GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

RESOLUTION

On approval of the Rules for evaluating applications, final proposals of participants in the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs

Document with changes made:
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 03.21.2016, N 0001201603210007);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 10.24.2016, N 0001201610240013);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 11/17/2016, N 0001201611170023);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 01/29/2019, N 0001201901290022);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 03/07/2019, N 0001201903070013);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 03.28.2019, N 0001201903280031).
____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________
Changes approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 20, 2016 N 1076 of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 20, 2016 N 1076 - paragraph 2 of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 20, 2016 N 1076.

____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
The changes approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 28, 2019 N 200 do not apply to procurements, notices of which are posted in the unified information system in the field of procurement before the date of entry into force or invitations to participate in which (draft procurement contracts) are sent before the date of entry into force of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 28, 2019 N 200 - paragraph 2 of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 28, 2018 N 200.

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________
The changes approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 21, 2019 N 293, do not apply to relations related to the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs, notices of the implementation of which are posted in the unified information system in the field of procurement until the day entry into force or invitations to participate in which were sent before the day of entry into force of the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 21, 2019 N 293 - see paragraph 2 of the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 21, 2019 N 293.
____________________________________________________________________

In accordance with the Federal Law "On the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs" the Government of the Russian Federation

decides:

1. Approve the attached Rules for the evaluation of applications, final proposals of participants in the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs.

2. To recognize as invalid:

Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated September 10, 2009 N 722 “On approval of the Rules for evaluating applications for participation in a competition for the right to conclude a state or municipal contract for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for state or municipal needs” (Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2009 , N 38, art. 4477);

paragraph 31 of the changes that are made to the acts of the Government of the Russian Federation, approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 17, 2010 N 1045 “On amendments and invalidation of certain acts of the Government of the Russian Federation” (Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2010, N 52, Art. 7104);

Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 28, 2012 N 265 “On amendments to the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of September 10, 2009 N 722” (Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2012, N 14, Art. 1659).

Chairman of the Government
Russian Federation
D.Medvedev

Rules for evaluating applications, final proposals of participants in the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs

APPROVED
Government resolution
Russian Federation
dated November 28, 2013 N 1085

I. General provisions

1. These Rules determine the procedure for evaluating applications, final proposals of participants in the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs (hereinafter referred to as procurement) in order to identify the best of the proposed conditions for the execution of the contract during the procurement, as well as the maximum significance values ​​of each evaluation criterion applications, final proposals of procurement participants (hereinafter - application, proposal).

2. These Rules apply to all purchases, with the exception of purchases carried out through an auction, request for quotation, from a single supplier (contractor, performer).
Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of January 25, 2019 N 41.

3. The following terms are used in these Rules:

“evaluation” is the process of identifying, in accordance with the conditions for determining suppliers (contractors, performers) according to evaluation criteria and in the manner established in the procurement documentation in accordance with the requirements of these Rules, the best conditions for the execution of the contract specified in the applications (proposals) of procurement participants, which were not rejected;

“significance of the evaluation criterion” - the weight of the evaluation criterion in the totality of evaluation criteria established in the procurement documentation in accordance with the requirements of these Rules, expressed as a percentage;

“evaluation criterion significance coefficient” - the weight of the evaluation criterion in the totality of evaluation criteria established in the procurement documentation in accordance with the requirements of these Rules, divided by 100;

“Application (proposal) rating by evaluation criterion” - a score in points received by a procurement participant based on the results of evaluation by evaluation criterion, taking into account the significance coefficient of the evaluation criterion.

4. For the purposes of these Rules, for the evaluation of applications (proposals), the customer establishes the following evaluation criteria in the procurement documentation:

a) characterized as cost evaluation criteria:

contract price;

expenses for operation and repair of goods (objects), use of work results;

the cost of the life cycle of a product (object) created as a result of performing work in the cases provided for in paragraph 5 of these Rules (hereinafter referred to as the life cycle cost);

proposal on the amount of the customer's relevant expenses that the customer will make or incur under the energy service contract;

b) characterized as non-cost evaluation criteria:

qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object;

qualifications of procurement participants, including their availability of financial resources, equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or on another legal basis, work experience related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other employees of a certain skill level.

5. In the case of a purchase, as a result of which a contract is concluded providing for the purchase of goods (performance of work), subsequent maintenance (operation) during the service life, repair, disposal (if necessary) of the delivered goods or an object created as a result of the work (life contract cycle), as well as in other cases established by the Government of the Russian Federation for the evaluation of applications (proposals), the customer has the right in the procurement documentation to establish, instead of cost criteria, the assessment criterion “life cycle cost”.

6. The use of the evaluation criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), use of the results of work” is possible only if the contract, in addition to the delivery of goods (performance of work), provides for further operation and repair of the goods (use of the object created as a result of the work) , including the supply of consumables.

7. Evaluation in accordance with paragraph 6 of these Rules in terms of goods is carried out according to the evaluation criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), and in terms of work - according to the evaluation criterion “expenses for the use of the object created as a result of the work”.

8. In the procurement documentation, the customer is obliged to indicate the evaluation criteria used to determine the supplier (contractor, performer) and the significance of the evaluation criteria. In this case, the number of evaluation criteria used to determine the supplier (contractor, performer) when making a procurement must be at least two, one of which must be the evaluation criterion “contract price”, and in the cases provided for in paragraph 5 of these Rules, the evaluation criterion “cost” life cycle".

9. The sum of the significance values ​​of the evaluation criteria used by the customer must be 100 percent. The significance value of the evaluation criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (facilities), use of work results” should not exceed the significance value of the evaluation criterion “contract price”.

10. In the procurement documentation in relation to non-cost evaluation criteria, indicators may be provided that reveal the content of non-cost evaluation criteria and take into account the peculiarities of evaluating purchased goods, works, services according to non-cost evaluation criteria.

11. To evaluate applications (proposals) for each evaluation criterion, a 100-point rating scale is used. If, in accordance with paragraph 10 of these Rules, the customer provides indicators in relation to the evaluation criterion in the procurement documentation, then for each indicator its significance is established, in accordance with which the assessment will be made, and a formula for calculating the number of points awarded for such indicators, or a scale of maximum values ​​of the significance of assessment indicators, establishing the intervals of their changes, or the order of their determination.

To evaluate applications (proposals) according to non-cost evaluation criteria (indicators), the customer has the right to establish the maximum required minimum or maximum quantitative value of qualitative, functional, environmental and qualification characteristics that are subject to evaluation within the specified criteria. In this case, when evaluating applications (proposals) according to such criteria (indicators), procurement participants who made an offer corresponding to this value, or the best offer, are assigned 100 points.

The sum of the significance values ​​of the evaluation criterion indicators should be 100 percent.

The significance of the evaluation criteria should be established depending on the purchased goods, works, and services in accordance with the maximum values ​​of the significance of the evaluation criteria according to the appendix.

In the case of a procurement, the results of which result in a contract for the construction, reconstruction, major repairs, demolition of particularly dangerous, technically complex and unique capital construction projects, as well as artificial road structures included in federal, regional or intermunicipal highways, of local importance, it is allowed to establish in the procurement documentation as non-cost evaluation criteria exclusively the evaluation criterion “qualification of procurement participants, including their availability of financial resources, equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or other legal basis, work experience, related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other employees of a certain skill level”, indicators of such criterion specified in paragraph 27_1 of these Rules.
(The paragraph was additionally included from March 15, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 28, 2019 N 200 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 21, 2019 N 293.

In the case of a procurement, as a result of which a contract is concluded providing for the execution of construction work, the customer is obliged to establish the indicator specified in subparagraph “b” of paragraph 27 of these Rules, except for the case provided for in paragraph 30 of these Rules. In this case, the significance of the indicator must be at least 50 percent of the significance of all non-cost evaluation criteria.

