S O T A R V II: Tate F HE RT Eport Olume
S O T A R V II: Tate F HE RT Eport Olume
S O T A R V II: Tate F HE RT Eport Olume
VOLUME II
JULY 2004
Public eProcurement European Commission
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this document are purely those of the writer and may not, in any circumstances,
be interpreted as stating an official position of the European Commission.
The European Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the information included in this study,
nor does it accept any responsibility for any use thereof.
Reference herein to any specific products, specifications, process, or service by trade name, trademark,
manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation,
or favouring by the European Commission.
All care has been taken by the author to ensure that he has obtained, where necessary, permission to use
any parts of manuscripts including illustrations, maps, and graphs, on which intellectual property rights
already exist from the titular holder(s) of such rights or from his or their legal representative.
Abbreviations / Acronyms
Abbreviation
Term
or Acronym
AGM Agency of Government Management (Danish administration)
API Application Program Interface
APM Agency of Public Procurement (Swedish administration)
CA Certification Authority
CPP Centralised Public Procurement (Hungarian administration)
CPV Common Procurement Vocabulary
cXML Commerce XML
DFPS Department of Finance and Public Administration (Basque administration)
DOC Microsoft MS Word document (.doc)
DPS Dynamic Purchasing Systems
EC European Commission
EDI Electronic Data Interchange
EU European Union
FAQ Frequently Asked Questions
FedICT Federal Public Services of Information and Communication Technologies
GAS Government Administration Services (Norwegian administration)
GPC Government Procurement Card
GUI Graphical User Interface
HTTP / HTTPS HyperText Transfer Protocol / Secure HyperText Transfer Protocol
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IDA Interchange of Data between Administrations
IT Information Technology
ITT Invitation to Tender
MEAT Most Economically Advantageous Tender
MINDEF Ministry of Defence (French administration)
MoD Service Public Fédéral of the Ministry of Defence (Belgian administration)
MS Member States
OGC Office of Government Commerce (UK administration)
OJEU Official Journal of the European Union
OSS Open Source Software
PDF Portable Document Format
PIN Prior Information Notice
PQQ Pre-Qualification Questionnaire
Q&A Questions & Answers
RFP Request for Proposal
RFQ Request for Quotation
RTF Rich Text Format
SLA Service Level Agreement
SME Small-Medium Enterprises
SMTP Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
SSL Secure Sockets Layer
UN/SPSC Universal Standard Products and Services Code
VPN Virtual Private Network
XLS Microsoft MS Excel spreadsheet (.xls)
XML eXtensible Markup Language
Glossary
Term Description
Advanced Electronic Means an electronic signature which meets the following requirements:
Signature (a) it is uniquely linked to the signatory
(b) it is capable of identifying the signatory
(c) it is created using means that the signatory can maintain under his sole control
(d) it is linked to the data to which it relates in such a manner that any subsequent
change of the data is detectable
Authentication Proving a user’s identity. To be able to access a Website or resource, a user must provide
authentication via a password or some combination of tokens, biometrics and passwords.
Authorisation The act of granting approval. Authorisation to resources or information within an
application can be based on simple or complex access control methods.
Basic Internet Security Typically employed in low value, low sensitivity applications using Secure Sockets
Layer (SSL) for confidentiality, with the possible addition of UserID and Passwords for
user authentication.
Browser Based This term describes software that does not require any client software to be installed or
configured on users' systems, except of the commercially supported Web-browsers (IE,
NS, Mozila and Opera). Unlike a browser plug-in, browser based applications do not
require manual download and execution of an installation program prior to Web site
access; Unlike an ActiveX control or some Java applets, browser based applications do
not force the user to agree to potentially confusing security warning dialogs. Unlike other
client applications, browser based applications do not have a noticeable download time.
In fact, download is transparent to the end-user.
Certificate An electronic "passport". A certificate is a secure electronic identity conforming to the
X.509 standard. Certificates typically contain a user's name and public key. A CA
authorises certificates by signing the contents using its CA signing private key.
Certificate validation The process of checking the trustworthiness of a certificate. Certificate validation
involves checking that the certificate has not been tampered with, has not expired, is not
revoked and was issued by a CA you trust.
Certification The system responsible for issuing secure electronic identities to users in the form of
Authority (CA) certificates.
Cryptography The science to convert plain language into coded text and in reverse.
Decrypt To decrypt a protected file is to restore it to its original, unprotected state.
Electronic signature Data in electronic form which are attached to or logically associated with other electronic
data and which serve as a method of authentication
Encryption To encrypt a file is to apply a mathematical function that transforms character(s) in the
file into some other character(s). Encryption renders the file unreadable. This means no
one, including the actor, can read the file until it is decrypted. Only authorised recipients
can decrypt the file.
Encryption key pair This consists of the encryption public key and decryption private key. The public key
portion of an encryption key pair is used to encrypt data which can be decrypted by the
matching decryption private key.
Enhanced Internet This is the required level of security needed for applications that deal with higher value
Security and higher sensitivity transactions and information. This consists of enhanced levels of
identification, entitlements, verification, privacy and security management.
Identification see Authentication
National Refers to the public authority responsible for the eProcurement programme of a country,
eProcurement as well as, for compliant with the legislation operation of the offered systems. The
Authorities information analysed in the current report has all been obtained by the National
eProcurement Authorities of the participating countries.
Private key The portion of a key pair that is kept secret by the owner of the key pair. Private keys
sign or decrypt data.
Public key The portion of a key pair that is available publicly.
Public Key A system that provides the basis for establishing and maintaining a trustworthy
Infrastructure (PKI) networking environment through the generation and distribution of keys and certificates.
This is also the foundation technology for providing enhanced Internet security.
Secure Sockets Layer A secure session protocol used to maintain data confidentiality only bet ween Web-
(SSL) browsers and Web servers. This is a fundamental component of basic Internet security.
Security Management The act of effectively and efficiently managing identification, entitlements, verification
and privacy such that there is less burden of administration for end users and
administrators regardless of application or platform.
Security policy An organisation's security policy governs the use of the appropriate infrastructure in the
organisation to achieve security objectives.
Time Stamping The validity of storing the official date and time a business transaction has occurred.
Web Portal A Web portal is a single doorway for employees, customers and partners to access an
organisation's content, data and services online. Also known as Enterprise portals, Web
portals make it possible to establish online relationships by providing personalised
content to different individuals and entities. Organisations are building portals not only
to increase loyalty, but also to create competitive advantage, strengthen relationships,
speed access to services and satisfy regulatory requirements. Portals also make it
possible to increase revenue, efficiencies and cost savings by moving business processes
online.
XML XML is the standard messaging format for business communication, allowing companies
to connect their business systems with those of customers and partners using the existing
Internet infrastructure. Similar to HTML, XML uses tags (words bracketed by '<' and '>')
and attributes (of the form name="value") to help place structured data into text files.
XML is different from HTML in that it is a meta-language (a language for describing
languages) and, therefore, does not define specific tags and attributes.
