Harar Procurement Process - December 31 2022

Harar Office Building [ New ]
(B+G+6– New Design Preparation and Contractor

Selection Process)
November , 2022
© Cooperative Bank of Oromia. https://coopbankoromia.com.et/ 1

Phase-One
1
The first part covers previous overviews and action taken to
complete the semi-finished Harar building through retrofitting
and also deal about process done to onboard contractors. And
also covers about the new design process done for Harar
project and also tried to describe the several steps done to
arrive on the final design
TABLE OF 2 Phase-Two
CONTENTS The second part deals with about contractor selection through
an open bid and steps followed to select best contractor
though in house evaluation process.
3 Phase- Three
The third part deals with about contractor selection through

selected competitive bid and steps followed to select best
contractor though in house evaluation process and
recommendations.
2
© Cooperative Bank of Oromia. https://coopbankoromia.com.et/
PHASE-ONE
1. Harar Building Overview and Action Taken To complete the
Unfinished Building
1.1 History of Harar Property Acquisition and Action Taken
▪ Cooperative Bank of Oromia purchased the incomplete B+G+4 Building in Harar
town for office and other purposes uses.
▪ The Bank then took a number of actions to finish the remaining components of the
building after the legal process was finished.
▪ The Bank went through a bid process and hire Consultant to assess the building's
condition.
▪ Based on the study results of the Consultant, the bank concluded that the building
could be retrofitted.
▪ Following the same a contractors was engaged in this profession through open bid.
▪ Finally signed the contract agreement with Tilahun Abebe G.C on May 15, 2020.
3
1.2. Background Information About The Existing Building
Building Address ▪ The building located at Harar town
Building Height ▪ B+G+4
Built up area ▪ 4,152.63sqm
Development status ▪ Partially completed
Consultant name ▪ YEMA Architectural PLC
▪ Contract Administration & Site

Scope of work given to Consultant Supervision
▪ Remedial action for structural

member through retrofitting
Scope of work given to the contractor ▪ Finishing work
▪ Electrical work
▪ Sanitary work
4
2. Note About Building Retrofitting
2.1. What Is Retrofitting
Before explaining detail explanation about the procurement process, we will first discuss
about retrofitting to give you a basic understanding of this concept. Retrofitting
building is involves changing its systems or structure after its initial construction and
occupation.
2.2. Why We Need Retrofitting

There are several problems that structural members experience and needed to be tackled
among them some common problems include:
1. Structural cracks
2. Damage to structural members
3. Excessive loading
4. Errors in design or Construction
5. Modification of the structural system
6. Seismic damage
7. Corrosion due to penetration -honeycombs
5
2.3. Method Of Retrofitting
There are many different ways to retrofit buildings, so in this instance we'll try to show
some examples in pictures.
6
7
2.4. Merits And Demerits Of Retrofitting
S/No Merits of Retrofitting's Demerits of Retrofitting's

1 It improve the stability and safety The skill of the worker must be complying
level of the structure with the adopted retrofitting approaches.
2 Helps to prevent damage to the Limited access to the construction site,
structure and injury to the occupant since the building could be still in function.
3 Retrofitting also helps to make Difficult of bonding might be arise between

buildings more habitable after any old masonry and the new concrete surface.
major earthquake
4 Increasing the local capacity of he Concrete has higher strength than old
structural and non structural structure, thus special care should be
components given to specify the strength of overlaid
concrete.
8
2.5. Factors Driven The Bank To Retrofitting Harar Building
Following the Integrity and investigation Report the consultant have found that the
previously constructed foundation with part of the columns at lower levels are insufficient to
take care both the function and the dead loads of the building thus they recommended
the building to be retrofitted by considering the following investigation report.
▪ Column-Some of the columns at Ground floor are overstressed needed Jacketing

▪ Footing –Both F1 and F2 are insufficient both punching and bending
▪ Beams –Few beams need more reinforcement
▪ Slab –nearly acceptable rebar if glazing only used at the edge
▪ No structural drawings have been obtained.
▪ Due to slight ground instability, some part of the building shows structural cracks
on walls and beams.
Accordingly, the bank was compelled to complete the incomplete Harar building through
retrofitting after taking into account the aforementioned conclusion and consultant
recommendation.
9
2.6. Picture Captured During Investigation
10
2.7. Contractor Onboarding For The Work And Its Challenge
After the contract was signed on May 15, 2020, the contractor asked to take over the site
to start construction, and at the same time, it was asked for the remaining paperwork
(like performance bond) that the contractor was required to finish. However, the
successful contractor eventually came to the decision to put forth the following
precondition that forbids starting the actual construction after conducting his own field
assessment.
No Contractor’s Request The bank responses
Structural designs to be rechecked in Every necessary test has already been