In the case of a procurement, as a result of which a contract is concluded providing for the provision of services for organizing children's recreation and their health, the customer is obliged to establish the indicator specified in subparagraph "b" of paragraph 27 of these Rules. In this case, the significance of the indicator must be at least 45 percent of the significance of all non-cost evaluation criteria.
(The paragraph was additionally included from November 1, 2016 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 20, 2016 N 1076 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 28, 2019 N 200.

12. The clause has lost force since February 6, 2019 - Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated January 25, 2019 N 41..

13. The customer is not allowed to use evaluation criteria (indicators) or their significance values ​​not provided for by these Rules. The customer is not allowed to use evaluation criteria or their significance values ​​that are not specified in the procurement documentation.
(Clause as amended, put into effect on February 6, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated January 25, 2019 N 41.

15. The winner is the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is assigned the highest final rating. The application (proposal) of such a procurement participant is assigned the first serial number.

II. Evaluation of applications (proposals) according to cost evaluation criteria

16. The number of points awarded according to the evaluation criteria “contract price” and “life cycle cost” () is determined by the formula:

a) if > 0,

Where:

b) if< 0,

where is the maximum offer among the proposals for the criterion made by the procurement participants.

17. Evaluation of applications (proposals) according to the evaluation criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), use of the results of work” can be carried out when purchasing goods or work to create objects that, while meeting the basic functional and quality requirements of the customer, may vary in cost operation and repair (use of work results).

Based on the characteristics of the purchased goods created as a result of the work of the facilities, the customer has the right to establish in the procurement documentation and take into account when assessing one or more types of operating costs or a set of expected costs.

The types of estimated operating costs taken into account during the assessment are established by the customer in the procurement documentation based on the characteristics of the purchased product (object) and the expected conditions of its operation and repair (use of work results).

The number of points awarded according to the evaluation criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), use of work results” () is determined by the formula:

Where:

- the minimum proposal from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;

- proposal of the procurement participant on the amount of expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), use of the results of work during the established service life or service life of the goods (object), the application (proposal) of which is being evaluated.

18. The procurement participant’s proposal on the amount of expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), the use of work results during the established service life or service life of the goods (object), the application (proposal) of which is evaluated () is determined by the formula:

Where:

n is the number of types of operating costs taken into account in the assessment;

- the amount of operating costs provided for by the i-th application by type of expense (t), during the service life or operation of the product (object) specified in the procurement documentation.

19. If all applications contain the same proposals according to the criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (facilities), use of work results,” applications (proposals) are not evaluated according to this criterion. In this case, the significance value of the criterion “contract price” increases by the significance value of the criterion “expenses for operation and repair of goods (objects), use of work results.”

III. Evaluation of applications (proposals) according to non-cost evaluation criteria

20. Assessment based on non-cost criteria (indicators), with the exception of cases of assessment based on the indicators specified in subparagraphs “a” and “c” of paragraph 25 of these Rules, and cases when the customer has established a rating scale, is carried out in the manner established by paragraphs 21-24 of these Rules.

21. If for the customer the best condition for fulfilling the contract according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) is the lowest value of the evaluation criterion (indicator), except for the case provided for in paragraph 20 of these Rules, the number of points awarded according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) () is determined according to the formula:

Where:



- the minimum proposal from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;

- proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated.

22. If for the customer the best condition for fulfilling the contract according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) is the lowest value of the evaluation criterion (indicator), the customer, in accordance with paragraph two of paragraph 11 of these Rules, has established the maximum required minimum value specified in paragraph two of paragraph 11 of these Rules, the number of points awarded according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) () is determined by:

a) if > , - according to the formula:

b) if , - according to the formula:

in this case = KZ100,

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator. If one indicator is used, KZ = 1;

- the minimum proposal from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;


- proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

- the number of points according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) awarded to procurement participants whose supply is less than the required minimum value established by the customer.

23. If for the customer the best condition for fulfilling a contract according to an evaluation criterion (indicator) is the highest value of the evaluation criterion (indicator), except for the case provided for in paragraph 24 of these Rules, the number of points awarded according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) () is determined according to the formula:

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator. If one indicator is used, KZ = 1;

- proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

- the maximum offer from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants.

24. If for the customer the best condition for fulfilling the contract according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) is the highest value of the criterion (indicator), the customer, in accordance with paragraph two of paragraph 11 of these Rules, has established the maximum required maximum value specified in paragraph two of paragraph 11 of these Rules Rules, the number of points awarded according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) () is determined by:

a) if< , - по формуле:

b) if, - according to the formula:

in this case = KZ100,

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator. If one indicator is used, KZ = 1;

- proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

- the maximum offer from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;

- the maximum value of characteristics required by the customer, specified in paragraph two of clause 11 of these Rules;

- the number of points according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) awarded to participants whose proposal exceeds the required maximum value established by the customer.

25. Indicators of the non-cost evaluation criterion “qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object” may include:

a) quality of goods (quality of work, quality of services);

b) functional, consumer properties of the product;

c) compliance with environmental standards.

26. The number of points assigned to an application (proposal) for the indicators provided for in paragraph 25 of these Rules is determined as the arithmetic average of the scores (in points) of all members of the procurement commission awarded to the application (proposal) for each of the specified indicators.

27. The indicators of the non-cost evaluation criterion are “the qualifications of procurement participants, including their availability of financial resources, equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or on another legal basis, work experience related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other employees of a certain skill level" may be the following indicators (taking into account the features provided for in paragraph 27_1 of these Rules):
(Paragraph as amended, put into effect on March 15, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated February 28, 2019 N 200.

a) qualifications of labor resources (managers and key specialists) proposed to perform work and provide services;

b) the participant’s experience in successfully delivering goods, performing work, and providing services of a comparable nature and volume;

c) the provision of the procurement participant with material and technical resources in terms of the procurement participant’s own or leased production facilities, technological equipment necessary to perform work and provide services;

d) provision of the procurement participant with labor resources;

e) business reputation of the procurement participant.

27_1. When making a purchase, as a result of which a contract is concluded providing for the provision of services for organizing children’s recreation and their health, the customer establishes that the indicator of the non-cost evaluation criterion provided for in subparagraph “b” of paragraph 27 of these Rules is formed exclusively from the following sub-indicators:

the total cost of executed contracts (agreements) for the provision of services for organizing children's recreation and their health;

the total number of executed contracts (agreements) for the provision of services for organizing children's recreation and their health;

the highest price of one of the executed contracts (agreements) for the provision of services for organizing children's recreation and their health improvement.

The customer does not have the right to change the significance of the sub-indicators specified in paragraphs two to four of this paragraph, as well as establish other sub-indicators in relation to the non-cost evaluation criterion provided for in subparagraph “b” of paragraph 27 of these Rules.
(The paragraph was additionally included on March 15, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated February 28, 2019 N 200)

27_1.* In the case of a purchase, the results of which result in a contract for construction, reconstruction, major repairs, demolition of particularly dangerous, technically complex and unique capital construction projects, as well as artificial road structures included in federal and regional highways or intermunicipal, local significance, according to the non-cost evaluation criterion “qualification of procurement participants, including their availability of financial resources, equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or other legal basis, work experience related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other employees of a certain skill level”, one or more of the following indicators are established in the procurement documentation:

* The numbering corresponds to the changes made by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 21, 2019 N 293. - Database manufacturer's note.

a) the total cost of executed contracts (agreements) for construction, reconstruction, major repairs, demolition work;

b) the total number of executed contracts (agreements) for construction, reconstruction, major repairs, demolition work;

c) the highest price of one of the executed contracts (agreements) for construction, reconstruction, major repairs, or demolition work.
Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 21, 2019 N 293)

27_2. In order to evaluate applications (proposals) according to the indicators provided for in paragraph 27_1 of these Rules, the customer has the right to provide for an assessment of work experience related to the subject of contracts (agreements) providing for construction, reconstruction, major repairs, and demolition work only for the following groups of objects:

a) capital construction projects;

b) especially dangerous, technically complex and unique capital construction projects, as well as artificial road structures included in highways of federal, regional or intermunicipal, local significance;

c) especially dangerous, technically complex or unique capital construction projects, or artificial road structures included in the highways of federal, regional or intermunicipal, local significance, related to the type of capital construction project, artificial road structure, construction, reconstruction work, major repairs, the demolition of which is the subject of procurement;

d) capital construction objects, including especially dangerous, technically complex and unique capital construction objects, as well as artificial road structures included in federal, regional or intermunicipal, local highways, related to the type of capital construction object, artificial road structure, execution works on construction, reconstruction, major repairs, demolition of which are the subject of procurement.
(The paragraph was additionally included on April 5, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 21, 2019 N 293)

28. Evaluation of applications (proposals) according to the non-cost evaluation criterion “qualification of procurement participants, including their availability of financial resources, equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or on another legal basis, work experience related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other employees of a certain level of qualification" is carried out if indicators are established in the procurement documentation in accordance with paragraph 10 of these Rules, revealing the content of the corresponding evaluation criterion, indicating (if necessary) the minimum or maximum value required by the customer, provided paragraph two of clause 11 of these Rules.

