Framework Agreement for Evaluation Services

Lyhyt kuvaus

Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland, Unit for Development Evaluation (hereinafter referred to as “Contracting Authority” or “MFA”) requests your tenders for providing evaluation management service (hereinafter referred to as ”the Service” or “EMS”) as detailed in this Invitation to tender and in its Annexes. Please refer to Annex 1 “Terms of Reference” for a more detailed description of the object of the contract.

Lyhyt kuvaus

Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland, Unit for Development Evaluation (hereinafter referred to as “Contracting Authority” or “MFA”) has requested tenders for providing evaluation management service (hereinafter referred to as ”the Service” or “EMS”) as detailed in the Invitation to tender and in its Annexes.

Lisätietoja

According to section 125 of the Public Procurements Act, a procurement procedure may be suspended for a real and legitimate reason.

According to the preliminary works of the Section 125 (HE 108/2016 vp p. 223), the Section has remained unchanged compared to the previously valid Section 73 a of the Public Procurements Act (348/2007). According to the preliminary works for the provision (HE 182/2010 vp pp. 22-23), when assessing the reason for suspension of a procurement procedure, the Contracting Authority must pay attention to whether the suspension of the procurement procedure is based on real reasons, and whether the decision would have a discriminatory effect on the candidates or the tenderers. Since the procurement procedure should, as a rule, lead to the conclusion of a procurement contract, it would not be acceptable to start a procurement procedure without the intention of concluding a procurement contract, for example to examine the market situation.

In addition, in the reasoning of the preliminary works for the Section 73a of the Act on Public Contracts (HE 182/2010 vp, p. 23) it has been further stated that in jurisprudence the suspension of the procurement procedure has been treated relatively permissively, and the provision was not intended to tighten the prevailing interpretation practice. The preliminary works includes also that according to the established case law, the suspension of the procurement procedure has been considered justified, inter alia, in the case of an incorrect invitation to tender, another error in the procurement procedure, the receipt of only one admissible tender, a change in the financial situation, a change in the procurement needs or other changes in circumstances since the publication of the contract notice. A real and legitimate reason for suspending a procurement procedure may also be attributable to an irregularity in the procurement procedure caused by the contracting authority's own action or omission.

In the report of the Finance Committee (Commerce Committee of the Parliament Report 48/2010 vp, p. 4) it has also been stated that it is considered in jurisprudence that the suspension of the procurement procedure does not require the existence of serious or exceptional circumstances.

The Contracting Authority has assessed that the tenders do not correspond to the needs of the Contracting Authority and the aim of the Procurement. The assessment is based on the tenders’ differences to the Invitation to tender, which the Contracting Authority has noticed during the procurement procedure. Therefore, the Contracting Authority must amend the invitation to tender to receive tenders which correspond to the needs of the Contracting Authority and the aim of the procurement. To treat the tenderers equally and on a non-discriminatory way, the Contracting Authority must suspend the current procurement procedure.