Table of Contents
Abbreviations / Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................. 3
Glossary............................................................................................................................................................................. 4
Table of Contents............................................................................................................................................................. 6
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................10
1.1 Document structure ...........................................................................................................................................10
2 Evaluation methodology ...........................................................................................................................................11
2.1 Evaluation methodology topics.......................................................................................................................11
2.1.1 Analysis of the status of eProcurement in reviewed countries..........................................................12
2.1.2 Analysis of eProcurement systems.........................................................................................................12
2.1.3 Analysis of eProcurement Practices .......................................................................................................14
2.2 Support activity ..................................................................................................................................................15
3 Reviewed countries....................................................................................................................................................17
3.1 Belgium...............................................................................................................................................................17
3.2 Denmark..............................................................................................................................................................18
3.3 France...................................................................................................................................................................19
3.4 Italy.......................................................................................................................................................................21
3.5 Norway ................................................................................................................................................................22
3.6 Spain (Basque country).....................................................................................................................................23
3.7 United Kingdom.................................................................................................................................................24
3.8 United Kingdom (Scotland) .............................................................................................................................25
3.9 Other Countries ..................................................................................................................................................26
3.9.1 Finland ........................................................................................................................................................26
3.9.2 Hungary ......................................................................................................................................................27
3.9.3 Sweden........................................................................................................................................................27
4 Electronic Procurement Systems .............................................................................................................................30
4.1 Individual Contracts..........................................................................................................................................30
4.1.1 DTC – Scottish Executive (UK/Scotland) ............................................................................................32
4.1.2 DPSM – Ministry of Defence (FRANCE) ............................................................................................36
4.1.3 JEPP – Federal Government Ministry of Defence (BELGIUM) ......................................................42
4.1.4 EPSS – CORDIS (EUROPEAN UNION) ............................................................................................46
4.1.5 SYSLOG Market – DG ADMIN (EUROPEAN UNION) ................................................................49
4.1.6 eSourcing Service – Office of Government Commerce (UK) ..........................................................53
4.1.7 eContratacion eTendering–Department of Finance & Public Administration (SPAIN/Bas que) 55
4.1.8 ehandel eSourcing – Government Administration Services (NORWAY) ......................................57
4.2 Repetitive Purchasing Systems........................................................................................................................59
4.2.1 PECOS – Scottish Executive (UK/Scotland).......................................................................................60
4.2.2 Lotto 2 – Consip (ITALY).......................................................................................................................63
4.2.3 DOIP/DOIPEI – Agency of Government Management (DENMARK)...........................................66
4.2.4 ehandel eOrdering – Government Administration Services (NORWAY) ......................................69
4.2.5 DPSM eCatalogues – Ministry of Defence (FRANCE) .....................................................................72
4.3 eAuctions systems .............................................................................................................................................75
4.3.1 eAuction services – Office of Government Commerce (UK) ...........................................................77
4.3.2 Lotto 1 – Consip (ITALY).......................................................................................................................79
4.3.3 DOIP eAuction – Agency of Government Management (DENMARK).........................................82
4.3.4 ehandel eAuctions – Government Administration Services (NORWAY) ......................................85
4.3.5 DPSM eAuctions – Ministry of Defence (FRANCE).........................................................................87
4.4 eProcurement supplementary systems ...........................................................................................................90
4.4.1 Supplier Adoption Database – Scottish Executive (UK/Scotland)...................................................91
4.4.2 eCatalogue Converter – Scottish Executive (UK/Scotland)..............................................................92
4.4.3 Eureka Search – Interchange of Data between Administrations (EU).............................................93
List of Tables
Table 1: Reviewed public administration eProcurement approach..................................................................12
Table 2: [Name of eProcurement system] system overview .............................................................................13
Table 3: [Name of eProcurement system] coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement 14
Table 4: [Name of eProcurement system] functionality overview...................................................................14
Table 5: Coverage of the EU legislation principles by the [Name of the category] eProcurement
Practices...........................................................................................................................................................15
Table 6: Belgian Federal eProcurement approach..............................................................................................18
Table 7: Danish AGM eProcurement approach..................................................................................................19
Table 8: French MINDEF (DGA) eProcurement approach ..............................................................................20
Table 9: Italian Consip eProcurement approach.................................................................................................21
Table 10: Norwegian GAS eProcurement approach ..........................................................................................22
Table 11: Basque government eProcurement approach.....................................................................................23
Table 12: UK – OGC eProcurement approach....................................................................................................24
Table 13: Scottish Executive eProcurement approach.......................................................................................25
Table 14: Swedish eProcurement approach.........................................................................................................29
Table 15: Features that establish the uniformity of an Individual Contract system with the new
legislative framework on public procurement ..........................................................................................31
Table 16: DTC system overview ...........................................................................................................................33
Table 17: DTC coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement..............................................35
Table 18: DTC functionality overview .................................................................................................................36
Table 19: DPSM system overview........................................................................................................................38
Table 20: DPSM coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement...........................................40
Table 21: DPSM functionality overview..............................................................................................................42
Table 22: JEPP platform overview........................................................................................................................44
Table 23: JEPP coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement..............................................45
Table 24: JEPP functionality overview ................................................................................................................46
Table 25: EPSS system overview..........................................................................................................................47
Table 26: EPSS coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement.............................................49
Table 27: EPSS functionality overview................................................................................................................49
Table 28: SYSLOG Market system overview .....................................................................................................50
Table 29: SYSLOG Market coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement........................52
Table 30: SYSLOG Market functionality overview...........................................................................................52
Table 31: eSourcing service overview..................................................................................................................54
Table 32: eContratacion eTendering system overview......................................................................................56
Table 33: ehandel eSourcing system overview ...................................................................................................58
Table 34: Features that establish the uniformity of a Repetitive Purchasing System with the new
legislative framework on eProcurement ....................................................................................................60
Table 35: PECOS system overview ......................................................................................................................61
Table 36: PECOS coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement.........................................62
Table 37: PECOS functionality overview............................................................................................................63
Table 38: Lotto 2 system overview .......................................................................................................................64
Table 39: Lotto 2 coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement..........................................65
Table 40: Lotto 2 functionality overview.............................................................................................................65
Table 41: DOIP/DOIPEI system overview..........................................................................................................67
Table 42: DOIP/DOIPEI coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement.............................68
Table 43: DOIP/DOIPEI functionality overview................................................................................................69
Table 44: ehandel eOrdering system overview ...................................................................................................70
Table 45: ehandel eOrdering coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement......................71
Table 46: ehandel eOrdering functionality overview.........................................................................................72
Table 47: DPSM eCatalogues system overview .................................................................................................73
Table 48: DPSM eCatalogues coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement....................74
Table 49: DPSM eCatalogues functionality overview.......................................................................................75
Table 50: Features that establish the uniformity of an eAuction system with the new legislative
framework on eProcurement........................................................................................................................76
1 Introduction
The current document provides the background analys is of the information gathered from various
Member States that eventually led to interesting eProcurement Practices (presented in Volume I).
The study considered 21 systems from 8 European countries (including 3 EC systems ). The
analysis of the Member States eProcurement programmes and their existing systems is performed
through an established evaluation methodology, which standardises the way they are examined.
The evaluation methodology used for the assessment of the reviewed systems is also presented in
this document, with a view to provide a method for administrations evaluating the quality of their
systems, or any proposals received from technology suppliers, for the development of
components, tools, or complete eProcurement systems.
• Section 2 - Evaluation methodology: presents the methodology used for reviewing the
eProcurement systems from the participating administrations. The purpose of the Evaluation
Methodology is not to benchmark the analysed systems, but rather to provide a standardised
mechanism in order to assess them and result in common conclusions. The Evaluation
Methodology can be utilised by MS in order to objectively evaluate their own systems and/or
contractor proposals for future developments.
• Section 3 - Reviewed countries : presents information related to the administrative structure
of the official government bodies involved with the development of public eProcurement in
each reviewed country. Furthermore, there is a high-level overview of existing and future
eProcurement programmes and systems of the reviewed administrations.
• Section 4 - Electronic Procurement Systems : provides an analysis of the reviewed
eProcurement systems. Systems are grouped into four main categories, depending on their
functionality. The identified categories are:
o Individual Contract systems: covering procurement of one-off contracts, through the
open, restricted, or negotiated procedures
o Repetitive Purchasing systems: covering systems employing electronic catalogues,
through DPS or framework agreements
o eAuction systems: covering eAuctions
o Supplementary systems: enhancing functionality of existing eProcurement systems ,
without directly covering an eProcurement type or phase
2 Evaluation methodology
In order to analyse all reviewed eProcurement systems, the contractor has established an
Evaluation Methodology; a structured procedure for assessing the procedural and technical
capabilities of all eProcurement programmes and systems reviewed. The Methodology is utilised
in order to evaluate the system functionality, compare it to the new EU public procurement
legislation and identify eProcurement Practices; ideas that can be included in a State-of-the-Art
programme/system.
The purpose for establishing the Evaluation Methodology is twofold. The first objective is to
identify and collect the necessary information in order to understand the policy followed by the
reviewed public administrations and analyse the ir eProcurement systems. The second objective is
to apply a formalised analysis procedure, in order to identify interesting eProcurement Practices
and recommend their implementation. The execution of the Evaluation Methodology requires a
wide range of information for all systems, which was not always available to the contractor
during the current analysis.
The established methodology can be used for analysing eProcurement systems, but it is not
destined for evaluating and benchmarking systems. Benchmarking is not the purpose of this
report and therefore reviewed systems are not compared one against the other with an intention to
conclude the systems that are the “best-of-breed” .
The analysis, based on the Evaluation Methodology, is carried out in three phases, each one
focusing on a separate area of review. The three phases are executed in a sequential manner, in
order to conclude concrete results. During the first phase there is an analysis of the policy
followed by the reviewed administrations. In the second phase there is an analysis of the reviewed
eProcurement systems. Finally, in the last phase there is a presentation of identified eProcurement
Practices and a conclus ion of the overall analysis. The following sections provide details for each
phase, allowing the reader to better understand the analysis approach used according to the
established methodology.
The contractor has also established a contingency plan in order to face possible disruptions during
the collection of information by the various participating public administrations. This plan is
presented at the end of this section.
Feature Description
Administration involved Name of reviewed public administration
Project(s) Name of eProcurement project(s)
Objectives:
o Objective 1
o Objective 2
o etc.
Technology Provider Name of technology provider(s)
System(s) Name of reviewed eProcurement system and year it was launched
o Characteristic 1
o Characteristic 2
o Characteristic 3
o etc.
Step Forward Further developments comprise:
o Target 1
o Target 2
o etc.
Table 1: Reviewed public administration eProcurement approach
The first stage of the eProcurement system analysis provides an overview of the system in a form
of a table . The first three rows of the table provide an overview of the functionality (row 1),
presentation of the exploitation model (row 2) and description of the types of actors (row 3). The
rest of the table grows depending on the system under review, as it lists the most interesting
characteristics of the system. This obviously varies from system to system, although some
characteristics are common to a number of them. Characteristics include technical, as well as,
procedural and operational aspects. The table of the system overview can be used in order to
quickly acquire a complete picture of the system under review. The structure of the table that
provides the system overview is presented hereafter.
Characteristic 2 - Description
Characteristic 3 - Description
etc. -
These tables consider two aspects of analysis, the coverage of the different eProcurement phases
(upper part of the table) and the coverage of certain legal principles (lower part of the table). In
the following chapters of this report, during the introduction of each eProcurement system
category, there is a presentation of the table template that will be used for the comparison. This
table explains the conditions that must be satisfied in order to conclude that the system supports a
particular functionality. A typical example of a table is presented here.