29. To use a rating scale for the purpose of evaluating applications (proposals), the customer must establish in the procurement documentation the number of points awarded for a certain value of the evaluation criterion (indicator) proposed by the procurement participant. If several indicators are used, the value determined in accordance with the rating scale must be adjusted taking into account the indicator's significance coefficient.

30. If additional requirements are imposed on procurement participants in accordance with Part 2 of Article 31 of the Federal Law "On the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs", such additional requirements cannot be used as criteria evaluation of applications (proposals).

Appendix to the Rules. Limit values ​​for the significance of criteria for evaluating applications, final proposals of participants in the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs

Application
to the Rules for evaluating applications, final
proposals from participants in the procurement of goods,
works, services to ensure
state and municipal needs

Revision of the document taking into account
changes and additions prepared
JSC "Kodeks"

14. When evaluating applications according to the “contract price” criterion (“contract price per unit of goods, work, service”), the use of subcriteria is not allowed.

15. To determine the rating of an application according to the criterion “contract price” (“contract price per unit of goods, work, service”), the initial (maximum) contract price (the sum of the initial (maximum) prices per unit of goods, work, services, provided for in the tender documentation, if the criterion “contract price per unit of goods, work, service” is applied).

A_max - the initial (maximum) contract price established in the tender documentation (the sum of the initial (maximum) prices per unit of goods, work, services established in the tender documentation) in accordance with paragraph 15 of these Rules;

A_i - offer of the i-th tenderer at the contract price (based on the sum of prices per unit of goods, work, service).

17. To calculate the final rating for an application in accordance with paragraph 11 of these Rules, the rating assigned to this application according to the criterion “contract price” (“contract price per unit of goods, work, service”) is multiplied by the significance corresponding to the specified criterion.

18. When evaluating applications according to the criterion “contract price” (“contract price per unit of goods, work, service”), the best condition for the execution of a state (municipal) contract according to this criterion is the proposal of the tender participant with the lowest contract price (with the lowest amount of prices per unit goods, work, services).

The state (municipal) contract is concluded on the terms of this criterion specified in the application.

Evaluation criteria under 44-FZ are the rules by which proposals from procurement participants are assessed for compliance with the requirements established by the customer. There are cost and non-cost ones.

Cost evaluation criteria:

1. Price.
2. Operating and repair costs.
3. Cost: purchase, subsequent maintenance, operation, repair, disposal.
4. Proposal on the amount of the customer's expenses for

Non-cost evaluation criteria:

1. The proposed quality of supplied goods, works, services.
2. Participant qualifications.

Let's take a closer look at the calculation of competition evaluation criteria under 44-FZ in electronic form for each group.

Contract price and life cycle cost

As a general rule, the lowest price is the highest score. In exceptional cases, the supplier is willing to pay for the right to conclude a contract and indicates a negative price in the proposal. In this case, the more he “goes into the minus”, the higher the score he receives.

Expenses for operating and repairing goods

For example, a customer needs to purchase equipment. The cost of further repairs and the purchase of consumables depends on the brand offered by the supplier. Therefore, in order to save budget funds, the customer initially indicates in the tender documentation that significant expenses for the subsequent use of the product will negatively affect the rating of the supplier’s application. And the best condition for fulfilling the contract is the proposal with the lowest operating costs.

To do this, in the tender documentation the customer has the right to set the following parameters that will affect the assessment:

• an exhaustive list of operating costs (repairs, supplies, etc.);
• unit of measurement for operating costs;
• product service life.

If all applications contain the same proposals for a given parameter, applications for this parameter are not evaluated. In this case, the significance value of the “contract price” criterion increases by the significance value of the “operating costs” indicator.

Qualitative characteristics

This indicator is a condition for the execution of the ongoing purchase. Proposals are evaluated based on the level of detail and content of the proposal on the quality of services. Taken into account:

• completeness of requirements accounting,
• validity of deadlines,
• service delivery technologies,
• justification of the resources required for this,
• indication of the quality control system,
• list of occupational health and safety measures,
• environmental activities.

The indicator is the most subjective and is defined as the arithmetic average of the scores (in points) that all members of the procurement commission awarded the application.

Participant qualification

In this case, the indicators could be:

• the number of employees with the required qualifications (have the appropriate education, doctorate, candidate of science, with certain diplomas or certificates, etc.);
• the number of successfully completed contracts for similar work;
• the amount of equipment required to perform the work;
• the number of positive reviews about the procurement participant, certificates, letters of gratitude confirming business reputation. A number of national standards are also subject to application, for example, the National Standard of the Russian Federation GOST R 56002-2014 “Business reputation of construction organizations”, etc.).

According to Decree No. 1085 of November 28, 2013, 4 types of formulas or a scale are used.

1. Calculation formula that takes into account the largest or smallest number of documents provided.

2. The maximum required minimum or maximum quantitative value of qualification characteristics.

3. Scale. This is the simplest method of assessment; it consists of determining the ranges of the required indicator and awarding points.

In all cases, the winner is the participant whose application is assigned the highest final rating.

When conducting an electronic competition, it is not allowed to use criteria or significance values ​​not provided for by Resolution No. 1085 of November 28, 2013. At the same time, all criteria for evaluating an open tender under 44-FZ in electronic form, which the customer uses, must be reflected in the documentation.

This document is amended based on the order of the Department of State Order of Ugra dated 02/05/2016 N 6.

On approval of the methodology for establishing evaluation criteria and applying the procedure for evaluating applications for participation in an open competition, a competition with limited participation, a two-stage competition, a closed competition, a closed competition with limited participation, closed...

DEPARTMENT OF STATE ORDERS OF THE KHANTY-MANSI AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT - YUGRA

ORDER

Pursuant to paragraph 16 of the Procedure for interaction between government bodies, state government institutions, budgetary institutions, autonomous institutions, state unitary enterprises of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug - Ugra and other legal entities when providing the latter with budget investments from the budget of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug - Ugra with the authorized body to identify suppliers (contractors, performers) for them in the conditions of centralized procurement, approved by Decree of the Government of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug - Ugra dated December 6, 2013 N 530-p

I order:

1. Approve the methodology for establishing evaluation criteria and applying the procedure for evaluating applications for participation in an open competition, a competition with limited participation, a two-stage competition, a closed competition, a closed competition with limited participation, a closed two-stage competition (appendix to this order).

2. Recognize as invalid the orders of the Department of State Order of Yugra dated December 30, 2013 N 92 “On approval of the Methodology for establishing evaluation criteria and applying the procedure for evaluating applications for participation in an open competition, a competition with limited participation, a two-stage competition, a closed competition, a closed competition with limited participation, closed two-stage competition" dated January 31, 2014 N 11 "On amendments to the order dated December 30, 2013 N 92".

3. The Department of Information Systems and Information Security of the Department of Planning and Informatization of State Order shall post this order on the website www.ozhmao.ru.

4. The Department of Financial and Organizational Support should familiarize the employees of the Department with this order.