1 depth by a senior structural Engineer conducted. Moreover, copy of structural
Reports for official test results Analysis and field test reports were
2 stipulating Re-bar quality, Re-bar dispatched again though they were
spacing, concrete quality, soil test, already provided during bid process
concrete thickness and size...etc.
Presentation on retrofitting
3 methodology and steps for retrofitting Considered
specific to the project,
11
No Contractor’s Request The bank responses
Request for the Bank’s The Bank has no obligation to recommend
4 recommendation for specialized a subcontractor,
retrofitting subcontractors,
Request for Supervising
5 Consultant to be assigned on The Bank assigned a supervising Engineer
site,
Type of Performance Securities
6 to be changed to Insurance Further Discussion
Bond,
7 To have a risk sharing agreement
with the Bank, Designer and Not applicable
Supervisor.
Also claimed that the Price Adjustment due to the significant time spent after signing the
contract
If we take a look at the questions ,The majority of the questions the contractor raised were
addressed during the bidding process, but because of an underlying concern on their
part that the building would collapse during construction, they kept bringing up the
same issue, which caused a delay in the project.
12
2.8. Resolution (Construction Steering Committee CSC-1-2021)
Following a meeting, the construction steering committee discussed the subsequent issues in
order to resolve any outstanding Harar project issues once for all.
▪ Although the contractor cited the aforementioned reasons as an impediment, the

real reason was that the contractor lacked experience in building retrofitting,
which is uncommon in our country. As a result, the contractor, who entered with a
bank, was concerned that the building would collapse.
▪ If the building collapses during construction and causes damage, the good image
of the bank would be at risk.
▪ The contractor realized that the previously constructed building had high quality
problems during construction, so it is difficult to retrofitting.
▪ Retrofitting require deep knowledge and high experience, so that, the winner
contractor after site visit could not takeover the site due to fear of collapse.
Additionally, the three options presented by the consultant were discussed by the
Construction Steering Committees.
13
No Description Merits Demerits
OPTION I – Negotiation and • Not to incur more • Additional budget.
1 bear the price adjustment. time in realizing the • Bad precedence as the
project. Contractor is more likely to come
with additional demands and is
waving of very strong contract
conditions.
OPTION II – Terminate, new • May find new • Takes time for realizing the
2 tendering process having the Contenders with project.
same design and existing more interest and • Once again, Contractor’s interest
structure (might take four (4) to energy. in participating will be low.
six (6) months).
OPTION III – Terminate, • New flexible, • Takes more time for realizing the
3 prepare new design and efficient and project.
construction documents, and effective design and • Additional design and associated
select a Contractor to demolish process. costs.
the existing structure and
construct.
Finally after thoroughly discussion the bank decided to cancel the retrofitting and contract
entered with Tilahun Abebe G.C and to proceed with the demolishing of the existing
building and construct the new building.
14
3.Consultant Onboarding For The New Design
3.1. Design Process
Following a thorough discussion on some conditions, the bank at this point cancelled the
contract agreement entered with Tilahun Abebe Contractor and instead signed a
new contract with YEMA Architecture PLC consultant to create a new design.
Thus, the bank decided to keep YEMA Architecture PLC consultant due to the following
benefits
▪ It was preferable to stick with the existing consultant because they had already
investigated the condition of the building and the surrounding area and it would not
take much time to create a new design.
▪ It is thought that issuing a new tender to select consultants will lead to
unnecessary costs and time for the bank, so in order to save both costs and time,
it was decided to continue with the existing consultant.
▪ The existing Consultant already has a Contract Agreement with the Bank for
Contract Administration and Site Supervision services,
15
Finally, the consultant proposed payment of Birr 1,044,200.00 (Birr One million Forty
Four Thousand and Two Hundred 00/100 Only), including 15% VAT; for the new service.
And to check the fairness of their proposal, analysis was made against the price
proposal made for jima for office building design & Construction project preparation
Parameters for Analysis For Jima Project For Hara project
Building Size: B+G+7 B+G+6
Built Up area 7,600 sqm 5,577.6sqm
Price offer after negotiation with VAT 2,300,000 Birr 1,044,200 Birr
Date final price offer issued February 18,2019 February 9 2021
After thorough review and comparisons with the above stated facts, the committee
approved the Consultant’s (YEMA Architecture PLC) total price offer of Birr 1,044,200.00
(Birr One million Forty Four Thousand and Two Hundred 00/100 Only), including 15% VAT;
for Harar Office Building’s new Design and Construction Document preparation.
16
3.2.Design Period Activities and The consultant new scope of work
After signing the contract, the consultant got work right away. They have presented
their design development to the bank several times, receiving feedback and making
changes based on the feedback forwarded on the outlined activities.
Design service Items Design-Options