For the coverage of the legal requirements of the new European public procurement directives,
compliance with the following principles has been examined:
− Tenderers receive an equal amount of information at the same time (equality of
treatment)
− Contracting authorit ies respect the confidential nature of information (confidentiality)
− Mechanisms are supported, in order to record all system events and user activities, as
well as, attempts to gain access to sensitive information (transparency)
− Operation of the system improves competition conditions for the users (effectiveness)
− Use of interoperable (compatible) electronic means, generally available on the market or
broadly used in MS, thus avoiding the use of country-specific or otherwise discriminatory
technologies that restrict access to tendering procedures (interoperability).
− Use of technologies to ensure the secure communication of information and its storage in
system data repositories (security)
− Use of technologies which are widely available and at low cost, as well as, mechanisms
ensuring continuous operation of the system (general availability)
At the end of the presentation of each Good Practice category, there is a discussion of the
deduced results. This discussion focuses on the coverage of the EU principles by the respective
eProcurement Practices of the category. A typical example of is presented hereafter.
General availability
Equal Treatment
Interoperability
Confidentiality
Transparency
Effectiveness
Security
No
[Name of the category] eProcurement
Practices
Table 5: Coverage of the EU legislation principles by the [Name of the category] eProcurement
Practices
Separate symbols indicate which EU principles are satisfied by the eProcurement Practices (ü)
and which are in risk (? ). This presentation helps the reader to understand the main EU rules that
are covered by the eProcurement Practices in each category.
plan for achieving the aims of the report, even if some countries would not be in a position to
provide the minimum amount of information for conducting the analysis.
Before detailing the contingency plan, it should be noted that the contractor established two
mitigating activities, which are believed to have minimised the risk of introducing complications
during the collection of information for the analysis.
• Assistance by the EC: The cooperation between the contractor and the reviewed
administrations was achieved with the help of the EC. The contractor was introduced to all
MS during the 4th IDA eProcurement Working Group meeting on 20/01/2004, where an
opportunity was given to the contractor to give a presentation to all participants and explain
the objectives of the current project and report. Furthermore, it was possible for participants
to ask for any clarifications, as well as, volunteer in contributing to the analysis for the
current report.
• Structured communication: The communication with the reviewed administrations was
attempted to be as structured as possible, avoiding ad-hoc communications and requests to
contributors. A complete of list of required documents and a questionnaire were provided to
administrations, minimising the disruption contributors had to undergo, in order to contribute
to the current project. For completeness, the complete list of the requested documentation and
the questionnaire are presented in ANNEX A: Structured Communication (page 95).
The aforementioned mitigating activities were put in place in order to minimise the risks for
complications during the collection of information. Nevertheless, when a complication arose with
regard to the lack of information for a reviewed system, the contractor adopted the following
contingency plan, as demonstrated in Figure 1.
Request from
Complication Is the complication Is there another
YES YES EC to change
with a system early in the process? similar EU system?
systems
NO
NO
Raise problem
with EC and EC accepts
The adhoc evaluation will be NO
completed according to the request change?
assistance
information available during
that phase of the project and
may:
3 Reviewed countries
This section provides an analysis of the public eProcurement programmes of the reviewed
countries. The participating public administrations volunteered to explain the national
procurement legislative framework in their countries, demonstrate the capabilities of their
eProcurement systems during missions organised for this purpose, as well as, to provide technical
documentation and complete a detailed questionnaire (Annex A, page 95).
The main purpose of the review was to present the various approaches followed in each country,
in order to introduce eProcurement in the public sector. A lot of attention is given in
understanding the reasons that led to the development of systems that support certain phases of
eProcurement, the implementation strategy and the available funding of the project. This section
presents a general overview of the findings in the areas of local legislation and eProcurement
projects in each country.
3.1 Belgium
The Federal Public Services of Information and Communication Technologies (FedICT) is the
Belgian public organisation responsible for defining the eProcurement federal recommendations .
These recommendations are applicable in all three economically autonomous regions of the
country (Brussels-Capital Region, Flemish Region, and the Walloon Region). In particular, the
role of FedICT is summarised below:
• develop a common Belgian strategy for eGovernment projects
• establish uniform IT standards, including technical architecture and implementation
methodology
• assist federal public departments to implement the strategy
• monitor the execution of eGovernment projects and services
Drawing on the laws and regulations sponsored by the FedICT, the Service Public Fédéral (SPF)
of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) took the lead for the initial development and deployment of the
first building bricks of the federal e-tendering initiative. This resulted in the deployment of a total
of three portals. The first portal is operated by the Belgian MoD , whereas the second is
implemented for all Pouvoirs Adjudicateurs du Niveau Fédéral (amongst other SPFs and
equivalent federal bodies) under a wide FedICT’s sponsorship. The third portal comes under the
Bulletin of the Adjudications (BDA), a federal entity responsible for the publication of RFPs for
all Belgian public entities, has a special role for hosting and providing an e-meeting place for all
federal eNotifications. Currently, there is a common distributed government-wide portal named
JEPP based on the integrated JEPP application.
In the context of this report, the approach to eProcurement followed by the Belgian MoD was
reviewed and an analysis of the JEPP system was carried out. This was based on technical
documentation and filled questionnaire provided by the Belgian MoD. Furthermore, an on-line
demonstration of the platform was attended during a mission to the Belgian MoD, where
discussion was carried out about its technical capabilities, the experiences gained through its
operation, and the steps forward.
The JEPP platform provides a standardised toolbox for developing and hosting organisation-
specific eProcurement portals. Through this platform, public organisations are enabled to
establish a gateway to eProcurement, without significant upfront investments (software and/or
hardware costs) using a “buy a little, test a little, yield a little” iterative strategy.
Feature Description
Administration involved Ministry of Defence (MoD)
Project(s) JEPP
Objectives:
o Replace paper-based public purchasing procedures
o Accelerate the traditional procurement processes
Technology Provider Unisys Consulting
System(s) JEPP launched during the last quarter of 2002
o Common platform capable of hosting several eNotification portals
o FedICT, MoD and BDA portals currently hosted
o Web-based approach
o Microsoft Technologies utilised
o Current version supports:
− electronic publication of notices and invitations to tenderers
− re-organisation of back-office processes
Step Forward Further developments comprise:
o Electronic submission of tenders
o Secure opening, evaluation and ranking of tenders
o eCatalogues
o ePayment (referred as “ePayable”)
3.2 Denmark
The Danish government bodies responsible for the development and expansion of eProcurement
in Denmark comprise:
• The National Procurement Ltd (SKI), a limited company, partially owned by the Ministry of
Finance (55% of ownership) and several local administrations, with main roles:
o To define public procurement procedures and perform procurement competitions for
individual contracts and framework agreements, on behalf of the Danish public
sector.
o To develop and maintain an eProcurement system (ETHICS), covering the full cycle
of the classic procedures.
• The Agency of Government Management (AGM) under the Ministry of Finance. The primary
objective of AGM is to develop systems and procedures for eAuctions and repetitive
purchasing. The currently establish eProcurement platform accommodates purchases from
suppliers that have framework agreements with Danish government.
• The National Audit Office of Denmark that is responsible for frequent auditing of
procurement competitions and purchases within the Danish public sector.
According to a study made by AGM, Danish government agencies spend about $4 billion
annually on public procurement.
In the context of the current work, the DOIP system (Den Offentlige Indkøbsportal, i.e. the Public
Procurement Portal), developed and provided by gaterade.net Ltd for AGM, was considered and
further analysed, for identifying interesting eProcurement Practices . DOIP supports electronic
auctions and purchasing through electronic catalogues from suppliers that are under framework
agreement with the Danish government. A recent extension to the system, called DOIPEI,
provides advanced integration capabilities, facilitating the exchange of information between
DOIP/DOIPEI and other governmental or supplier systems. DOIPEI is also developed and
provided by gaterade.net Ltd.
Feature Description
Administrations involved Agency of Government Management (AGM)
Project DOIP
Objectives:
o Model internal recurring procurement procedure workflows
o Integrate with governmental and supplier legacy systems
o Achieve savings of around $20-50 million annually
Technology Provider gatetrade.net Ltd.
System(s) DOIP/DOIPEI launched during2002
o Web-based system
o Oracle exchange software
o Current version supports:
− electronic auctions
− electronic catalogues
− integration with back-office systems
− payment and logistics functionality
Step Forward Further developments:
o Integrate with ETHICS (an eTendering system)
3.3 France
The government of France has set the target to modernise its public procurement mechanisms ,
through the enforcement of eProcurement throughout the whole French public sector. In this
respect, the French parliament approved (in 2002) the New Code for the Public Procurement
(NCMP), which came into force in January 2004. Furthermore, in March 2004, the French
Ministry of Finance announced the creation of a Central Purchasing Body, aiming to assist
contracting authorities for electronically purchasing their commodities (stationary, IT equipment,
furniture, etc.), under centrally arranged framework contracts (initially effective only for the
French Ministry of Finance).
According to the NCMP, all contracting authorities must be able to accept tenders submitted
electronically by 1st January 2005. The NCMP defines four types of contract awarding
procedures:
• Calls for tenders, foreseeing an open or restricted procedure
• Negotiated procedure, through competition with or without notification
• Simplified competitive dialogue, where the procurement agency specifies its needs with
the aid of selected suppliers, before creating a competition
• Contracts without prior formalities, for low-cost standard recurring purchases for
common frequent commodities
In the context of the current work, the e-achat platform was studied. e-achat is developed and
operated by the General Delegation for the Armament (DGA), of the French Ministry of Defence
(MINDEF). DGA is the most important purchasing authority in France, with a large volume of
operations for 2002 (73 armament programmes, €11.8 billion of purchases, €7.2 billion of
payments, and €905 million of intervention fees). Following significant re-structuring during the
last three years , due to the re-engineering of their internal business processes with the adoption of
eProcurement, DGA currently employs 18,000 personnel. The following table provides an
overview of the platform.