5. I reserve control over the execution of this order.

Acting Director
S.V.Slavyansky

Application. Methodology for establishing evaluation criteria and applying the procedure for evaluating applications for participation in an open competition, a competition with limited participation, a two-stage competition, a closed competition, a closed competition with limited participation, a closed...

Methodology for establishing evaluation criteria and applying the procedure for evaluating applications for participation in an open competition, a competition with limited participation, a two-stage competition, a closed competition, a closed competition with limited participation, a closed two-stage competition

1. This methodology was developed with the aim of forming a unified approach to establishing evaluation criteria and applying the procedure for evaluating applications when holding competitions by customers of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug - Ugra.

The methodology provides for the specifics of establishing evaluation criteria when purchasing goods, works, and services.

When establishing evaluation criteria, customers must be guided by the provisions of Article 32 of the Federal Law of 04/05/2013 N 44-FZ “On the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs” (hereinafter referred to as Law N 44-FZ), and also the Rules for the evaluation of applications, final proposals of participants in the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs, approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 28, 2013 N 1085 (hereinafter referred to as the Evaluation Rules).

2. Part 1 of Article 32 of Law No. 44-FZ establishes a closed list of criteria for evaluating applications: for participation in the competition:

- contract price;

- costs of operation and repair of goods, use of work results (hereinafter referred to as operating costs);

- quality, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object;

- qualifications of procurement participants, including their availability of financial resources, ownership or other legal basis of equipment and other material resources, work experience related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other employees of a certain skill level (hereinafter referred to as qualifications participant).

In cases of concluding life cycle contracts in accordance with the provisions of Part 16 of Article 34 of Law No. 44-FZ, as well as in other cases established by the Government of the Russian Federation, the first two criteria can be replaced by the criterion “Life cycle cost of a product or an object created as a result of performing work.” This criterion includes the costs of purchasing goods, subsequent maintenance, operation during their service life, repairs, and disposal of the supplied goods.

Criteria and their significance values ​​not specified in the procurement documentation cannot be used for evaluation purposes.

3. In accordance with the Evaluation Rules, when purchasing by the customer, the tender documentation must establish at least two evaluation criteria, one of which is price.

In addition to the evaluation criteria, the customer must indicate the significance values ​​of such evaluation criteria. The sum of the significance values ​​of all evaluation criteria provided for in the tender documentation must be 100%. For the purpose of establishing the significance values ​​of each criterion, the Evaluation Rules stipulate the division of evaluation criteria into:

- characterized as cost (contract price; costs of operation and repair of goods (objects), use of work results; life cycle cost of goods (objects) created as a result of the work; proposal on the amount of the customer’s corresponding expenses that the customer will make or incur under the energy service contract);

- characterized as non-cost evaluation criteria (qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object; qualifications of the participant).

4. Limit values ​​for the significance of evaluation criteria are set out in the Appendix to the Evaluation Rules, which provide for the establishment of limit values ​​for a group of cost and non-cost criteria, respectively. In this case, the distribution of significance values ​​of each criterion within the group is carried out in accordance with the needs of the customer, taking into account the requirements of Part 5 of Article 32 of Law No. 44-FZ in relation to the group of cost criteria.

5. When purchasing goods, the customer may set the following evaluation criteria:

Article 32 of Law N 44-FZ, when, in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, state-regulated prices (tariffs) for goods are established. The minimum significance of such a criterion is 70% (if the “Operating costs” criterion is not established);

2) operating costs. In accordance with the Evaluation Rules, the customer can apply this criterion only if the contract, in addition to the delivery of goods, provides for further operation and repair of the goods, including the supply of consumables. If the contract does not provide for these costs, the customer does not have the right to use such a criterion. The significance of such a criterion, if established, is determined based on the minimum significance provided for cost criteria (70%) taking into account the significance of the “Contract Price” criterion established in accordance with the requirement of Part 5 of Article 32 of Law No. 44-FZ. (For example, the significance of the “Contract Price” criterion is 40%, the significance of the “Operating Costs” criterion is 30%), the significance of the “Operating Costs” criterion should not exceed the significance of the “Contract Price” criterion;



a) quality of goods. Evaluation for this indicator can be carried out by each member of the commission subjectively without using the procedure for calculating points provided for by the Evaluation Rules;

b) functional, consumer properties of the product. To evaluate this indicator, the customer needs to determine whether the highest or lowest value of the indicator is most preferable for him. At the same time, for assessment purposes, the maximum required minimum value of such an indicator or the maximum required maximum value of the indicator can also be established;

c) compliance with environmental standards. Evaluation for this indicator can be carried out by each member of the commission subjectively without using the procedure for calculating points provided for by the Evaluation Rules.

The maximum significance of the criterion as a whole cannot exceed 30% (if the “Participant’s qualification” criterion is not established). If the criterion “Qualification of the participant” is established, the sum of the significance values ​​of both criteria should not exceed 30%.

4) qualification of the participant. For this criterion, in accordance with the Evaluation Rules, indicators can be established that reveal the content of the criterion.

At the same time, the Evaluation Rules establish a closed list of such indicators:

a) the participant’s experience in successfully delivering goods of a comparable nature and volume;

b) provision of the procurement participant with labor resources;

c) business reputation of the procurement participant.



When conducting a competition with limited participation in accordance with the procurement for the right to conclude a contract for the supply of food products purchased for organizations engaged in educational activities, medical organizations, social service organizations, organizations for children's recreation and their health, if the initial (maximum) price contract (lot price) exceeds 500,000 rubles, the indicator specified in paragraphs a) “The participant’s experience in successfully delivering goods of a comparable nature and volume” cannot be used for evaluation purposes.

The maximum significance of the criterion as a whole cannot exceed 30% (if the criterion “Qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object” is not established). If the criterion “Qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object” is established, the sum of the significance values ​​of both criteria should not exceed 30%. (For example, the significance of the criterion “Qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object” is 10% and the significance of the criterion “Qualification of the participant” is 20%).

6. When purchasing work, the customer may set the following evaluation criteria:

1) contract price is a mandatory criterion. The customer has the right not to establish such an evaluation criterion only in the case provided for in Part 8 of Article 32 of Law N 44-FZ, when, in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, state-regulated prices (tariffs) for work are established. The minimum significance of such a criterion as a general rule is 60% (if the “Operating costs” criterion is not established);

2) operating costs. In accordance with the Evaluation Rules, the customer can apply this criterion only if the contract, in addition to the performance of work, provides for the use of an object created as a result of the work, including the supply of consumables. If the contract does not provide for these costs, the customer does not have the right to use such a criterion. The significance of such a criterion, if established, is determined based on the minimum significance provided for cost criteria (60%) taking into account the significance of the “Contract Price” criterion established in accordance with the requirement of Part 5 of Article 32 of Law No. 44-FZ. (For example, the significance of the “Contract Price” criterion is 40%, the significance of the “Operating Costs” criterion is 20%), the significance of the “Operating Costs” criterion should not exceed the significance of the “Contract Price” criterion;

3) qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object. For this criterion, in accordance with the Evaluation Rules, indicators can be established that reveal the content of the criterion. Such indicators may include:

a) quality of work. Evaluation for this indicator can be carried out by each member of the commission subjectively without using the procedure for calculating points provided for by the Evaluation Rules;





4) qualification of the participant. For this criterion, in accordance with the Evaluation Rules, indicators can be established that reveal the content of the criterion. At the same time, the Evaluation Rules establish a closed list of such indicators:

a) qualifications of labor resources (managers and key specialists) proposed to perform the work;

b) the participant’s experience in successfully performing work of a comparable nature and scope;

c) the provision of the procurement participant with material and technical resources in terms of the procurement participant’s own or leased production facilities, technological equipment necessary to perform the work;





To evaluate each of the above indicators, the customer needs to determine whether the highest or lowest value of the indicator is most preferable for him. At the same time, for assessment purposes, the maximum required minimum value of each indicator or the maximum required maximum value of the indicator can also be established.

