Bidder bidding on how to correct errors in the evaluation of link.

Government procurement of goods and services of tenders provided for in the tender documents "on the meaning of the ambiguous, similar problems do not coincide or expressed has clear text and calculation errors, bid evaluation board can be written (it should be signed by the Evaluation Committee of experts) require bidders to make the necessary clarifications, description or corrected. Visible issues clarification does not however in occupies the bid evaluation process, but the important clarification of how quality directly affects the comparison and evaluation phase, the authors found in the tender documents of OSHMS, due to the variety of subjective and objective factors, issues clarified in a number of inappropriate, improper practices. 1. for individuals in psychology, or worried that gave me that some judges face vendor bid file mix-up take ignored, not corrected and clarified; there are also some expert clarification process due to mismanaged and leave sequelae. Some experts in assessment go straight to the subject, do not consider issues clarification process vendor bid file should be clarified by a blind eye to the content, or are carried out to clarify procedures, but with a problem. To sum up, the assessment experts on issues relating to the tender documents to clarify the process, mainly in the following issue. In terms of time, in accordance with the regulations, issues clarification should be eligible for review and compliance review is finished, the substantive comparison review before, but in practice, assessment experts in clarifying issues "preemptive" there, "lag" is, moreover, some experts in assessment work side edges of the judges, which clarify the bid evaluation-order and mixed, seriously affecting the fairness of bid evaluation results and evaluation of efficiency and quality. From specific programs, under normal circumstances, issues clarification of procedures should be raised first by evaluation experts require bidders to note explains the issue, and then by the bidder in response to these questions for clarification, correction, the author described or found in some project review process, the bid is over, yet pending review experts to ask questions, the bidder is requested the tender file default, ambiguous confessed. From the clarification of the principal, the question should be experts, reply-to is a bidder, sometimes issues clarification of principal will often, questions parties translocation by procurement agency handling personnel or personnel to act as a notary, and answer frequently not bidders or authorized person, bidder's Entourage, Entourage will answer book "signature's cross". From the clarification of content, "shall not exceed the scope of the tender documents or alter the substance of the tender documents" is the bidder's clarification first must insist on the principle that a considerable number of bidders on relevant issues for clarification and not abiding by the rules, or exceeding the scope of the responses or to change the substance of wilfully disturbing the experts ' evaluation ideas, but they think that "smart" approach would be unnecessary. From the clarification of forms, whether it is asked for clarification or clarification is required to be in written form, some bidders and evaluation experts troubles, easy, the use of simple oral questions, answers, and no records without recording, government procurement regulatory agency in the routine check frequently encountered enquiries without problems on the card. From the clarification of confidentiality, in issues clarification process often involves bidding vendor's trade secrets, trade secrets, is generally not known to others, experts in clarification should be protected, some experts in clarification might make use of the collective clarification is at the same time, same place bringing together all the bidders for clarification on related issues, will be available to the public about the issues. From the clarification of rigor, individual loans elucidation of the judges and dark help a "relational operators," help "the relationship between household" and "make up" the defects in the tender documents, the bidders to themselves know clearly grasp the opportunity to modify the substantive content. 2. Enter the review links, in the face of vendor bid file errors, correct performance issues to clarify procedures, not only protect the error provider's legitimate interests, let suppliers feel the laws of human care and, more importantly, improves the quality of accreditation to promote government procurement market players between fair and orderly competition. First, issues clarification as government procurement review of a statutory program, is absolutely not allowed to casually omit or cannot afford to engage in, the judges have recognized the importance of the issue clarified. Only the file problems cleared up, to reach the next review process, including evaluation experts, purchase any person representing a judges should make good use of its use in the hands of the right to review, both on the bidding vendor be responsible on his own responsibility, to engage with issues of accreditation is extremely irresponsible behavior, judges should keep a clear mind and good professionalism. Secondly, questions for clarification only statutory scope, any exceeding the scope of the clarification, in particular changes in the substantive content of the tender documents clarification is itself a kind of violations, issues clarification is limited to the meaning of the tender file is not clear, similar problems do not coincide or have expressed clearly in words and calculation errors in the content, not exceed the scope of the tender documents, not change the substance of the tender documents. Once again, a clarification only specification program to be effective. Experts in the tender documents of relevant issues to clarify, the procedures required by the specification, justice must understand, unambiguous, clear up completely, without leaving the tail. To seize the time to issue a clarification should in the first instance after work, before the start of the comparative evaluation of the work, neither ahead or lag, or edge accreditation boundary clarification. Questions to clarify the question people should be experts, reply-to is a bidder or its authorized representatives, have asked the mandatory, no question is not answered, the bidder is active frankly very unwise. Experts and the bidder is legally required of the parties to clarify the process, without authorization, others do not, it is particularly important in procurement agencies bidding activities must put the location instead of mixing, disturb the normal order of evaluation. Questions to clarify whether it is a question or reply, shall be in written form, the question shall be signed by the experts, a reply should be determined by the bidder or its authorized representative's signature. Finally, issues clarified in order to prevent derailment of the judges, on theBid Committee officers and field supervisors to clarify the issues of the whole process strictly not tolerate individual evaluation experts took the opportunity to favour one or some bidders, for wilful violations operations experts to mercilessly expose, decisive against the bad substitution should be field. At the same time it is necessary to pay attention to confidentiality, issues clarification process to fully respect the legitimate rights and interests of the supplier, to protect the bidding vendor's trade secrets, it is necessary to clarify the question of ambiguity, you should also not use the bearing supplier for the survival and development of secret publicly available.