Feature Description
Administration involved General Delegation for the Armament (DGA)
Project e-achat launched in 2000
Objectives:
o Provide a fully operational electronic procurement platform, for the 200
procurement agencies of MINDEF (initially used by the 40 agencies that are
directly attached to DGA)
o Reduce administrative and bureaucracy costs
o Reform internal procurement procedures, by automating their paper-based
processes
o Improve transparency of public procurement
o Secure exchanges between suppliers and procurement agencies
Estimated gains:
o €10 billion from the costs of the armament programmes
o 31% reduction of the intervention fees
Technology Provider Consortium led by:
o Capgemini France
o France Telecom
System(s) The Defence Public Sector Marketplace (D PSM) which integrated two armament
portals was launched in 2003, facilitating the organisation of competitions, the
publishing of call for tenders notifications, and the submission of tenders:
o ixarm.com: used for the procurement of arms, ammunition and other combat
related supplies
o achats.defense.gouv.fr: covering the remaining defence procurement needs
(furniture, construction works, fuel, medical equipment, etc)
There exists support for private network establishment, between all involved parties,
for secure repetitive purchases (e.g. parts of Rafale fighting aircraft)
eAuction and eCatalogues services are currently offered through a third party platform
(Answork)
Step Forward Further developments:
o Further promote the efficient use of eCatalogues services, by purchasing
agencies
o Entice more suppliers to participat e in eAuctions
o Implement eAwarding and eOrdering/eInvoicing functionality
o Create interfaces with internal back-office systems
The purchasing policy of MINDEF is based on open and fair competition. To enforce this
principle for the procurement of defence equipment, there is a tendency for MINDEF selecting
prime contractors without competition and assigning them responsibilities to organise a
competitive tendering procedure on behalf of MINDEF. In such cases, the MINDEF negotia tes
with prime contractor the certain conditions, under which the competition will be organised
between sub-contractors. This process aims at securing equality of treatment between all
MINDEF sub-contactors.
During the last year, the use of the two eProcurement portals has been spread among the different
procurement agencies of MINDEF. In this respect, e-achat platform has been recently proposed
by the French Prime Minister services, as a global government-wide solution, to be used by the
French pubic sector.
3.4 Italy
The body responsible for the development of eProcurement in Italy is an independent agency
called Consip (Concessionaria Servizi Informativi Pubblici - Public Information Services
Agency). Consip is a limited joint-stock company owned by the Italian Ministry of Economy and
Finance that provides consultancy and IT solution management in the field of eProcurment.
Consip’s primary objectives comprise:
• Provide assistance in the development and optimisation of IT eProcurement solutions, for
becoming available to all central and local contracting authorities in Italy
• Modernise the procurement procedures of the Italian public sector
• Renovate the internal IT systems of the Ministry of Economy and Finance
The 2000 Finance Act adopted by the Italian government presented opportunities for the Italian
contracting authorities, by service level agreements with suppliers, by simplifying/automating
their internal business processes. The Act introduced new procurement procedures for the Italian
public sector and required the functionality to be supported for the electronic supply of goods and
services by government contracting authorities. It formed the legal basis for the appointment of
Consip (in February 2000) as the responsible body for the implementation of eProcurement
systems for the Italian public sector. All central government agencies in Italy are obliged to use
Consip’s systems, whereas other public bodies (municipalities, hospitals, universities, etc.) are
also offered the opportunity to utilise them.
An overview of the Italian eProcurement approach developed by Consip (based on the 2000
Finance Act and the DPR 101/2002 Act that regulates online auctions and eMarketplace systems )
is presented below.
Feature Description
Administration involved Consip (Concessionaria Servizi Informativi Pubblici)
Project eProcurement launched in 2000 with an initial investment of €25 million
Main objective: to ensure “best value for money” for contracting authorities, through
open and fair competitions
3.5 Norway
The Norwegian procurement legislation favours decentralised public procurements, with the
largest volume of framework agreements procured solely by public sector entities, at local or
regional level. Centrally procured framework agreements are applicable only under special
circumstances. The underlying reasoning for this regulation is to enhance the procurement of
goods and services from SMEs, since centrally procured framework agreements commonly
include large product/service volumes that can be fulfille d only by large corporations.
The Norwegian Ministries of Labour and Government Administration (MLGA) and of Trade and
Industry (MTI) are responsible for implementing public sector purchasing polic ies and
developing/operating eProcurement systems for the public sector.
In the context of the current European State-of-the-Art report, the eProcurement project of the
Government Administration Services (GAS) was analysed. GAS is an underlying entity of
MLGA responsible for the definition and execution of the “Programme for Electronic Commerce
in the Norwegian Public Sector”. The main objective of this Programme is to introduce
eCommerce into all governmental organisations. The main project launched under this
Programme was the eMarketplace ehandel.no (launched in 2001), which is summarised in the
table below.
Feature Description
Administration involved Government Administration Services (GAS)
Project eMarketplace ehandel.no (ehandel) launched in 2001
Objectives:
o Provide public sector entities and their suppliers with easy access to an
affordable and easy to use eProcurement solution
o Develop a modular application to be the cornerstone for any future extension
o Achieve self-funding operation due to limited budget
Technology Provider Integrated Business Exchange (IBX)
System(s) ehandel - eOrdering system became operational in 2002:
o Repetitive p urchas es system
o CommerceOne , SAP, Poet and others
o Currently supports
− purchases of goods and services under existing framework agreements
or by free text search in catalogues and using round trip
− advanced reporting capabilities
− datawarehouse solutions
Step Forward Further developments comprise customisation and pilots for eSourcing and
eAuctions system supporting:
o eProcurement under individual contracts
o Supplier identification/sourcing
o RFIs, RFPs and RFQs (request for Invitations, Proposals and Quotations)
o eAuctions
o Framework agreements and dynamic purchasing system (DPS)
o Contract management
Objectives:
o Improve performance of public procurement and minimise administration
costs
o Improve level of public services
o Standardise public procurement methods
o Encourage competition in an open and efficient environment
o Promote eCommerce and the use of di gital signatures
Technology Provider o EJIE (Basque Government Information Society)
System(s) - eContratacion eTendering
Currently supports contract notification and procurement of individual contracts
- eContratacion eMarketplace
A repetitive p urchas es system that currently supports purchases under framework
agreements through supplier eCatalogues
- Suppliers Registry
Database of fiscal and juridical information about registered enterprises
- Procurement Procedure and Documentation File Manager
Tendering procedure management system
Step Forward Further developments comprise:
o Contracts Registry
o Application for tracking online proposals status by tenderers
In the context of the current work, the UK eProcurement policy and systems adopted by OGC
have been examined, as summarised in the table below:
Feature Description
Administration involved Office of Government Commerce (OGC)
o Zanzibar (eHUB/Purchase-to-Pay)
− establish the Purchase-to-Pay system (eCatalogues system)
− develop transactional hub for system-to-system integration
o Change Management
− establish government supplier adoption programme
− develop the eProcurement Assessment Tool (ePAT) to conclude the
status of eProcurement in the UK public sector
Technology Provider N/A
System(s) 5 different 3rd party eAuctions services:
- Currently supporting electronic auctions
Step Forward Further developments:
- Project for establishing eSourcing service, covering the procurement of individual
contracts, following the same strategy of the existing eAuction services
In November 2001, the Scottish Executive launched the eProcurement Scotland (ePS) project,
with main objective to provide contracting authorities with all necessary services for performing
electronically their procurement activities. The following table presents an overview of the ePS
project.
Feature Description
Administration involved Scottish Executive
Project ePS launched in 2001
Objectives:
o Develop an open eProcurement platform accessible to all public sector buyers
and suppliers
o Cover all the phases of eProcurement lifecycle
PECOS
A repetitive p urchas es system that currently supports purchases under framework
agreements
eCatalogues converter
An application used for transforming electronic catalogues maintained by suppliers
into PECOS format
Step Forward Further enhance the functionality supported by DTC:
− p reparation of PINs
− Web Forms for PQQ and bid submission
− Automated scoring
3.9.1 Finland
The Trading House Hansel, a government-owned company, is responsible for the development of
the Sentteri eProcurement system, which is based on the principles and procedures described in
the Finish Public Procurement Act. Sentteri covers the complete procurement lifecycle.
Approximately five thousand contracting authorities issue calls for tenders through Sentteri
system, settling more than two hundred tenders per year and creating an annual total purchasing
value of €168 million.
The system is developed in distinct module s. The two most important modules comprise:
• Tenderi: it fully supports the eTendering phase of eProcurement. It provides assistance to
contracting authorities for preparing their tenders and sends automatic notification to
suppliers, containing information about tenders matching their profile. Potential suppliers can
also receive tendering forms electronically and submit their tenders using web-forms. The
system automates procedures related with assessment and evaluation of tenders, produces
administrative reports, and creates the necessary documents associated with contract
awarding.
• Merkaattori: it is an electronic ordering system based on eCatalogues that facilitates the
purchasing of goods and services under framework agreements, by Finnish public sector.
The use of the system does not impose any fees to suppliers, while contracting authorities pay
fees only in case they require custom-made implementations (the “out of the box” operation of
the system is offered at no cost to contracting authorities).