When holding a competition with limited participation, the indicators specified in paragraphs b) and c) cannot be used when evaluating applications in the cases provided for by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 4, 2015 N 99 when purchasing for work:

- on the design, construction and decommissioning of nuclear energy facilities;

- on the management of nuclear materials, spent nuclear fuel, radioactive substances and radioactive waste, including during their use, processing, transportation, storage, burial and disposal;

- design and manufacture of equipment used at nuclear energy facilities;

- repair of weapons and military equipment of the nuclear weapons complex;

- for the construction, reconstruction, overhaul of especially dangerous, technically complex capital construction projects, as well as artificial road structures included in federal, regional or intermunicipal, local highways, if the initial (maximum) contract price for procurement for to meet state needs exceeds 150 million rubles; to meet municipal needs exceeds 50 million rubles.

The maximum significance of the criterion as a whole cannot exceed 40% (if the criterion “Qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object” is not established). If the criterion “Qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object” is established, the sum of the significance values ​​of both criteria should not exceed 40%. (For example, the significance of the criterion “Qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object” is 15% and the significance of the criterion “Qualification of the participant” is 25%).

7. When purchasing services, the customer may set the following evaluation criteria:

1) contract price is a mandatory criterion. The customer has the right not to establish such an evaluation criterion only in the case provided for in Part 8 of Article 32 of Law N 44-FZ, when, in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, state-regulated prices (tariffs) for services are established. The minimum significance of such a criterion as a general rule is 60%;

2) qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object. For this criterion, in accordance with the Evaluation Rules, indicators can be established that reveal the content of the criterion. Such indicators may include:

a) quality of services. Evaluation for this indicator can be carried out by each member of the commission subjectively without using the procedure for calculating points provided for by the Evaluation Rules;

b) compliance with environmental standards. Evaluation for this indicator can be carried out by each member of the commission subjectively without using the procedure for calculating points provided for by the Evaluation Rules.

As a general rule, the maximum significance of the criterion as a whole cannot exceed 40% (if the “Participant’s Qualification” criterion is not established). If the criterion “Qualification of the participant” is established, the sum of the significance values ​​of both criteria should not exceed 40%.

3) qualification of the participant. For this criterion, in accordance with the Evaluation Rules, indicators can be established that reveal the content of the criterion. At the same time, the Evaluation Rules establish a closed list of such indicators:

a) qualifications of labor resources (managers and key specialists) offered for the provision of services;

b) the participant’s experience in successfully providing services of a comparable nature and volume;

c) the provision of the procurement participant with material and technical resources in terms of the procurement participant’s own or leased production facilities, technological equipment necessary for the provision of services;

d) provision of the procurement participant with labor resources;

e) business reputation of the procurement participant.

To evaluate each of the above indicators, the customer needs to determine whether the highest or lowest value of the indicator is most preferable for him. At the same time, for assessment purposes, the maximum required minimum value of each indicator or the maximum required maximum value of the indicator can also be established.

When holding a competition with limited participation, the indicators specified in paragraphs b) and c) cannot be used in the cases provided for by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 4, 2015 N 99 when making purchases for the provision of services:

- public catering purchased for organizations engaged in educational activities, medical organizations, social service organizations, organizations for children's recreation and their health improvement if the initial (maximum) contract price (lot price) exceeds 500,000 rubles.

The maximum significance of the criterion as a whole cannot exceed 40% (if the criterion “Qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object” is not established). If the criterion “Qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object” is established, the sum of the significance values ​​of both criteria should not exceed 40%. (For example, the significance of the criterion “Qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object” is 20% and the significance of the criterion “Qualification of the participant” is 20%).

8. Peculiarities of applying the criterion “Life cycle cost of a product or an object created as a result of performing work.”

The criterion “Life cycle cost of a product or an object created as a result of work” can be used by customers of the Autonomous Okrug only if a life cycle contract is concluded. Cases of concluding life cycle contracts are determined by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 28, 2013 N 1087 “On determining cases of concluding a life cycle contract”. Such cases include:

a) carrying out work on the design and construction of highways (sections of highways), protective road structures, artificial road structures;

b) carrying out work on the design and construction of infrastructure of sea and river ports, including artificial land plots, hydraulic structures of ports;

c) carrying out work on the design and construction of airfields;

d) carrying out work on the design and construction of municipal infrastructure facilities and other public utility facilities, including water, heat, gas and energy supply facilities, drainage, wastewater treatment, processing and disposal (disposal) of household waste;

e) carrying out work on the design and construction of subway infrastructure facilities, off-street transport and urban ground electric transport;

f) carrying out work on the design and construction of public railway transport infrastructure facilities;

g) performing work on the design and construction of unique capital construction projects;

h) purchase of railway rolling stock, subway vehicles, off-street transport and urban ground electric transport;

i) purchase of aircraft, sea and river vessels.

For example, the procurement of work on the design and construction of highways (sections of highways), protective road structures, artificial road structures requires the conclusion of a life cycle contract. When holding a competition for the purpose of concluding such a contract, the criteria for evaluating bids from procurement participants may be:

1) The cost of the life cycle of an object created as a result of the work (hereinafter referred to as the cost of the life cycle) - 60%. This criterion is mandatory and the only cost criterion used during the competition.

2) quality, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object - 20%.

2.1) quality of work. Significance factor (SC) - 0.5. Each application for this indicator is assigned a score from 0 to 100. For assessment purposes, information on the methodology and technology for performing work will be considered, including: intensity of work (working hours, number of shifts, working days and weekends), labor protection measures and safety precautions, description of the quality control system, environmental measures and measures to prevent accidents. In the absence of such information, the participant’s application is assigned 0 points for this indicator. The number of points assigned to an application for this indicator is determined as the arithmetic average of the scores (in points) of all commission members for this indicator, multiplied by the indicator’s significance coefficient (CI).



. The criterion indicators to be assessed can be:

3.1) qualifications of labor resources (managers and key specialists) proposed to perform the work. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.2. For assessment purposes, information about specialists with specialized education in the specifics of the work performed and experience in this field of at least 5 years will be considered. To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit copies of educational documents and copies of certificates of the applied specialists as part of the application. For the customer, the best condition is the highest value of the indicator. Assessment for this criterion will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kmax),

Where:









3.2) provision of the procurement participant with labor resources. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.2. For assessment purposes, information on the number of full-time specialists with specialized education in the specifics of the work performed will be considered. For the customer, the best condition is the highest value of the indicator. Assessment for this criterion will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kmax),

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator.

If one indicator is used, KZ = 1;

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;



3.3) business reputation of the procurement participant. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.1.

For evaluation purposes, copies of letters of gratitude, reviews of the procurement participant’s work and other documents confirming his qualifications will be considered.

0 documents - 0 points;





3.4) the participant’s experience in successfully performing work of a comparable nature and scope. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.5. For assessment purposes, information on the number of executed contracts for similar work will be considered. To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit copies of contracts and certificates of work performed as part of the application. For assessment purposes, the maximum required maximum value (Kpred) is set at 5 contracts.

If all participants’ applications contain information about the number of contracts less than 5, then the calculation of points for this indicator will be carried out using the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kmax), where



Kmax is the maximum offer among the proposals according to the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants.

If one or more proposals from participants exceed the maximum required maximum value (Kpred), that is, the application(s) contains information on the number of contracts of more than 5, then the calculation of points for this indicator will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kpred);

in this case, NCBmax = KZ*100, where

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

Kmax - the maximum offer from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;



NCBmax - the number of points according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) awarded to participants whose proposal exceeds the required maximum value established by the customer.

9. Possible criteria for evaluating applications for participation in a competition with limited participation for the supply of food products purchased for organizations engaged in educational activities:

1) contract price - 70%



The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

2.1) product quality. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.2. For assessment purposes, information will be considered on the product’s compliance with voluntary quality standards, international standards, information on the recommendations of associations of doctors and nutritionists presented in the product description, information on the content of GMOs, sugar, dyes, thickeners, stabilizers, starch in the product, the possibility of use by persons prone to allergies, etc. Each application for this indicator is assigned from 0 to 100 points. If there is no information about the quality of the product, the participant’s application is assigned 0 points for this indicator. Number of points. assigned to an application for this indicator, is defined as the arithmetic average of the scores (in points) of all commission members for this indicator, multiplied by the indicator’s significance coefficient (CI).