▪ Data collection and analysis
▪ Geotechnical investigation (Soil Test)
Option - 1
▪ Propose a minimum of two alternative Schematic Designs
▪ Design Development in phases
✓ Design brief development,
✓ Schematic Design,
Option - 2
✓ Preliminary Design,
✓ Final design
▪ Architectural Design
▪ Structural and seismic Engineering Design
Option - 3
▪ Electrical and Sanitary Design
▪ Sustainable Building Design
17
3.4.The Construction Steering Committee Directions.
After several time taking design process back and forth the consultant presented his
final design for approval meanwhile the bank after checking the final design and accepted
for the next process. At the end after presenting the design stage to construction steering
committee. The Construction Steering Committee unanimously forwarded the following
condition, i.e.:
▪ To promptly amend the previously furnished Bidding Document,
▪ And commence with the necessary bid action for Contractor selection through Open
Bid and In-house Bid Administration.
18
3.5.Comparision Between The Existing Building With the new One
Comparison parameters Existing Building Intended building to
Construct
Building Height ▪ B+G+4 ▪ B+G+6
Built up area ▪ 4,152.63sqm ▪ 5,577.6sqm
Development status ▪ Partially completed ▪ Under plan
▪ Remedial action for ▪ Demolishing of an existing building
structural member through ▪ Concrete
Assigned scope of work retrofitting ▪ Masonry
▪ Finishing work ▪ Metals
▪ Electrical work ▪ Thermal And Moisture Protection
▪ Sanitary work ▪ Openings
▪ Finishes
▪ Specialties
▪ Conveying
▪ Fire Suppression
▪ Plumbing
▪ Heating, Ventilation, And Air
Conditioning (HVAC)
▪ Electrical
▪ Communications
▪ Electronic & Security
▪ Earth Work
▪ Compound work
19
PHASE-TWO
1.Bid Process through Open Bid
1.1. Introduction
This part two seeks to describe the procurement process that has so far been completed
in order to secure contractor on the construction of Harar building. As a result,
procurement processes and summary of evaluation report will be presented in this
power slide to demonstrate what has been done so far.
1.2. Pre-Bid Preparatory work
The following activates were conducted prior to the bidding document being floated.
▪ Expected building size shall be B+G+6
▪ The bidding document preparation for Harar project has been conducted in between
January 10, 2022 and February 18, 2022.
▪ The bidding document has been presented to Procurement committee on February
25,2022
▪ Following the presentation, the Procurement committee also recommended that the
final draft to be distributed once certain critical comments on the draft bidding document
has been corrected.
▪ After Procurement committee direction, the final bidding document has been duplicated
in between March 22, 2022 and March 24, 2022 and made ready for distribution
20
1.3.Discharging Bid Document
During this stage, the bidding document was provided to prospective bidders through
invitation, which was advertised in a highly circulated local Reporter Newspaper and
the bid floated on the air from March 25th to April 18th, 2022.
21
1.4.List of Bidder Who Collected the Bidding Document
Following the official announcement from March 25th to April 5th, 2022, sixteen (16)
bidders, as listed below, were able to collect the bidding document from the cooperative
bank of Oromia procurement office:-
S/No Bidders Name S/No Bidders Name

