The setting of "Test Report" is unreasonable.
In the tender documents, there are often words that need to submit the specified inspection report when bidding or acceptance. Under normal circumstances, it is not encouraged to require suppliers to provide test reports issued by national testing institutions in bidding documents, so as not to increase the cost of suppliers' bidding. However, for some projects that are really necessary for purchasing specific products, they can be agreed upon when preparing the bidding documents. Of course, in this case, in principle, it should be stated that the certification certificate (test report) is issued by a nationally recognized certification and testing institution. Generally speaking, it is not appropriate to designate a specific certification and testing institution, unless otherwise stipulated by national laws and regulations. Several certification marks such as "CMA", "CAL" and "CNAS" often appear in the procurement requirements of bidding documents. According to the Administrative Measures for Accreditation of Laboratories and Inspection Institutions issued by the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine in 2006, "accreditation forms include CMA and CAL". In addition to the above two compulsions, CNAS certification is a voluntary act of the organization, and any first-party, second-party and third-party laboratory can apply for accreditation. It is not appropriate if the document takes the test report issued by CAL as a mandatory requirement.
According to Article 22 of the Measures for the Administration of Bidding for Government Procurement of Goods and Services (Order No.87 of the Ministry of Finance), "Under normal circumstances, purchasers and agencies may not require bidders to provide samples, except for special circumstances such as unable to accurately describe the procurement requirements in writing or requiring subjective judgment on the samples to confirm whether they meet the procurement requirements. If a bidder is required to provide samples, the standards and requirements for sample production shall be clearly stipulated in the tender documents, and whether it is necessary to submit relevant test reports, sample evaluation methods and evaluation standards with the samples. " In the case of requiring bidders to provide samples, more detailed test report requirements can be stipulated.
Over-quoting "product introduction"
The most common procurement requirement of goods bidding documents is to choose a product parameter as the technical standard of goods. Some parameters are too high to meet the requirements of "more than three suppliers meet the requirements" in the market, which not only easily leads to the failure of bidding, but also often becomes the fuse of questioning complaints. Once other steps are added to the plan, the project will inevitably be postponed.
Take the description of a procurement demand in the project bidding document as an example. "Goods have mature solutions from well-known brand manufacturers at home and abroad", "well-known brands" and "maturity" are some requirements that human beings cannot objectively judge, so the setting is not rigorous enough, which will increase the difficulty of bid evaluation. It is best to check whether there are too many advertising words and modifiers for each parameter. You can't simply copy and paste the product introduction of a supplier into the bidding documents, so it's better to avoid the content of non-objective indicators.
There is no direct relationship between purchase demand and project performance.
In the aspect of award certification, it is unreasonable to set awards and certificates as substantive response to the requirements of the clause. If the purchased products have national mandatory standards, then the national mandatory standards must be implemented. If it is a non-mandatory standard, it is not appropriate for the bidding documents to require the supplier's products to meet a certain standard. Taking medical devices as an example, the quantity of goods is large, and the quality of devices is closely related to hospital doctors and patients. Bidding documents of such projects often require some product certifications, but these certifications are not required by all countries. In the field of medical devices sold in China, "3C certification" is a compulsory product certification in China. For products not listed in 3C catalogue, China Quality Certification Center (CQC) can take voluntary product certification, which is only the certification of enterprise resources, and has nothing to do with product performance.
In addition, some awards are awarded by trade associations, which are non-governmental organizations. It is also unreasonable to use some association-specific awards as qualification requirements and extra points.
Judging from the scoring method, setting the relevant evaluation rules of the whole cargo project according to the requirements of a single cargo often encounters practical bottlenecks. Imagine if you buy more than one item? Baobiao Bidding Network once encountered a project to purchase two kinds of goods, A and B. The price of A accounts for a very small proportion in the whole goods procurement, accounting for about 0.8% of the whole project, but the bonus item set around it is 15, which obviously far exceeds its actual value. This setting not only may exclude other suppliers, but also violates the principle of fairness. If the average quality B goods win the bid because of the deviation of scores, it will lay a hidden danger for the future use of goods. The scoring method of multi-goods bidding documents should consider the price ratio and the degree of use, and avoid those secondary contents.
For more information about project/service/procurement bidding, and to improve the winning rate, please click on the bottom of official website Customer Service for free consultation:/#/? source=bdzd