2.2) consumer properties of the product. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.7. For evaluation purposes, information about the remaining shelf life of the product will be considered. Moreover, in accordance with the technical specifications, the remaining shelf life of the product must be at least 50%. For assessment purposes, the required maximum value (K) is set at 80%.

If all participants’ applications contain a proposal for a residual shelf life of less than 80%, then the calculation of points for this indicator will be carried out according to the formula

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kmax), where

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application is being evaluated;

Kmax is the maximum offer among the proposals according to the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants.

If one or more proposals of participants exceed the maximum required maximum value (K), that is, containing in the application(s) a proposal for a residual shelf life of more than 80%, then the calculation of points for this indicator will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kpred);

in this case, NCBmax = KZ*100, where

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

Kmax - the maximum offer from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;





2.3) compliance with environmental standards. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.1. Each application for this indicator is assigned a score from 0 to 100. For assessment purposes, information on the product’s compliance with environmental safety requirements will be considered. In the absence of such information, the participant’s application is assigned 0 points for this indicator. The number of points assigned to an application for this indicator is determined as the arithmetic average of the scores (in points) of all commission members for this indicator, multiplied by the indicator’s significance coefficient (CI).

3) Participant qualification - 10%

The criterion indicator to be assessed can be:

3.1) business reputation of the participant.



0 documents - 0 points;

up to 5 documents (inclusive) - 50 points;

6 or more documents - 100 points.

"*" - Means that formulas can be used to evaluate applications by the customer.

* Business reputation will be assessed on the basis of product sales by year for the last 3 years. For the customer, the best condition is the highest value of the indicator. Assessment for this criterion will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ 100 (Ki/Kmax),

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator.

If one indicator is used, KZ = 1;

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;



10. Possible criteria for evaluating applications for participation in a competition with limited participation for construction, reconstruction, and major repairs of particularly dangerous, technically complex capital construction projects.

1) contract price - 60%

2) qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object - 20%:

The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

2.1) quality of work. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.5. Each application for this indicator is assigned a score from 0 to 100. For assessment purposes, information on the methodology and technology for performing work will be considered, including: intensity of work (working hours, number of shifts, workdays and weekends), labor protection measures and equipment safety, description of the quality control system, environmental measures and measures to prevent accidents. In the absence of such information in the participant’s application, 0 points are assigned for this indicator. The number of points assigned to an application for this indicator is determined as the arithmetic average of the scores (in points) of all commission members for this indicator, multiplied by the indicator’s significance coefficient (CI).

2.2) availability of a quality management certificate. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.5. Each application for this indicator is assigned a score from 0 to 100. If a participant has a certificate, the participant is assigned 100 points, if not, 0 points. The number of points assigned to an application for this indicator is determined as the arithmetic average of the scores (in points) of all commission members for this indicator, multiplied by the indicator’s significance coefficient (CI).

3) Participant qualification - 20%

The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

3.1) qualifications of labor resources (managers and key specialists). proposed for work. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.4. For assessment purposes, information about specialists with specialized education in the specifics of the work performed and experience in this field of at least 3 years will be considered. To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit copies of educational documents and copies of certificates of the applied specialists as part of the application. For the customer, the best condition is the highest value of the indicator. Assessment for this criterion will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kmax),

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator.

If one indicator is used, KZ = 1;

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

Kmax is the maximum offer among the proposals according to the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants.

3.2) provision of the procurement participant with labor resources. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.4. For assessment purposes, information on the number of full-time specialists with specialized education in the specifics of the work performed will be considered. For the customer, the best condition is the highest value of the indicator. Assessment for this criterion will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kmax),

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator.

If one indicator is used, KZ = 1;

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

Kmax - the maximum offer from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;



For evaluation purposes, copies of letters of gratitude, reviews of the procurement participant’s work and other documents confirming his qualifications will be considered. The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

0 documents - 0 points;

up to 5 documents (inclusive) - 50 points;

6 or more documents - 100 points.

11. Possible criteria for evaluating applications for participation in a competition for the provision of educational services.

1) contract price - 60%

2) qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object - 20%:

The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

2.1) quality of services. Significance coefficient (CI) - 1. Each application for this indicator is assigned from 0 to 100. For evaluation purposes, information on the content of the educational program will be considered, taking into account the customer’s requirements for the services provided, information on the use of various forms of training, organizational conditions for the provision of services, provision teaching aids, handouts. The number of points assigned to an application for this indicator is determined as the arithmetic average of the scores (in points) of all commission members for this indicator, multiplied by the indicator’s significance coefficient (CI).

3) Participant qualification - 20%

The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

3.1) qualifications of labor resources (managers and key specialists) offered for the provision of services. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.4. Availability of academic degrees and academic titles among teachers participating in training on the stated topic. To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit copies of educational documents as part of the application. For the customer, the best condition is the largest number of teachers with an academic degree or academic title. Assessment for this criterion will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kmax),

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator.

If one indicator is used, KZ = 1;

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is evaluated:

Kmax is the maximum offer among the proposals according to the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants.

3.2) the participant’s experience in successfully providing services of a comparable nature and volume. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.4. For evaluation purposes, information on the number of executed contracts for the provision of educational services on the stated topic will be considered. To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit copies of contracts and certificates of services provided as part of the application. For assessment purposes, the required maximum value (K) is set at 20 contracts.

If all participants’ applications contain information on the number of contracts less than 20, then the calculation of points for this indicator will be carried out using the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kmax), where

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application is being evaluated;

Kmax is the maximum offer among the proposals according to the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants.

If one or more proposals from participants exceed the required maximum value (K), that is, the application(s) contains information on the number of contracts of more than 20, then the calculation of points for this indicator will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kpred);

in this case, NCBmax = KZ*100, where

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

Kmax - the maximum offer from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;

Kpred - the maximum value of characteristics required by the customer,

NCBmax - the number of points according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) awarded to participants whose proposal exceeds the maximum required maximum value established by the customer

3.3) business reputation of the procurement participant. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.2.

For evaluation purposes, copies of letters of gratitude, reviews of the procurement participant’s work and other documents confirming his qualifications will be considered. The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

0 documents - 0 points;

up to 10 documents (inclusive) - 50 points;

11 or more documents - 100 points.

12. Possible criteria for evaluating applications for participation in the competition for the provision of photographic services:

1. contract price - 60%

2. participant qualification - 40%:

The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

2.1) qualifications of labor resources (managers and key specialists) offered for the provision of services. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.25. Availability of full-time photographers with more than 3 years of experience. To confirm the above information, you must submit copies of employment contracts as part of your application:

No documents - 0 points

from 1 to 4 (inclusive) documents - 25 points;

from 5 to 7 (inclusive) of the document - 50 points;

from 8 photographers or more - 100 points;

* For the customer, the best condition is the largest number of photographers. Assessment for this criterion will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kmax),

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator. (If one indicator is used, KZ = 1);

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

Kmax is the maximum offer among the proposals according to the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants.

2.2) the participant’s experience in successfully providing services of a comparable nature and volume. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.5. For evaluation purposes, information on the number of completed contracts/agreements for the provision of photographic services on the stated topic will be considered. To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit copies of contracts/agreements and certificates of services provided as part of the application. For assessment purposes, the required maximum value (K) is 10 contracts.

If all participants’ applications contain information about the number of contracts less than 10, then the calculation of points for this indicator will be carried out using the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kmax), where

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application is being evaluated;

Kmax is the maximum offer among the proposals according to the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants.

If one or more proposals from participants exceed the required maximum value (K), that is, the application(s) contains information on the number of contracts of more than 10, then the calculation of points for this indicator will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ*100 (Ki/Kpred);

in this case, NCBmax = KZ*100, where

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

Kmax - the maximum offer from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;

Kpred - the maximum value of characteristics required by the customer;

NCBmax - the number of points according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) awarded to participants whose proposal exceeds the maximum required maximum value established by the customer;

2.3) business reputation of the procurement participant. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.25.