Even though the system was initially developed to serve the needs of public procurement in
Finland, foreign suppliers expressed their interest to participate in public contests. This can be
enabled by the fact that the system currently supports the English language; although at the
moment the contracting authorities do not use this feature.
The system is implemented using Microsoft ASP technology. Special care was given to the
development of security, aspects and in particular to the support of an enhanced auditing
mechanism for all eProcurement activities.
3.9.2 Hungary
Comments of the Hungarian administration focuses in particular to product categorisation and the
use of CPV codes. The Republic of Hungary introduced their current public procurement
legislation in 1995. Drawing on this legislative framework, the government established the
institute of Centralised Public Procurement (CPP) for supporting centralised procurement
activities for all public entities that are directly dependent on government budget. In order for
CPP to aggregate the volume of public procurement, all public entities are obliged to provide
notices on their procurement requirements for CPP launching of procurement procedures.
During the preparation phase for the introduction of electronic procurement to the public sector,
the Hungarian government realised that the lack of a clear classification hierarchy for goods and
services prohibits the preparation of quality product catalogues and creates obstacles to the
systematic statistical analysis of government spending. The technology provider of the Hungarian
government attempted to utilise UN/SPSC classification schema; however the problem of
combining products with existing contracts under a common classification schema remained
unsolved.
Following this failed attempt, CPP decided to introduce a new classification hierarchy, which
relies on the current structure and relevant practices followed in the Hungarian market, and
correlates product categorisation codes with product attributes. This hierarchy is dynamic and
display cross-references to other similar hierarchies (UN/SPSC, CPV, E-CLASS, etc). According
to this, each product will be associated with product attributes, which will be used for classifying
the products into 3 or 4 categories.
3.9.3 Sweden
Public procurement in Sweden is decentralised. At central level, the Swedish Agency for Public
Management (Statskontoret) is charged by government to coordinate public procurement. County
councils and municipalities, however, have an independent status and are generally free to
organise procurement within their respective area of competence. They often act on their own, or
sometimes they collaborate locally/regionally or through the national Associations/Federations.
When initiating the first large-scale public eProcurement project in Sweden, involving
representatives for state counties and municipalities, it was recognised that one common system
would not fit the Swedish procurement practice. Instead, the project set focus on the development
of common specifications and engaged some IT suppliers to develop systems and services to
compete on the market.
When the project terminated, the results were taken over by a Committee, representing all three
levels of government, and the work has since then been carried on under the name of Single Face
to Industry (SFTI). Its programme of work covers activities like awareness and promotion of
eProcurement, identification of common requirements, development of standards and working
practices and encouragement to IT suppliers to develop of systems and services supporting the
specifications. The official web site is http://www.eh.svekom.se/.
Several IT suppliers developed additional or even alternative solutions based on their market
expectations. One conclusion is that interoperability and integration issues have to be high on the
SFTI agenda. Statskontoret’s user questionnaires show that the SFTI organisation has achieved
the best result, in terms of eProcurement implementations, at the local and regional levels
According to a survey in May, 2003, 73 local authorities/municipalities out of 290 (250 answered
the survey) had initiated eProcurement initiatives (mostly ordering-invoice process). Further 50
had taken a decision to begin with eProcurement and 70 others could consider beginning within
the next few years. Many municipalities and county councils have also initiated eProcurement
projects (e-tendering and e-awarding phases).
The SFTI (Single Face to Industry) initiative recently adopted standards for "simple" electronic
invoicing targeting, among others, SMEs and other users that so far have been reluctant to engage
in EDI. SFTI is not a "system", but support to systems. One of the cornerstones of the
specification is a basic transport profile, the SFTI transport profile Bas.
The specification is based on the ebXML Message Service Specification and parts of the ebXML
Business Process Specification Schema. Although developed for the "simple" e-invoicing
purpose, it may be used for any kind of message as long as it is defined by a formatted
specification schema.
The specification has intentionally been kept at the basic level, so that it has a potential for wide-
spread implementation with limited resources on heterogeneous systems and based on knowledge
and technology that is commonly available. Users, who require additional features, for example
regarding security, can upgrade within the ebXML framework from this profile.
SFTI so far has given priority to the post-contract phases of eProcurement compared to the early
ones. The argument for this decision is simply that they are transaction-intensive with only small
variations in the data exchanged.
With regard to publication of notices, service providers already offer competitive solutions to
contracting authorities, including significant electronic communication with OJEU. For invitation
to tender and bidding, an in-depth SFTI study was carried out but not over implementation,
pending the implications of new public procurement directives. Nevertheless, a couple of
software suppliers offer tendering platforms based on vital parts of the concepts. The case of
Ekerö municipality and the University of Lund can serve as an example of this type of
developments. The system that is used by the University of Lund and other universities has
functionality for electronic submission of tenders as well as automatic evaluation of tenders. The
report from the study can be obtained from http://www.eh.svekom.se/english/reports.htm.
In Sweden framework agreements are common. The core of developments by SFTI relates to a
scenario of interrelated transactions for price lists, orders, order responses, delivery advices and
invoices exchanged under such framework agreements. Two approaches are supported: a) the use
of a central catalogue/price list operated either by the buyer or a third party b) supplier-
maintained catalogues. In the latter case orders can be placed directly on a supplier’s web site or
via a punch-out mechanism.
Another main scenario profile covers periodic invoicing of bills (energy, telephone, etc.).
In the initial work the emphasis was put on interface specifications, while in later work systems
internal requirements and functionality has been given more attention. A general conclusion has
been that establishing electronic data exchange itself is not enough; in order to tap the benefits of
electronic public procurement, system functions and routines may need to be reviewed.
Another experience is the fact that the heterogeneous group of suppliers can not be expected to fit
into one common way of working, with the same degree of automation – the incentives for
switching over to eProcurement differ. The electronic scenarios that were first drawn up take care
of high-volume relations but they are not cost-effective for the low -volume ones. In a recent
development SFTI has developed a simple electronic invoice for use in such relations. It is based
on XML technology and the plan is to encourage IT suppliers to implement it in their standard
applications so that parties to trade can start invoicing in new relations with minimal set-up
efforts.
Information about the IT solutions that are based on the SFTI standard for public sector and their
suppliers are available at http://www.eh.svekom.se/.
One example from Sweden regarding the use of electronic signatures in the eProcurement phase
is ChamberSign. ChamberSign is an international organisation with presence and associations
with local Chambers in many countries within the EU. ChamberSign has created a secure
international environment where certified enterprises can carry out online procurement. In
Sweden the municipality of Ekero and the Third National Pension Fund (AP 3) are already using
ChamberSign´s solution for eTendering.
Feature Description
Administration involved The Association of Local Authorities, The Federation of County Councils and The
Swedish Agency for Public Management
Project SFTI – Single Face To Industry
Objectives:
o Development of common eProcurement specifications
o Promotion / encouragement of the use of eProcuremnet in Sweden
Technology Provider Several IT suppliers; each contracting agency/public buyer decides on its own
eProcurement solution
System(s) Joint SFTI specifications,
current versions support
- electronic catalogues under framework agreement
- interaction with back-office systems
- invoicing.
• Individual Contracts: systems that support the notif ication, submission, and/or awarding
phases of eProcurement, under the open, restricted, or negotiated procedures.
• Repetitive Purchasing : systems that support procurement through framework agreements,
eCatalogues, or marketplaces resembling the DPS mechanism. Main attributes of such
systems presented include among others the order approval workflows, the integration with
legacy systems of suppliers, eInvoicing, and ePayments.
• eAuctions: systems that support eAuctions, featuring the preparation of competitio n criteria,
the definition of bid evaluation functions, the support for online bid submission, and the
automated ranking of bids.
• Supplementary systems: they comprise peripheral systems that enhance the existing
functionality of operational eProcurement systems; however, without modelling any specific
eProcurement activities.
• Third column provides a description on how the reviewed system addresses the required
eProcurement functionality. In the following table, the information available in the third
column explains the functionality required under the new legislative framework.
eProcurement lifecycle Required Functional Details System Implementation Details
eNotification support ? Documentation preparation • Online preparation of tender documentation
? Contract Notification • Call for tenders notification publication
? Integration to OJEU • Automated publication of call for tenders
notification to the OJEU
eTendering support ? Request to participate • Online Expression of Interest (EOI)
? Short listing of tenderers • Online supplier qualification
? Invitation to tender • Online response to the EOI
? Tender submission • Online submission of tenders
? Updating of tenders • Online updating of submitted tenders
? Locking of tenders • Automated secure locking of submitted tenders,
until predefined opening time
eAwarding support ? Tender opening • Secure opening of submitted tenders
? Tender evaluation • Online evaluation of tenders
? eAuct ions • eAuction competition
? Contract Award • Online process for awarding contracts
? Award Notification • Publication of contract award notification
Back Office support ? Pre-defined reports • Reporting capability
? Monitoring of logs • Analysis of system logs (audit trailing logs)
? Statistical analysis • Sophisticated statistical capability
Legislative principles Required Functional Details System Implementation Details
Equal amount of ? Automated notification • Automated user alerting for important events
information ? Questions & Answers • Online execution of Q&A sessions
Pan-European standards ? International Coding • Categorisation according to international
hierarchical coding systems (CPV, UN/SPSC, etc.)
