Decision

The Assistant Director of Property and
Investment has approved the award of a contract for the Asbestos
Surveying and Sampling Works Schedule of Rates Contract to
Pennington Choices Ltd (Company Number 3945920) as the most
advantageous tenderer or a period of 2 years with the option to
extend for a further year on two occasions to undertake planned
preventive maintenance, reactive repairs and emergency repairs in
relation to the Council's land and property with an estimated
contract value of £400,000 over a period of four
years

Reasons for the decision

Wirral Borough Council has a large portfolio
of assets that require asbestos surveying and sampling works,
including planned, reactive and emergency work. Ensuring that the
Council has the ability to appoint contractors to do this work is
an essential step to take.

Presently the Facilities Management team provide planned and
reactive maintenance services for the Council's land and property
either directly or on behalf of the Council's service areas. In
addition, the Council is implementing a Corporate Landlord Model,
whereby ultimately this team will be responsible for the
maintenance of Council owned land and buildings in the future,
excepting schools, which have differing management arrangements.
The Council's property portfolio is comprised of a mixture of
operational and non-operational assets, ranging from offices and
publicly accessed venues, commercial and retail properties and
assets held for regeneration and schools.

The Council has a statutory duty to ensure that its assets comply
with relevant Health and Safety legislation and Regulations.

The award of the new Asbestos Surveying and Sampling contract will
allow the Council's Facilities Management team to deliver asbestos
surveying and sampling services, emergency repairs, reactive
repairs, and planned preventative maintenance work on the Council's
land and property portfolio. This includes minor capital
maintenance works.

Tenders were sought from 5 suppliers. The 2 tenders were submitted,
including from Pennington Choices Ltd. They were evaluated on
price, quality and social value submissions and moderated with the
Council’s Procurement Team. Details of the tender evaluation
are set out in the exempt Appendix 1.

Appendix 1 is exempt from publication pursuant to paragraph 3 of
part 1 of Schedule 12 A of the Local Government Act 1972
(Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any
particular person (including the authority holding that
information)) because it contains or refers to information relating
to the financial and business affairs of tenderers and the Council
and the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the
public interest in disclosure.

The evaluation criteria was based on price (50%), quality (40%) and
social value (10%).

Quality elements of the tender return were evaluated by three
officers from the Asset Management team, completing individual
scoring sheets which were moderated by Procurement.

The Pricing element of the tender return was scored separately by
Procurement
The final scores are brought together by Procurement in a weighted
"evaluation matrix" which determines the preferred tenderer. The
tender submitted by Pennington Choices Ltd represents the most
advantageous tender received

Alternative options considered

There is not a do-nothing option. The Council
needs to have a contract in place as the Council has a statutory
duty to ensure that its assets comply with relevant Health and
Safety legislation and Regulations

The Council could look to let individual pieces of work on a
case-by-case basis. This would present a significant challenge to
administer, significantly increase the cost of administration and
would not be satisfactory for certain works, for example emergency
call out. Not commissioning would generate significant challenges
to the Facilities Management team, impacting their operational
effectiveness, in provision of works and would have significant
implications for the operation of the Council's property portfolio,
which may lead to asset non availability or Health and Safety
implications.

The Council could explore other options, for example outsourcing
models, however there is a requirement for a contract to be in
place now to enable delivery of works and any development of a
proposal for outsourcing would need to be properly developed, so
the best outcome for the Council could be achieved and the contract
mobilised.