For evaluation purposes, copies of certificates, diplomas, letters of gratitude, recommendations from state authorities and local governments, reviews of the work of the procurement participant and other documents confirming his qualifications will be considered. The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

- 100 points - assigned to the participant who provided the largest number of reviews, certificates, diplomas, letters of gratitude;

- the rest of the participants are awarded points in proportion to the specified number of reviews, certificates, diplomas, and letters of gratitude.

- 0 points - assigned to the participant in the absence of reviews, certificates, diplomas, letters of gratitude.

* Business reputation will be assessed based on the provision of services by year for the last 3 years. For the customer, the best condition is the highest value of the indicator. Assessment for this criterion will be carried out according to the formula:

NCBi = KZ 100 (Ki/Kmax),

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator. (If one indicator is used, KZ = 1);

Ki - proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is evaluated:

Kmax is the maximum offer among the proposals according to the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants.

13. Possible criteria for evaluating applications for participation in the competition for the provision of services for compulsory civil liability insurance of vehicle owners (MTPL):

1) contract price - 60%

2) participant qualification - 20%:

The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

2.1) provision of the procurement participant with material and technical resources in terms of the procurement participant’s own or leased production facilities, technological equipment necessary for the provision of services. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.7.

For assessment purposes, submitted copies of the participant's charter and the certificate of tax registration of the branch will be considered. The largest number of structural units (branches, representative offices and (or) central). The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

- 0 points - there are no structural units;

- 100 points - assigned to the participant who has the largest number of structural units (branches, representative offices and (or) central office);

- other participants are assigned points in proportion to the specified number of branches, representative offices and (or) central office;

2.2) the participant’s experience in successfully providing services of a comparable nature. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.3. For evaluation purposes, the most positive experience of participants over the past 3 years in the successful provision of services similar to the subject of procurement will be considered. To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit as part of the application copies of contracts/agreements with execution attached (acts of services rendered). The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:



from 1 to 34 (inclusive) contracts and acts - 50 points;

35 - more than contracts and acts - 100 points;



The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

3.1) quality of services. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.4. For assessment purposes, the time frame for conducting an independent examination (assessment) in case of an accident (days) will be considered:

No more than 5 days - 100 points;

6-10 days - 50 points;

11 or more days - 0 points.

3.2) quality of services. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.3. For assessment purposes, the possibility of an insurance commissioner visiting the accident site at any time of the day will be considered:





3.3) quality of services: Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.3. For evaluation purposes, the possibility of providing a 24-hour dispatch service will be considered:

availability of opportunity - 100 points;

lack of opportunity - 0 points.

14. Possible criteria for evaluating applications for participation in a competition to carry out research work:

1) contract price - 20%

2) participant qualification - 80%:

The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

2.1) qualifications of labor resources (managers and key specialists) offered for the provision of services. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.3. The general specialization of the tender participant is assessed: the qualifications and experience of the tender participant’s personnel in the field of assignment and the degree of its compliance with the subject of procurement. To confirm the above information, you must submit as part of your application:

- copies of diplomas confirming higher education (bachelor’s, specialist’s, master’s) in relevant specialties

- copies of diplomas confirming an academic degree in the relevant specialties (list the types of required specialties);

- copies of work books or employment contracts confirming the specialist’s employment relationship with the procurement participant.

The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

no documents - 0 points

from 1 to 3 (inclusive) diplomas of higher education, 0 diplomas of Candidate of Sciences and 0 diplomas of Doctor of Sciences - 20 points;

from 4 to 5 (inclusive) higher education diplomas, 1 candidate of sciences diploma and 0 doctorate diplomas - 50 points;

from 6 to 7 (inclusive) diplomas of higher education, 2 diplomas of Candidate of Sciences and 1 diploma of Doctor of Sciences - 70 points;

8 or more diplomas of higher education, 2 or more diplomas of Candidate of Sciences, 2 or more diplomas of Doctor of Sciences - 100 points.

2.2.) the participant’s experience in successfully performing work of a comparable nature and scope. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.5. For assessment purposes, information will be considered on the number of executed contracts for carrying out research work on the stated topic over the last 5 years, permits (open sheets) received for the execution of submitted state (municipal) contracts and certificates of acceptance of the scientific report in the archive. To confirm the above information, you must submit as part of your application:

- copies of state (municipal) contracts with certificates of work performed (the list of works under the contract must contain one of the following types of work (list the types of work required);

- copies of permits (open sheets) received for the execution of submitted state (municipal) contracts;

- copies of certificates confirming the acceptance of a scientific report for permanent storage as part of the scientific-industrial archive of the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences for work performed within the framework of the submitted state (municipal) contracts.

The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

no documents - 0 points;

1 executed state (municipal) contract, 1 or more permits (open sheet), 1 or more certificate of acceptance of a scientific report for permanent storage as part of the scientific and industrial archive of the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences - 50 points;

2 or more executed state (municipal) contracts, 2 or more permits (open sheets), 2 or more certificates of acceptance of a scientific report for permanent storage as part of the scientific and industrial archive of the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences - 100 points.

2.3) provision of the procurement participant with material and technical resources in terms of whether the procurement participant has its own or leased production facilities, technological equipment necessary to perform the work. Significance factor (SC) - 0.2.

Submitted documents will be reviewed for evaluation purposes. confirming the participant’s provision of resources (copies of contracts for the supply (rent) of equipment, copies of invoices or extracts from the list of fixed assets). The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

no documents - 0 points;

1 or more computer equipment, 1 or more premises, 1 or more electronic total stations, 1 or more GPS receivers that ensure coordinate accuracy in accordance with the technical specifications - 100 points.

15. Possible criteria for evaluating applications for participation in the competition to carry out design and survey work on the facility:

1) contract price - 60%

2) participant qualification - 40%:

The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

2.1) provision of the procurement participant with labor resources. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.3. It is assessed whether among the employees of the competition participant there are persons with basic and additional professional education relevant to the subject of procurement, and who have more than 7 years of experience in performing work similar to the subject of procurement. To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit as part of the application a set of documents and information:

- a document confirming the total list of employees (including full-time and freelance employees);



(list the types of required specialties);

-





- copies of documents on hiring specialists;

- copies of diplomas of higher professional education (list the types of required specialties);

- copies of diplomas of additional professional education (list the types of required specialties, received less than 5 years before the closing date for applications for participation in this open competition.



The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

0 points - lack of documents;

20 points - up to 30% of copies of documents (orders, contracts, etc.) of the payroll number of employees;

40 points - from 30% to 70% of copies of documents (orders, contracts, etc.) of the payroll number of employees;

60 points - from 70% to 90% of copies of documents (orders, contracts, etc.) of the payroll number of employees;

100 points - 90% or more copies of documents (orders, contracts, etc.) of the payroll number of employees.

2.2) qualifications of labor resources (managers and key specialists) offered for the provision of services. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.5. It is assessed whether the employees of the tender participant (for employees information about whom is presented in indicator 2.1 of this criterion) have professional and additional professional education corresponding to the subject of the procurement and have experience in performing work similar to the subject of the procurement for more than 7 years. To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit as part of the application a set of documents and information:

1. for full-time employees, copies of the following sets of documents:

- copies of a state-issued higher education diploma in one of the specialties (list the types of required specialties);

- copies of diplomas of additional professional education received less than 5 years before the deadline for accepting applications for participation in the competition;

- copies of specialists’ work books;

2. for freelance employees, copies of the following sets of documents:

- copies of documents on hiring specialists (list the types of required specialties);

- copies of a state-issued higher education diploma in one of the specialties (list the types of required specialties);

- copies of diplomas of additional professional education (list the types of required specialties), received less than 5 years before the deadline for accepting applications for participation in the competition;

- copies of specialists’ work books.