1 Asrat Ketema G.C 9 Anwar Ebrahim G.C
2 HAKICON Engineering PLC 10 Mekash Ambaw B.C
3 TEKROM Construction PLC 11 MCG Construction PLC
4 MEDCON Engineering And 12 ASAMINEW TESHOME
Construction PLC Construction PLC
5 GUTEMA FIRISA Construction 13 YIRGALEM Construction PLC
PLC
14 BLC Construction
6 Shangi Furniture Plc
15 HEBRON Construction PLC
7 DUGDA Construction PLC
16
8 SELALE Engineering PLC KUSHLADDER Construction PLC
22
1.5.Bidder response
Following the release of the bidding document, bidders replied appropriately and submitted
their documents until April 18th,2022.
1.6.Bid Opening Ceremony
The bid opening ceremony was held on the at Rang Real Estate Building 7th floor in the
presence of procurement committee members, officers and staff.
On April 19,2022, during Bid opening only six (6) applicants submitted their bidding
document; namely:
▪ Hakicon Engineering plc,
▪ Yirgalem Construction plc
▪ MCG Construction,
▪ Gutema Ferisa Construction
▪ Hebron Construction
▪ Anewar Ibrahim Building Contractor but rejected due to unable to include their
power of attorney letter
23
1.7.Formation of Technical evaluation Team
To this end, Technical evaluation Team was formed on April 25, 2022 by the
procurement committee to handle the evaluation of bidding document. Therefore by the
procurement committee the following outlined staffs were assigned to evaluate the bidding
document submitted by the bidders.
Name Position
1. Obbo Anteneh Demirew • Manager ,Construction Project Management
2. Obbo Shiferaw kumbi • Senior Civil Engineer
3. Obbo Derara Emana • Senior Civil Engineer
4. Obbo Million Andarge • Associate Civil Engineer
5. Obbo Alemisa Gebisa • A/Manager, Procurement Team
24
1.8.Bid Evaluation Process
The process for bid document evaluation started immediately after the bid officially
opened and the evaluation was proceed with in House evaluation starting from April 25,
2022 and the corresponding technical evaluation was concluded by May 23,2022.
Accordingly , the committee officially notified the evaluation report with technical
recommendation.
1.9.Feedback on the Evaluation Report
Following the Evaluation report ,the Procurement committee was called for discussion
on the Technical document evaluation report. In this regard ,the procurement committee
was thoroughly discussed on the technical evaluation report and recommendation ,at the
end ,the committee with minute number PAC-A/011/2022 passed decision to further
more assess the outlined bidder whose technical document has minor deviation from
evaluation criteria set in bidding document and at the same time clarification request
were sent to bidder:
25
▪ Hakicon Engineering plc,
▪ Yirgalem Construction plc
▪ Gutema Ferisa Construction
▪ Hebron Construction
1.10.Field Assessment
Between June 1 and June 8, 2022, in accordance with the procurement committee's
minute direction, the technical valuation team assessed the bidder’s site and went
through all of the bidders' technical experience as well as their office setup. Finally, the
technical evaluation team concluded its visit by noting the following points
▪ All bidders are technically qualified and capable for the project. Their office setting is
well-organized, with various organizational structures.
▪ All bidders have demonstrated their ability to complete projects worth more than Birr
100 million on time and to the highest quality.
▪ It was recognized that all bidders are qualified enough to execute the project.
26
1.11.Discharge of Final Technical Evaluation Report
Following the field assessment and clarification request response ,the technical valuation
team once again met and discussed on field assessment and clarification responses
made by bidder. And finally on June 8,2022 ,the final Technical evaluation report was
discharged with an internal memo.
1.12.Compiled Technical result
Item No. Bidders Total Score (Out of Remark

100%)
1 HAKICON Engineering P.L.C 88.00 pass
2 Gutema Firisa Construction GC-I 91.00 pass
3 MCG Construction PLC 95.00 pass
4 Yirgalem Construction 86.00 pass
5 HEBRON Construction PLC 86.50 pass
27
1.13.Financial Bid Opening and Financial Evaluation Report
The financial proposal opening was conducted on June 9,2022, and written request for
evaluation delivered to evaluation team was on June 9, 2022. following the official memo,
the evaluation team thoroughly evaluate the bidder financial proposal and On June
13,2022 with an internal memo notify the financial evaluation findings to Director Supply
chain management at the same time on the memo the director requested to notify
the bidders on their offer after arithmetic checking.
1.14.Bidders Financial offer Before and After Arithmetic Checking
S/N Bidders Before Arithmetic After Arithmetic Differences

check in Birr check in Birr
1 HAKICON Engineering P.L.C 237,116,454.02 293,378,067.12 56,261,613.1
2 Gutema Firisa Construction GC-I 323,669,362.66 330,862,112.41 7,192,749.78
3 MCG Construction PLC 310,871,421.97 317,986,824.61 7,115,402.64