? Document standards • Standard document file formats
Unrestricted access to ? Full competition documentation • Publication of details for complete procurement
information process
Interoperability ? System accessibility • Ease of access to the system
? No software/hardware • No cost-related software/hardware prerequisites to
requirements access system
? Multilingualism support • Multiple character sets
? Localisation parameterisation • GUI parameterisation (currency, date/time format,
units of measure, etc.)
Confidential nature of ? User profiles • Restricted access to data according to user profile
data
Restrict access to tenders ? Locking of supplier tenders • Instant locking of submitted tenders
? Encryption of stored tenders • Secure storage of submitted tender
Four eyes principle ? Two officials to open tenders • Opening of tenders by simultaneous action of at
least two physical persons
Authentication ? Authentication of tenderers • Proof of user identity
Call for Tenders ? Tenders compliant with call for • Acceptance of tenders which conform to the call
specifications tender specification for tenders specification
Security ? Usage of SSL • Minimum security level for data transmission
? Data encryption • Secure storage of all sensitive information
? Digital Signatures • Application of digital certificates
Audit Trail / Traceability ? All user actions recorded in • Automated storage of all system event details
system logs
? Detection of tampering attempts • Mechanism for monitoring infiltration attempts
Time-stamping ? Official time • Integration to 3rd party, for official guarantee
Table 15: Features that establish the uniformity of an Individual Contract system with the new
legislative framework on public procurement
and password)
- Use of SSL for secure communication
- No use of digital signatures
Means of - Email is the primary communication medium used for:
communication o Reporting the stage of each competition (i.e. updated documents, new
questions and/or answers, etc), but not for exchanging documents with
sensitive information
- Each supplier has a functional “inbox” within the system, allowing for the:
o trailing of all previous communications
o monitoring email communications that have not been read
Documents - System treats documents as attachments, which can be of any type
- Call documentation and tenders are prepared offline utilising commercial
programs
- No technical solutions for virus infected or corrupted offers
Tender box - Submitted tenders are stored in a “tender box”, which is used for the:
o Secure locking of tenders
o Denial of access to users, until pre-defined tender opening time
o Tenders are not encrypted while locked by the tender box
o Automatic opening of tenders
- Stored tender documents are not encrypted
- Tenders open automatically, not following the four eye principle
Offline activities - Both online and offline activities are supported during the tendering period
- Suppliers can chose to download the call documentation online and then
submit the tender offline, and vice-versa
Multilingualism - Uploaded call documentation can be in any language
- The GUI of the system is provided only in English
A small number of interoperability aspects with regards to Web-browser compliance are currently
addressed, whereas an analysis of eAuctions is performed, in order for the associated module to
be activated. Furthermore, Capgemini assists Scottish Executive to define the specifications for
utilising the built-in Web Forms functionality, thus facilitating the more efficient and controlled
collection of tenders. The use of Web Forms will facilitate automated validation for submitted
tenders. Hence only tenders that are compliant with the call specification will be acceptable . On
top of this, the use of Web Forms for submitting tenders will facilitate their automated evaluation.
Currently, DPSM is endorsing two eProcurement portals, dedicated to the electronic procurement
of the defence public sector. ixarm.com, is used for the procurement of defence systems, and
achats.defense.gouv.fr, is used for other procurements within MINDEF (infrastructure, gas,
health, support, etc).
The following table provides an overview of the most important features of the DPSM system.
eProcurement platform are expiring at the end of 2004. The next phase will
keep the core of the platform intact and transform the portals in OSS
technology
Security policy - Time-stamping of the tenders
- Use of digital signatures for the encryption (HTTPS)
o Acquisition of a certificate that is recognised by MINDEF (actually
Certinomis – Socieposte or Credit Lyonnais – Authentys)
o Average time for obtaining a certificate is two to three weeks
o Electronic tools used for the signing of tenders are downloaded when
a tender is submitted for the first time
o Sup plier signs the tender before submission
o Tenders must be transmitted at least 24 hours after they have been
signed
- Use of SSL for secure communication
- Tenders are locked, encrypted, and checked for virus up on reception
o If a virus is detected, an email is sent to the supplier, requesting for the
virus to be removed and the document to be resubmitted
- Decryption of tenders made via key that becomes available only to the
president of the contract awarding committee, after tender submission deadline
Alerting mechanism - Available mechanism for creating alerts to inform suppliers by email for any
new suitable business opportunities that come up and satisfy their pre-selected
criteria and profile
o Customisation of supplier’s home page and filtering of news and
available call for tenders notifications
o Q&A sessions operating via email
As there is still an 80% of call documentation downloads , which are initiated from unregistered
tenderers that eventually submit their tenders offline, the next challenge for MINDEF is to
encourage these tenderers to use the electronic platform. Furthermore, a next phase of the project
will focus on the other end of the eProcurement pipeline, namely the eInvoicing and ePayments.
The objective will be to automate the invoicing and payment processes from a single -point of
access, i.e. the armament portal. This has already been achieved through the private network of
the MINDEF only for some specific procurement needs (section 3.3).
The following table gives an overview of the DPSM system’s functionality, by presenting the
different activities performed by users (actors) of the system, during the classic procedure.
committee set for decrypting candidature documents from all different suppliers
and a different key-set for the offer documents for each supplier)
• Decrypt and open all candidature documents. The awarding
committee will decide which tenderers qualify for submitting an
offer.
• Decrypt and open the offer documents of the tenderers that qualified
Initial coordination process is on-going between Federal Government and the Wallonne Region
aiming at interconnecting the region's deployed eNotification system with the federal JEPP
system. A similar approach is under consideration with the Brussels Region. Currently, there are
two portals created within JEPP and integrated under BDA portal, one for the Belgian MoD and
another for all Pouvoirs Adjudicateurs du Niveau Fédéral under the FedICT’s umbrella . Different
approaches have been explored for the creation and hosting of the above two portals:
- MoD initially installed JEPP platform on its own infrastructure and the platforms were
maintained/hosted by MoD. To increase synergies with the other JEPP platforms, the MoD
decided to host this service together with the other SPF platforms
- FedICT outsourced the creation and maintenance/hosting of its portal to Unisys Consulting
- BDA outsourced the creation and maintenance/hosting of its portal to Unisys Consulting
Furthermore, smaller federal agencies are offered the opportunity to group together and use the
eProcurement facilities of the FedICT portal, for publishing their RFPs on an one-off basis.
The following table provides an overview of the most important features of the JEPP platform.
Interface with external - Interface with external legacy systems utilising the built-in XML integration
systems capabilities
- MoD portal is studying the integration of the ILIAS back-office system
(Integrated Logistic and Information Automated System) with JEPP system
Advanced search - It supports search based on the type of publication, CPV code, NUTS code,
capabilities and on free text
Multilingualism and - Current version supports Dutch, French, English, and German
localisation - Multilingual aspects for supporting all European languages are incorporated
- Customisation of the logo of each administration is possible
notified by email
Registration of Procurement • Performed by BDA’s CPP personnel
Procurement Agency officer
Supplier Registration & Supplier • Required information comprises login name, family name, company
User Preferences name, preferred market activities, and industrial preferences/
specialities
• User profile stored on common portal
Procurement Officer Procurement • Authorisation performed at the portal level, authentication is
Authentication & officer performed at the application level
Authorisation • Access to resources is granted based on user identity (access rights)
Supplier Authentication Supplier • Optional central authorisation and authentication performed at the
& Authorisation common portal (application level)
• Suppliers can access all JEPP portals freely and at no-cost
There is a wide the range of research areas, activities and themes that are addressed. Potential
“Proposers” can view FP6 calls for proposals and download all the relevant documentation in
order to prepare their proposal. Proposers can be individuals or legal entities such as companies,
consortia, and universities. The following table presents an overview of the main features of the
EPSS.
The DI has developed corporate information systems in order to support the administrative
processes of the EC. SYSLOG is a set of business applic ations comprising three main areas:
Training, Logistics and Credit Management. A part of the third area is the SYSLOG Market
module, which is dealing with the administration of Calls for tenders.
The system was set operational in October 2003. It was implemented by ADMIN-DI.4 PFD
(Information Systems Support: Planning, Financial management, Documents management) which
is also responsible for the technical support. The system is an intranet application and therefore
operating only inside the EC’s secure infrastructure. Tenderers may view Notices, Q&As
published on the DI’s website but they do not interact with the system online. The following table
presents an overview of the most important features of the system.
Table 29: SYSLOG Market coverage of the new legislati ve framework on eProcurement
3
ADMIN-DI-FCL (IT Finances, Contracts and Logistics) is the responsible body of the EC for the
procurement procedures related to Informatics and Telecommunications.
• Submit Tender: Tenderers submit their tenders to FCL via the post. Tenders are received at
the Central mail office of the EC in order to have the packages scanned for security reasons.
The Central mail office issues receipts to tenderers in case of delivery by hand as proof of
compliance with the deadline date for submission
• Open Tenders: Tenders are forwarded to the contract section of FCL, where they are locked
in a safe room, until the opening session of the specific procurement procedure
• Exclusion of Tenderers: The selection of tenderers is performed by both the Technical
Administrator in charge (technical capacity) and the Juridical Officer (financial and economic
capacity) and according to the competition pre-qualification criteria.
• Evaluation of Te nderers: The evaluation of the technical part of the proposal is assigned to
the Technical Administrator. The evaluation criteria are communicated in the notification of
the call for tenders. The technical administrator usually assigns weighting factors and a
minimum threshold for each criterion and/or on the technical evaluation criteria as a whole.
