal Fees

The fees for “normal services” suggested in the Guideline can be applied to many projects and have proved over a
long period of time to provide fair compensation to the Consulting Engineer. However the factors that influence the
fee are complex and depend on many contributing factors, some examples of which are described in the Guideline
(Clause 4.1 (4) (a) – (l), as follows:

4) While the tariff of fees contained in this Schedule can be applied to many projects the factors that influence the fees
to be paid for design services on a project are complex and depend on a number of contributing factors These contributing
factors that should be taken into account may include, inter alia, all or any of the following:
a. Project complexity: Projects may range from relatively simple projects where the designs are based on well
established, common practices to more complex projects where the works call for the application of new, unusual
or untried techniques, designs, systems or applications.
b. Monetary value of the works: This may range from a situation where the value of the work is very high relative to
the services being rendered to a project where the value of the works is abnormally low relative to the services
required from the consulting engineer.
c. Time duration: This may involve projects where the works are executed over appreciably shorter or longer periods
than would normally be expected for any of the stages defined in 3.1.
d. Level of responsibility, liability and risk: These may range from relatively low levels of responsibility and/or risks
to projects with unusually high responsibilities and/or risks that are expected to be carried by the consulting
engineer.
e. Level of expertise, qualifications, skills and experience: Some works do not require a high degree of expertise
while other works may require more specialized expertise or substantial skills and experience that cost more to
develop and retain.
f. Level of technology required and changes in technology that may influence the costs of the services provided
g. Whether aspects related to labour intensive works need to be considered in the design.
h. Level of effort: Some projects do not call for substantial effort as the works can be designed without extensive
investigations or field measurements while others may call for unusually high effort on the part of the consulting
engineer because of, for example, research required or integration with existing works or repairs to existing
infrastructure where the status quo needs to be investigated in considerable detail and these need to be
accommodated within the design.
i. Potential value added: In some instances the design, no matter how sophisticated will not add much value to
the overall project while in other cases greater design optimization can lead to considerable savings in capital,
maintenance or operations costs, or add value to the final project.
j. Client Requirements: Some clients have relatively few requirements and/or many standard details and the
consulting engineer’s designs are accepted at face value. Other clients require considerable details to be
investigated during design development to satisfy their own, often complex, internal processes.
k. Business Strategy: Some firms may decide to offer a low price to enter a market segment at a low cost or to keep
employees busy while waiting for economic upswings.

81
 l. Project Definition: In some projects the design concept and scope is self evident and does not require much
further investigation and analysis of options, while in other projects the design development requires extensive
analysis and testing of various options.

Other factors which could influence the calculation of the fee include:
• Where the scope of services includes more than one category of engineering, ie civil, structural, mechanical,
electrical, or electronic, then the fee is calculated separately for each category using the value of work for the
category and the applicable fee table.
• Where the work takes place on different sites, or is discontinuous, or fragmented in any way, then a separate fee
is calculated for each portion of the work.
• The reduced fee for “Duplication” only applies in a situation where a complete design unit is reused, such as a
bridge or a building. It is not to be applied to components of a design. The duplication factor applies only to that
portion of the fee applicable to the design stage.

