Publication - FOI/EIR release

Contract for Chargeplace Scotland EV Network to Charge Your Car Ltd: EIR release

Published: 25 Jan 2021

Information request and response under the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004

Published:
25 Jan 2021
Contract for Chargeplace Scotland EV Network to Charge Your Car Ltd: EIR release
FOI reference: FOI/202000106393
Date received: 2 Nov 2020
Date responded: 30 Nov 2020
Information requested

1) Please provide details of the commercial process followed to award the contract for Chargeplace Scotland EV Network to Charge Your Car Ltd including:
a) Overall budget allocation from Transport Scotland/ScotGov (estimated figures are sufficient if commercial sensitivity exists regarding the exact contract award figure)
b) Names of the bidding parties.
c) Evaluation and scoring criteria used to select Charge Your car Ltd as the winning bidder.
d) Length of contract.

2) Other relevant commercial information to the Chargeplace Scotland Scheme, including but not limited to:
a) Who owns the charging network installed, specifically does the infrastructure belong to Charge Your car Ltd or the Scottish Government?
b) What proportion of the public EV charging network in Scotland is held by Chargeplace Scotland ?

Response

As the information requested is ‘environmental information’ for the purposes of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs), we are required to deal with your request under those Regulations. We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA.

This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. This is essentially a technical point and has no material effect on the outcome of your request.

1.
a) The cumulative value of the services to be called-off under the framework agreement over the overall 4 year period was estimated to be approximately £1,000,000.

b) There were 4 bidding parties:
a. Charge Your Car
b. IBI Group
c. Energy Saving Trust (EST)
d. SSE Enterprise

c) The evaluation and scoring Criteria – Please see the table and information below containing the evaluation and scoring criteria from the Invitation to Tender (ITT) document. Please note that this information is an extract from the ITT document as the document contains commercially sensitive material.

d) The framework agreement commenced at the start of June 2016 and was awarded for a duration of 3 years. At the end of this 3 year period the Employer had the option to extend the agreement for a further 1 year, which has been applied.

2.
a) Publicly available charge points on Scotland’s ChargePlace Scotland network are owned and maintained by the respective host. This will normally be either the Local Authority or a private organisation (if a charger is located on their land and funded through the Energy Saving Trust) and as set out in the Scottish Ministers’ grant award terms and conditions to them. The host must ensure that the charge points are maintained and in a serviceable condition.

b) Based on the latest UK figures 61% of charge points in Scotland are on the ChargePlace Scotland map.

The following information has been extracted from the Invitation to Tender document in response to question 1c.

Evaluation and Scoring Criteria
Please be aware that there was a typo in the following text and it should read ‘five tender evaluation criteria’.
6.5.2 The six tender evaluation criteria categories that shall be used by the Employer to determine the Quality Submission score shall be:
(i) Skills and Experience;
(ii) Management;
(iii) Mobilisation and Exit Management;
(iv) Fault Reporting and Management;
(v) Customer Service and Engagement

Table 6.5b – Scoring of Quality Submissions

Evaluation Description Score
Inadequate The Quality Submission does not demonstrate that the quality
requirements have been considered in the proposals and show little
understanding of the Services and the requirements of the
Employer.
0-4
Adequate The Quality Submission demonstrates that the quality requirements
have been considered in the proposals and show a reasonable
understanding of the Services and the requirements of the
Employer.
5-6
Good The Quality Submission demonstrates that the quality requirements
have been considered in the proposals and show a good
understanding of the Services and the requirements of the
Employer.
7-8
Excellent The Quality Submission demonstrates that the quality requirements
have been considered in the proposals and show an excellent
understanding of the Services and the requirements of the
Employer.
9-10

The Financial Submission Evaluation
Scoring of the Prices shall be applied as follows:

(i) The lowest value of the Price submitted by any of the Tenderers as part of the Financial Submissions shall score 100 marks in the evaluation of the Price score; and

(ii) The remaining Prices submitted by any of the other Tenderers as part of the Financial Submissions shall each score a mark of 100, reduced by 1 mark for each 1 percentage point by which that Price exceeds the lowest value of all the Prices opened as part of the evaluation process. Each Tenderer’s score shall be rounded to the nearest two decimal places.

The Aggregated Quality and Price Scores Calculation and determination
On completion of the evaluation of the Quality Submission and the Financial Submission, each Tender shall have obtained a weighted quality score out of 100 (to two decimal places) and a price score out of 100 (to two decimal places).

Prior to aggregating these scores, further weightings shall be applied.
1. The weighting applied to Quality will be 65 %.
2. The weighting applied to Price will be 35 %.

Following the application of weightings, Panel 4 shall then aggregate these weighted Quality and Price score totals for each compliant and acceptable Tender, to calculate an aggregated score out of 100 for each Tenderer and ultimately determine the most economically advantageous Tender. The aggregated quality and price score shall be rounded to the nearest two decimal places.

In the event that following the evaluation of Tenders, there is a tie between the first and second ranked compliant most economically advantageous Tenders (i.e. both Tenderers have achieved the same aggregated quality/price score), a qualitative criteria may be applied by the Employer, at its sole discretion, to determine the most economically advantageous Tender.
Such criterion that may be applied in such a tie, shall be that the Tenderer that has gained the highest overall weighted quality score, determined in accordance with Section 6.5, shall be considered in this  circumstance to be the most economically advantageous Tender.

About FOI

The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at http://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.

Contact

Please quote the FOI reference
Central Enquiry Unit
Email: ceu@gov.scot
Phone: 0300 244 4000

The Scottish Government
St Andrews House
Regent Road
Edinburgh
EH1 3DG