The financial evaluation is a responsibility of the Juridical Officer, who either evaluates on
the global cost of the offer over the whole duration of the contract, or on a pre-defined
scenario representing a significant part of the total cost. FCL mainly uses the “most
economically advantageous tender” method and applies a 50/50 quality/price ratio.
• Award Contract: The contract is awarded by the Juridical Manager. When the contract is
signed, a contract award notice is published on the OJEU. Furthermore, this contract award
notice is added on the DG ADMIN’s website in the “Closed calls for tenders” section.
The OGC, like in the case of the eAuctions (section 4.3.1), is opting for an off-the-shelf IT
service, which will be configurable to meet the needs of each contracting authority, but offered
via a service provider who will also be responsible for the hosting and maintenance.
The eSourcing service is not currently operational; therefore this section only describes a number
of implementation decisions of OGC, which can provide some valuable input for the current
project. The following table presents an overview of the features the new system will have.
The DFPA assigned the development and hosting of the system to EJIE (Basque Government
Information Society). The eTendering system is currently in the last testing phases and is planned
to be deployed into production in the next few months. The legal regulations for establishing the
system as the official electronic notification system of Basque Government have been approved
by the Bureau for the Basque Public Service Modernisation (DOMA). As, the system is not
currently operational, it is not fully analysed here, however the following table provides some
interesting aspects.
The ehandel eSourcing system is based on the Negotiations software of Emptoris, which is
parameterised according to the GAS requirements, based on the national and EU procurement
legislation. The software is purchased by IBX, who will offer it as an additional service to users
of the ehandel. The system is not currently operational and therefore is not fully analysed in this
report, however the following table provides some interesting aspects of the system.
Electronic catalogues are not simplified electronic versions of paper based catalogues. Instead,
eCatalogues may offer various benefits, taking advantage of their electronic nature. Therefore,
multilingualism, multi-currency, pictorial descriptions, Internet links to products/services details,
advanced search facilities and interoperability capabilities for maintenance can be foreseen. In
particular for interoperability, an eCatalogue system can assist suppliers to create and maintain
their catalogues with minimal effort, potentially through the integration with their websites,
ERP/back office systems, or other supplier sources.
The following table considers all functional features to be supported by a Repetitive Purchasing
system according to the new EU public procurement legislation. It is assumed that the pre-
selection of suppliers to be included in the system can be done through a system that supports the
procurement of individual contracts. The first column presents the main phases of eProcurement,
as well as, the primary principles as deduced from the legislation. The next column lists the
necessary functionality of each phase or principle. The last column describes in more detail the
corresponding functionality.
This table is used in the subsequent sections of the reviewed repetitive purchasing systems, for
comparing their supported functionality against state-of-the-art features for such systems, as
concluded by the analysis of the public procurement legislative framework. The first two columns
of these tables are uniform, while the third column explains how each reviewed system addresses
the considered functionalit y.
Table 34: Features that establish the uniformity of a Repetitive Purchasing System with the new
legislative framework on eProcurement
The following table provides a general overview of the most interesting aspects of the PECOS
system.
The system is maintained by Consip, who are responsible for attracting buyers and suppliers in
using the system, as well as, uploading supplier catalogues onto the system. Supplier catalogues
can be updated at any time, although manual intervention from Consip is necessary.
The following table presents an overview of the main aspects of the Lotto 2 system.
System feature System implementation details
Functionality overview - Purchasing from supplier catalogues
- Issuing RFQs
- Suppliers update theirs catalogues online, modify prices and perform
catalogue’s lines deletion
- Full audit trailing
Exploitation model - Contracting authorities:
o No cost
o Free training
- Suppliers:
o No cost
o Upload eCatalogues for free
Actors - Standard User: responsible for browsing through supplier catalogues,
comparing commodities, adding commodities to a shopping cart and placing
orders and prepare RFQ Draft s which require approval
- Super User: can perform direct purchasing, place RFQs and approve pending
orders
- Administrator: responsible for uploading catalogues, reviewing logs ,
performing general maintenance of the database records
- Supplier: upload catalogues and update, modify a catalogue’s lines
Technology used - Based on the Oracle Exchange software modified to some extend in order to
comply with the Italian public procurement legislation (DPR 101 Act of
2002)
- Oracle Database is utilised for the back-end
- Oracle Portal is used for the front-end software
Security policy - Limited use of digital signatures by suppliers outside the system in order to
Interesting system characteristics
The DOIP/DOIPEI system was developed primarily for resolving issues with regards to the
bureaucracy of public sector purchasing, as well as, automating ordering, invoicing and payment
of government supplies. The benefits of the current system are not realised only by the buyers
(i.e. the public sector), but also the suppliers, as a wide range of integration capabilities is
provided for straight-through processing of the placed orders. The following table presents the
most important aspects of the DOIP/DOIPEI system.
It is interesting to mention that other MS governments have also identified the benefits of a
generic transactional system, like the BTS of Denmark. The UK government for instance, in
March 2004 launched a Prior Information Notice for the realisation of the Zanzibar project; a
project which is intended to create a platform similar to BTS, with the ability to allow for the easy
integration of several systems. The new eProcurement system of the UK public sector will be
based on OSS technologies and will utilise the recently established UKGOV XML schema,
however the high-level functionality will be similar to the Danish BTS service.
GAS realised the ehandel eOrdering system, which can integrate to supplier and buyer systems
and through its customisable workflows can support the internal recurring purchasing processes
of the public sector. The following table presents the most important aspects of eHandel
eOrdering.
approving/disapproving orders
o Procurement Manager: responsible for maintaining eCatalogues
o System Administrator: responsible for maintaining contracting
authority’s data (users, user roles, workflows, etc.)
- Supplier: default roles for a supplier include:
o Order Approver: responsible for receiving and approving/disapproving
an order placed by a contracting authority
o Invoice Sender: responsible for processing received orders, generating
and submitting electronic invoices
o System Administrator: responsible for maintaining supplier data in the
system (users, user roles, workflows, etc.)
Technology used - Based on CommerceOne, SAP and Poet technologies
- Configuration and development according to an implementation model,
developed by PWC, GAS and IBX, of process, technology, supplier
activation and change management
- Interconnections with other systems achieved by employing xCBL 3.0
- Open Catalogue Interface from SAP is utilised
Quality assurance - IBX performs a catalogue quality check on behalf of the buyers at least twice
a year
- Review details of all supplier catalogues in terms of product categorisation,
use of images, product name, product description and product attributes
- Assist suppliers to better demonstrate their products (badly described
products are identified and can be improved)
Integration with other - Interconnection between buyer and supplier financial systems
Interesting system characteristics
Table 45: ehandel eOrdering coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement
The following table presents the most important aspects of the MINDEF eCatalogues system.
Table 48: DPSM eCatalogues coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement
The award of a contract can be based either on the best economic value, or on the Most
Advantageous Economic Tender (MEAT), which can be concluded by a number of evaluation
factors. The evaluation criteria which will be used in an eAuction, as well as, the fact that an
eAuction event may take place during the eAwarding phase of the procurement are all elements
that need to be included in the notification of the contract. The EU public procurement legislation
also allows the contracting authorities not to award the contract to the winner of the eAuction,
providing clear and specific justification.
The following table presents state-of-the-art for eAuction systems, derived from requirements of
new EU public procurement legislation and their further analysis. These are used in the
subsequent sections, for analysing the reviewed EU eAuctions systems. The upper part of the
table contains functionalit y concerning the eProcurement lifecycle. The lower part contains
functionality concerning legal aspects.
Table 50: Features that establish the uniformity of an eAuction system with the new legislati ve
framework on eProcurement
Significant effort has been given to support functionality in accordance to the UK procurement
laws, as well as, the EU public procurement legislative framework. The following table provides
the main aspects of the UK eAuctions services.
Audit Trail / Traceability ü All user actions recorded in • Automated storage of system events in logs
system logs
û Detection of tampering attempts • Not supported
Time-stamping û Official time • Not supported
Table 52: UK eAuctions services coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement
The following table presents the main aspects of the Lotto 1 eAuctions system.
The following table presents the main aspects of the DOIP eAuctions system.
Table 58: DOIP eAuctions coverage of the new legislative framework on eProcurement
The eAuctions module of the ehandel eSourcing service is not currently operational and therefore
is not fully analysed in this report. However, the following table provides some interesting
aspects of the module.
The service is hosted by the MINDEF’s technical provider Answork. Currently the system is
operational but not very utilised yet. A few “simulations” of eAuctions have been conducted by
certain purchasing entities of the MINDEF. The primary objective of these events is to train
MINDEF suppliers, as well as, validate the operation of the service. The following table presents
the most interesting features of the DPSM eAuctions service.
Table 63: DPSM eAuctions coverage of the new legislati ve framework on eProcurement
The growth of eProcurement and the benefits it can offer, heavily depend on how both public
administrations and suppliers are able to adapt to the new environment of public procurement.
The procedures that both types of organisations must exercise for utilising eProcurement are
somewhat different to their current procedures. Therefore education and training to eProcurement
procedures, change management, IT familiarisation and similar aspects may be considered by all
Member States.
Using eProcurement usually means that supplying organisations need to change their way they
conduct their business with the public sector, which in turn involves costs in restructuring internal
procedures, defining new roles and responsibilities to support the new procedures, as well as,
educate their personnel in the new procurement methods. Therefore, suppliers and particularly
SMEs, are sceptical in adopting eProcurement.