82
 APPENDIX I: USEFUL WEBSITES
The following table contains useful references relating to the Procurement of Consulting Engineering Services:
No. Reference
1 Advisory Notes (approx 100) (CESA)
2 Benefits of Membership (CESA)
3 Best Practice Procurement in Construction and
Infrastructure in New Zealand
4 Biennial Economic and Capacity Report (CESA)
5 Bills, Acts, Government Gazettes (GG)etc
6 Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment Act
(53 of 2003)
7 Business Integrity Management Guidelines (CESA)
8 Capital Asset Management Framework – British
Columbia
9 cidb Act (38 of 2000)
10 Code of Conduct (CESA)
11 Code of Conduct (cidb)
12 Constitution of Republic of South Africa
13 Construction Charter (Govt Gazette 5 June 2009)
14 Construction Procurement Manual
15 Consultant’s Performance Information System
and Management of Consultant’s Performance –
Hong Kong / March 2009
16 Consultants Guidelines (Dept of Public Works – DPW)
17 FIDIC Presentation – Best Practice Procurement of
Engineering Services
18 Guideline on the Briefing and Engagement for
Consulting Engineering Services – NZ / January
2004
19 Guideline for the Selection of Engineering
Services – Professional Engineers of Ontario
20 Guideline Scope of Services and Tariff of Fees
(ECSA)
21 Guidelines: Selection and Employment of
Consultants by World Bank Borrowers
22 How to Select a Consulting Engineer (CESA) ‐ 2006
83
Downloadable at Weblink
http://www.cesa.co.za/node/19
http://www.cesa.co.za/public_downloads/CESA4page.pdf
http://www.nzcic.co.nz/CIC_Procument_document_internet.pdf
http://www.cesa.co.za/node/21
http://www.info.gov.za/view/DynamicAction?pageid=528
http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=68031
http://www.cesa.co.za/public_downloads/100119%20‐
%20CESA%20Business%20Integrity%20Management%20
System%20‐%20October%202009.pdf
http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/tbs/camf.htm
http://www.cidb.org.za/Documents/KC/cidb_Publications/Leg_
Regs/other_leg_regs/leg_regs_gg21755_cidb_act_38_2000.pdf
http://www.cesa.co.za/public_downloads/code_of_conduct.pdf
http://www.cidb.co.za/Documents/PDM/Toolbox/Code_of_
conduct.pdf
http://www.info.gov.za/documents/constitution/1996/a108‐96.pdf
http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=102535
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/
Publications/2005/11/28100404/04095
http://www.devb.gov.hk/filemanager/technicalcirculars/en/
upload/298/1/c‐2009‐02‐0‐1.pdf
http://www.publicworks.gov.za/consultantsguidelines.html
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35384010/FIDIC‐Power‐Point
http://www.acenz.org.nz/Category?Action=ViewandCategory_
id=522
http://www.peo.on.ca/public/selection_eng_services.pdf
http://www.ecsa.co.za/documents/Guideline_Scope_Services_
Tariff_fees2010.pdf
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/PROJECTS/
PROCUREMENT/0,,
contentMDK:50002392~menuPK:93977~pagePK:84269~piPK:6
0001558~theSitePK:84266,00.html
http://www.saace.co.za/public_downloads/guide_appoint_
consult.pdf
No. Reference Downloadable at Weblink
23 InfraGuide ‐ Selecting a Professional Consultant ‐ http://www.cebc.org/library/libraryfiles/DMIP_11_Selecting_a_
Canada Professional_ConsultantWEB.pdf
24 Inform Practice Notes (8‐24) (cidb) http://www.cidb.co.za/knowledge/publications/practice_notes/
default.aspx
25 Integrity Pact (overview of status quo) http://www.transparency.org/global_priorities/public_contracting/
integrity_pacts
26 Joint Venture and Subcontracting Arrangements (cidb) http://www.cidb.co.za/procurement/procurement_toolbox/best_
prac_lib/joint_venture/default.aspx
27 Mediators, Arbitrators and Adjudicators (CESA) http://www.cesa.co.za/public_downloads/MEDS_ARBS_ADJ.pdf
28 Municipal Finance Management Act (56 of 2003) http://www.info.gov.za/gazette/acts/2003/a56‐03.pdf
29 National Treasury website http://www.treasury.gov.za/#
30 Preferencing Policies (cidb) http://www.cidb.co.za/procurement/procurement_toolbox/best_
prac_lib/preferencing/default.aspx
31 Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=68218
(5 of 2000)
32 Preferential Procurement Regulations 2009 http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=105525
(draft) (GG 14 Aug 2009)
33 Prevention and combating of Corrupt Activities Act http://www.info.gov.za/acts/2004/a12‐04/index.html
(12 of 2004)
34 Principles of Best Practice – Construction http://www.nzcic.co.nz/Best_Practice_Guideline_2006.pdf
Procurement in New Zealand
35 Procurement Best Practice Guidelines (cidb) http://www.cidb.co.za/procurement/procurement_toolbox/best_
prac_lib/policies/default.aspx
36 Procurement Documentation (cidb) http://www.cidb.co.za/procurement/procurement_toolbox/best_
prac_lib/procurement_doc/default.aspx
37 Procurement Guideline for Consulting Engineers http://www.saace.co.za/public_downloads/100119%20‐%20
–April 2010 (CESA) Guide%20‐%20Procurement%20of%20Consulting%20Eng%20
Services%20in%20Construction%20Industry%20‐%20Jan%20
2010.pdf
38 Procurement of Consulting Engineering Services http://www.cesa.co.za/public_downloads/100119%20‐%20
manual Guide%20‐%20Procurement%20of%20Consulting%20Eng%20
Services%20in%20Construction%20Industry%20‐%20Jan%20
2010.pdf
39 Procurement Toolbox (cidb documentation) http://www.cidb.co.za/procurement/procurement_toolbox/default.
aspx
40 Professional Services Consultant Work http://www2.dot.state.fl.us/proceduraldocuments/procedures/
Performance Evaluation – Florida / Nov 2010 bin/375030007.pdf
41 Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (3 of 2000) http://www.acts.co.za/prom_admin_justice/whnjs.htm
42 Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair http://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/2000‐004.pdf
Discrimination Act (4 of 2000)
43 Public Finance Management Act (1 of 1999) http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=70577
44 Qualification‐based selection promotes http://www.acecny.org/PDF/QBS2010.pdf
excellence and saves millions – ACEC / 2010
45 Quality Begins with Quality‐Based Selection http://www.acecnv.org/App_Images%5CQBS.pdf
(QBS) ‐ Nevada
46 Schedule of Disbursements (ECSA) http://www.ecsa.co.za/documents/Disbursement_2010.pdf
47 Selection and Remuneration of Engineering and http://www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/publications/handbook/index.htm
Associated Consultants – Hong Kong / March 09
48 Standard for Uniformity (cidb) http://www.cidb.co.za/knowledge/publications/standards/sfuinfo/
default.aspx
49 Time‐based Fees (ECSA) http://www.ecsa.co.za/documents/Indicative_Timebased_
fees_2010.pdf

84
Consulting Engineers South Africa (CESA)

Fulham House
Hampton Park North
20 Georgian Crescent
Bryanston
Johannesburg, South Africa

PO Box 68482
Bryanston
Johannesburg, South Africa
2021

Tel: +27 (011) 463 2022

Fax: +27 (011) 463 7383
Email: general@cesa.co.za / Web: www.cesa.co.za

Construction Industry Development Board (cidb)

Private Bag X14

Brooklyn Square
0075 Pretoria

Tel: 086 681 9995

Fax: 0866 819 995
Email: cidb@cidb.org.za / Web: www.cidb.org.za

The Voice of Consulting Engineering