The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

0 points - if the participant attaches copies of documents for less than 10 specialists;

20 points - if the participant attaches copies of documents from 10 to 25 (inclusive) specialists;

100 points - if the participant attaches copies of documents for 26 or more specialists.

2.3.) the participant’s experience in successfully performing work of a comparable nature and scope. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.2. For assessment purposes, information on the number of executed contracts for design and survey work will be considered, accompanied by documents confirming execution (work completion certificates) for the last 2 years before the date of filing the application for participation in the relevant competition. In this case, the total cost of previously executed contracts is at least 50 percent of the initial (maximum) price of the contract for the right to conclude which a competition is being held.

To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit as part of the application copies of contracts/agreements with execution attached (acts of services rendered). The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

no documents - 0 points;

from 1 to 4 documents (inclusive) - 25 points;

from 5 to 10 documents (inclusive) - 65 points;

11 or more documents - 100 points.

16. Possible criteria for evaluating applications for participation in the competition for the provision of services for organizing recreation and health improvement for children:

1) contract price - 60%

2) participant qualification - 20%.

The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

2.1) qualifications of labor resources (managers and key specialists). offered for the provision of services. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.5. It is assessed whether the participant's employees have professional education relevant to the subject of the procurement. To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit as part of the application a set of documents and information:

- copies of documents on hiring specialists with pedagogical education (contract or employment order or copies of work records);

- copies of diplomas of higher professional pedagogical education;

The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

lack of documents confirming the hiring of specialists with pedagogical education and the qualifications of teaching staff - 0 points;

availability of documents confirming the hiring of specialists with pedagogical education and the qualifications of the teaching staff for each teaching staff - 100 points.

2.2.) the participant’s experience in successfully providing services of a comparable nature and volume. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.5. For assessment purposes, information will be considered on the number of executed contracts for the provision of services for the organization of recreation and health improvement for children, with the attachment of documents confirming execution (acts of services rendered) for the last 5 years before the date of filing the application for participation in the relevant competition. In this case, the cost of previously executed contracts is at least 20 percent of the initial (maximum) price of the contract for the right to conclude which a competition is held (it is possible to express the amount of the executed contract in rubles). To confirm the above information, it is necessary to submit as part of the application copies of contracts/agreements with execution attached (acts of services rendered).

The assessment will be made in accordance with the rating scale:

no documents - 0 points;

from 1 to 14 documents (inclusive) - 70 points;

15 or more documents - 100 points.

3) quality, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object - 20%.

The evaluated criterion indicators can be:

3.1) quality of services. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.3. For assessment purposes, the degree of comfort of living will be considered. Evaluated based on the submitted documents:

from 2 to 4 (inclusive) people in the room - 100 points;

from 5 to 6 (inclusive) people in the room - 50 points;

7 or more people in the room - 0 points.

3.2) quality of services. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.4. For assessment purposes, the organization of mass cultural, sports and recreational events aimed at strengthening the physical and spiritual development of children will be considered. Evaluated on the basis of the presented program of cultural events:

2 events per day - 50 points;

3 or more events per day - 100 points;

Lack of events - 0 points.

3.3) quality of services. Significance coefficient (SC) - 0.3. For assessment purposes, the distance of the health facility from the sea will be considered. Evaluated based on the submitted documents:

100 meters from the sea or less - 100 points;

from 101 meters to 150 m (inclusive) - 70 points;

further than 150 meters from the sea - 0 points.

17. The criteria for evaluating applications for participation in the competition for submission to the authorized body of the Autonomous Okrug are drawn up in the form below:

Criteria for evaluating applications for participation in the competition

Contents of non-cost criteria for evaluating applications for participation in the competition

Criterion 2.1. "Qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object":

Criterion 2.2. “The qualifications of procurement participants, including the availability of financial resources, equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or on another legal basis, work experience related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other employees of a certain level of qualification for the execution of the contract":

Electronic document text
prepared by Kodeks JSC and verified against.

This procedure is used to evaluate applications for participation in the competition and evaluate applications for participation in the request for proposals.

To apply this procedure, the Customer must include in the tender documentation, documentation on the request for proposals specific criteria from among those listed below, specify the subject of assessment for each criterion, establish requirements for the provision of documents and information in accordance with the subject of assessment for each criterion, and establish the significance of the criteria.

The total significance of all criteria should be equal to 100%.

Evaluation and comparison of applications in order to determine the winner(s) of the procedure is carried out by the procurement commission with the involvement, if necessary, of experts in the relevant field of the subject of procurement.

To evaluate applications, the following criteria can be used with appropriate limit values:

Applications are assessed in the following order.

1. To evaluate an application, the final rating for each application is calculated. The final application rating is calculated by adding the ratings for each application evaluation criterion, multiplied by their importance.

   The rating of the application for each criterion is a score obtained based on the results of the assessment according to the criteria. The fractional rating value is rounded to two decimal places according to mathematical rounding rules. In this case, for rating calculations, a significance coefficient is used equal to the value of the corresponding criterion in percentage, divided by 100.

   The assignment of a serial number to each application as the degree of attractiveness of the participant's proposal decreases is made based on the results of calculating the final rating for each application. The application with the highest final rating is assigned the first number. The first number can be assigned to several applications that receive the highest final rating. Further distribution of serial numbers of applications is carried out in descending order of the final rating.

Amax - initial price of the contract;

Ai is the contract price proposed by the i-th participant.

To obtain a rating of applications according to the criteria “Participant qualifications”, “Product quality”, “Availability of production capacity”, each application for each criterion is assigned a value from 0 to 100 points by the purchasing commission.

Bmax - the maximum delivery time (performance of work, provision of services) established by the customer in the documentation, in units of measurement of the delivery period (period) (number of years, quarters, months, weeks, days, hours) from the date of conclusion of the contract;

Вmin - the minimum delivery period (work performance, provision of services) established by the customer in the documentation, in units of measurement of the delivery period (period) (number of years, quarters, months, weeks, days, hours) from the date of conclusion of the contract;

Вi - proposal contained in the i-th application for the delivery time (performance of work, provision of services), in units of measurement of the delivery period (period) (number of years, quarters, months, weeks, days, hours) from the date of conclusion of the contract.

RWith i

Cmin is the minimum period for providing a quality guarantee for goods, works, services, established by the customer in the procurement documentation;

Ci- proposal of the i-th participant for the period of guarantee of the quality of goods, works, services.

In order to evaluate and compare proposals in applications with a period for providing a quality guarantee for goods, works, services that exceeds by more than half the minimum period for providing a quality guarantee for goods, works, services established in the procurement documentation, such applications are assigned a rating according to the specified criterion equal to 50 .

In this case, the contract is concluded on the terms according to this criterion specified in the application. The fulfillment of the warranty obligation is carried out by the participant with whom the contract is concluded, without charging any additional fee other than the price of the contract.

The procurement commission has the right not to determine the winner if, based on the results of the evaluation of applications, none of the applications receives a total of more than 25 points.

1The procurement regulations are approved:

1) the highest management body of a state corporation or state company if the customer is a state corporation or state company;

2) the head of a unitary enterprise if the customer is a state unitary enterprise or a municipal unitary enterprise;

3) the supervisory board of an autonomous institution if the customer is an autonomous institution;

4) the board of directors (supervisory board) of a business company if the customer is a joint-stock company, or the collegial executive body of such a joint-stock company if the charter of the business company provides for the exercise of the functions of the board of directors (supervisory board) by the general meeting of shareholders of the business company;

5) a general meeting of company participants if the customer is a limited liability company.

2Qualification requirements must be expressed in measurable units, For example,

Have at least five years of experience providing similar services,

Having experience in performing similar work worth at least 15 million rubles,

Availability of ownership or lease of production facilities, namely: at least two tower cranes, warehouse premises with an area of ​​at least 2 thousand square meters,

Availability of departmental and/or state awards (at least three), etc.

3The list of information contained in the procurement notice may be expanded at the discretion of the Customer, including depending on the procurement method used.

4The list of information contained in the procurement documentation may be expanded at the Customer’s discretion, including depending on the procurement method used.