To overcome this hurdle, Scottish Executive has developed a methodology by which all public
sector administrations joining their eProcurement programme, are immediately responsible for
assisting their usual suppliers to understand the way they will be required from now on to conduct
business with the Scottish public sector. Contracting authorities are also responsible for assisting
suppliers to understand the considerable benefits from the use of eProcurement.
To assist the supplier adoption programme, Scottish Executive has furthermore developed a
simple but very informative Supplier Adoption Database, which allows at any time its users to
find out at which step of the adoption methodology a supplier is. Furthermore, users can find out
which public administration is responsible for introducing a supplier to eProcurement, which
ensures that a supplier will be approached and introduced to the Scottish systems only by one
administration rather than all administrations that conduct business with them. Therefore,
duplication of effort is eliminated.
The Supplier Adoption Database does not directly support any phases of eProcurement, however
it can assist administrations to make the Scottish eProcurement systems more appealing to
suppliers, helping them to use and benefit from electronic procurement. Furthermore, it can
provide a medium for Scottish Executive to evaluate how successful their provided services are,
as this database can easily demonstrate how many suppliers are using the Scottish systems against
the number of suppliers that have been through the adoption methodology.
The eCatalogue Converter, developed by Reqio, a sub-contractor of the CGEY, provides the
online ability to ePS systems to accept supplier ele ctronic catalogues in many formats and
automatically convert them to the format required by the PECOS application (or any other
format). Furthermore, this application is used as a “staging area”, where buyers can review the
products and prices of a new supplier catalogue against the old details, before accepting it in the
PECOS system. The purpose of the “staging area” is to ensure that only catalogues that are in
compliance with the framework agreements between the buyers and suppliers are uploaded in the
PECOS application. The eCatalogue Converter can accept catalogues in various formats,
including:
• eXtended Markup Language (XML)
• Microsoft Excel Spreadsheets (XLS)
• Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)
• Comma-separated values (CSV)
• HyperText Markup Language (HTML)
The import/export flexibility provided by the application can be utilised in future modifications of
the ePS systems, without necessitating changes to the suppliers systems. Furthermore, such
application can be further elaborated to an Open Source Software (OSS) tool, which can work as
an add-on to most eProcurement systems that support eCatalogues.
Eureka was implemented by TRASYS, who aimed at offering a central point of reference for the
search of information in any of the EU’s Internet websites, irrespectively of the physical location
of this information. The application comprises three main parts:
• Indexer: The primary functionality of the Indexer is to recursively search through HTTP
servers, FTP servers, local files, etc. and capture all document information. Such information
can be keywords and document meta-data (i.e. information describing the document).
Following this operation, the Indexer stores the captured information in a database
• Search facility: This facility allows users to search all collected information from the Indexer
through an easy-to-use web interface. There are two types of search available: the simple
search, based on a simple string-based searches and the advanced search, incorporating
searches using multiple search criteria (i.e. keyword, date, etc.)
• Administration Interface: Through this interface the system administrator or content
manager can obtain statistics about the use of the application. Furthermore, the system
administrator can obtain access to the index storage database allowing for alterations in the
index configuration
The indexing priority is configurable. The priority that is assigned for certain attributes of a
document such as the body, title, description, keywords, etc. by the Indexer can be modified by
an authorised user (e.g. content manager). However basic authorisation must be applied for
indexing password protected areas (usually by the system administrator). Another important
feature of Eureka is the support of a wide range of character sets and languages. The character set
and the language of documents allows for 70 character set/language combinations. It also
includes 11 official languages of the EU, as well as, languages of candidate countries. The
supported META tags by default are “keywords” and “description”. However the application
allows users to define their own META tags (i.e. category, classification, etc.). There is a “Re-
entry capability”, meaning that more than one Indexer and searching processes can be executed at
the same time. This allows a big volume of data to be processed in a short time. The indexing
depth can be limited depending on the user’s needs and the volume of the indexed documents.
Finally, the application supports boolean queries and fuzzy search (search by different word
forms, synonyms, substrings).
Eureka can be a useful tool for indexing eTendering systems which contain a lot of documents.
An efficient search facility is necessary for allowing users to have quick access to the interesting
information. Most of the current eTendering and eNotification systems provide a search based on
the title of the call, the date, the department and other high-level information. However, it is
important for suppliers to locate documents not only through searching the META data of a
document, but on its contents as well. Therefore, Eureka can be a very positive add-on to such
systems.
System Documentation
• System architecture
• Functional and technical design of system components and modules
• Documentation on any open source and proprietary software used
• Supported hardware and software platforms
• Information on Security aspects
• Operational Guide and User Manual
• Online Access to the system.
Questionnaire
Section A: Contact Information
In the following, please provide contact information for the person responsible to complete this
questionnaire and contact for any adhoc queries.
A1. Name: ______________________________________________
A2. Position: ______________________________________________
A3. Organisation: ________________________________________
A4. E-Mail/Telephone/Fax: _________________________________
B2. Type of goods that are procured in the system and provision of an indicative list of them:
• Products ________________________
• Services ________________________
• Works ________________________
• Other, please specify: _______________
C3. Pre–Conditions
Please specify any conditions that need to be satisfied before procurement can commence.
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
C4. Notification
Please describe the workflow of your call notification process, including the actors involved and
the interactive procedure for Questions and Answers sessions. Furthermore, please mention other
online, publicly -accessible systems that notices are published.
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
© European Communities 2004 State of the Art Volume II Page 100 of 109
Public eProcurement European Commission
D4. Please provide any additional information you believe will be useful for evaluating the
implementer’s capacity to offer high standards of service to your organisation.
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
© European Communities 2004 State of the Art Volume II Page 101 of 109
Public eProcurement European Commission
E3. Standardisation
Please describe any eProcurement or technical standards used within your organisation (e.g.
Common Procurement Vocabulary, XML Schemas, etc). Furthermore, please elaborate on
capabilities of the system to support multiple languages, as well as, globalisation parameterisation
(i.e. currency, date/time format, etc.)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
© European Communities 2004 State of the Art Volume II Page 102 of 109
Public eProcurement European Commission
E9. Costs
Please provide information on the necessary costs for the licensing and maintenance of the
software, as well as, hardware components of the system.
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
Section F: Security
In the following, please provide information in terms of the security setup used in the production
environment of the system.
F1. Electronic Signature Devices
Please provide information concerning the use of electronic signature in the system.
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
© European Communities 2004 State of the Art Volume II Page 103 of 109
Public eProcurement European Commission
© European Communities 2004 State of the Art Volume II Page 104 of 109
Public eProcurement European Commission
G1. Equal Amount of Information: Tenderers receive an equal amount of information at the same
time.
YES / NO / PARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
G2. Pan-European Standards: Authorities are required to use European standards in order not to
favour domestic suppliers.
YES / NO / PARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
© European Communities 2004 State of the Art Volume II Page 105 of 109
Public eProcurement European Commission
G5. Interoperability: Use of electronic means that are interoperable (interchangeable) with
electronic means generally available on the market or generally used in other Member States,
without using country-specific or otherwise discriminatory technologies capable of restricting
economic operators' access to the tendering procedure.
YES / NO / PARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
G6. Confidential Nature of Data: Tenderers have the right to require a contracting authority to
respect the confidential nature of information which they make available
YES / NO / PARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
G7. Electronic Signatures: Tenders, requests to participate and the forwarding of plans and
projects must comply with national provisions adopted pursuant to directive 1999/93/EC;
YES / NO / PARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
G8. Restrict Access to Tenders: Contracting authoritie s must not be able to examine the content
of requests to participate and tenders before the deadline for their submission has expired. If that
access prohibition is infringed, then the electronic device for the receipt of tenders or requests to
participate should detect the infringement. Also, only authorised persons may set or change the
dates for opening the data received.
YES / NO / PARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
© European Communities 2004 State of the Art Volume II Page 106 of 109
Public eProcurement European Commission
G9. Four-Eye Principle : During the different stages of the contract award procedure, access to all
data submitted must be possible only through simultaneous action by authorised persons.
Simultaneous action by authorised persons must give access to data transmitted only after the
defined date and the data received and opened in accordance with these requirements must remain
accessible only to persons authorised to acquaint themselves therewith.
YES / NO / P ARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
G10. Authenticate Tenders: The requirement of ensuring the integrity of data entails the
obligation for contracting authorities and suppliers to sign all submitted documents of requests to
participate and tenders. This will provide the necessary authentication of the call, by validating
the sender and its contents. If document contents are changed at any time, then the electronic
device for the receipt of tenders or requests to participate should detect the infringement.
YES / NO / PARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
G11. Publish Notices: Individual contracts are publicised as early as possible in a medium equally
accessible to all interested parties (the Community’s Official Journal).
YES / NO / PARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
G12. Objective Criteria : Procurement procedures should be formalised and transparent to the
participants, by employing objective selection and award criteria.
YES / NO / PARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
G13. Call Specifications: All offers to be considered during the selection stages of the award
procedure should be in conformity with the call specifications.
YES / NO / PARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
© European Communities 2004 State of the Art Volume II Page 107 of 109
Public eProcurement European Commission
G14. Pre-Stated Criteria : The contracting authority shall state all the criteria intended to apply to
the award in the contract documents or in the call notice.
YES / NO / PARTIALLY (if partially, please give details)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
© European Communities 2004 State of the Art Volume II Page 108 of 109
Public eProcurement European Commission
© European Communities 2004 State of the Art Volume II Page 109 of 109