4 Yirgalem Construction 282,015,738.00 300,116,143.16 18,100,405.16
5 HEBRON Construction PLC 262,809,228.50 284,744,611.85 21,935,383.35
28
1.15.Claim After Arithmetic checking and Resolution
Following the release of the result of arithmetic checking, One of the bidder has raised its
claim with formal letter on its financial proposal offer after arithmetic checking and also
requested the copy financial proposal to be opened. Hence the procurement committee
after thoroughly discussion has accepted the claim and decided to open the financial copy.
And hence ,the Procurement Committee formally notified all bidders to appear in
witnessing the document verification process but only representatives from two bidders
(HAKICON Engineering PLC and HEBRON Construction PLC) appeared on July 1, 2022
for the document verification. Accordingly, the document verification was concluded on the
same date and both bidders (HAKICON Engineering PLC and HEBRON Construction
PLC) formally confirmed that there is no variation/misconception between proposal
documents and evaluation report as well. Following the same, Procurement Committee
stopped the bid process considering
1. The improper approach by the aforesaid two bidders and
2. Unusual and exorbitant differences witnessed between the Financial Offers
before and after arithmetic checking.
Thus, it was forwarded to the Construction Steering Committee for discussion and
conclusion.
29
1.16.Resolution
After thoroughly discussing on the agenda, the members of the Construction Steering
Committee unanimously forwarded the following condition, i.e.:
▪ The Procurement Committee was ordered to cancel the whole bid process,
▪ Revise the recent Bidding Document (if need be),
▪ And considering the urgency we are in, promptly proceed with a new Selected Bid
Process having additional Contractors through field assessment and including the
three (3) Contractors from the recent Open Bid Process; namely: (YIRGALEM
Construction PLC, GUTEMA FIRISA Construction PLC, and MCG Construction PLC).
30
Why Short list is selected
31
Response made
32
PHASE THREE
Bid Process through Short listing
1. List of Invited Contractors
The Employer announced a call to bidders to participate on the bid through invitation
letter dated on August 19, 2022 to contractor engaged that is in relation to “General
Construction and Building Construction”
Item No. Bidders Remark
1 Gutema Firisa Construction GC-I
2 MCG Construction PLC
3 Yirgalem Construction
4 Samket Engineering
5 OBM construction
6 Mesay Oli
33
34
35
36
1.2. Bid Submission
During bid submission dated September 08, 2022, and later extended to September
16,2022 ,by the time the bid was closed, out of the above stated Six (6) Contractor only
four (4) bidders’ submitted packages of technical and financial proposals
Item No. Bidders Remark
1 Gutema Firisa Construction GC-I
2 MCG Construction PLC
3 Yirgalem Construction
4 Samket Engineering
37
1.3. Bid Opening
1.3.1 Bid Opening Attendance
38
1.3.2 Picture Capture during Opening
39
1.4.The Bidding Evaluation Process
After First Bid Opening was conducted on September 16, 2022, the Procurement
Committee orders to proceed the evaluation with a Sub Evaluation committee. Thus,
proposal documents were dispatched to the sub evaluation committee on September
16, 2022 and the corresponding Technical Evaluation commenced accordingly
1.5.Bid Evaluation Criteria and Evaluation Result
The evaluation has been done on the basis of RFP evaluation criteria which were
prepared in the light of PPA 2011 Guidelines by Public procurement agency, for
Procurement of Goods, Works & Services.
Therefore the evaluation criteria for this case has been divided into two(2)
A. The must meet criteria and
B. Point allotted criterion
Accordingly the evaluation criteria and the bidders technical document evaluation
result shall be outlined in the table hereunder
40
A. Must Meet Evaluation Criteria
1 Legal Status Qualification Criteria
Bidders Name and Award

Must Meet Criteria
Gutema MCG Yirgalem Samket
Firisa GC GC Engineeri
GC ng
1.1 Nationality √ √ √ √
1.2 Conflict of Interest √ √ √ √
1.3 Registration in the FPPA's Suppliers List √ √ √ √
1.4 Debarred by decision of the FPPA √ √ √ √
1.5 Valid trade license or business √ √ √ √
organization registration certificate
1.6 VAT registration certificate √ √ √ √
1.7 Valid tax clearance certificate √ √ √ √
1.8 Government Owned Entity
41
2 Professional Qualifications and Capability of the Applicant

Must Meet Criteria Gutema MCG Yirgalem Samket
GC ng
2.1 Number of staff √ √ √ √

2.2 Personnel for the key positions √ √ √ √
3 Technical Qualifications, Competence, and Experience of the Applicant
3.1 General construction experience √ √ √ √
3.2 Specific construction experience √ √ √ √
3.3 History of non-performing contracts √ √ √ √
3.4 Pending litigation √ √ √ √

3.5 Major Equipment √ √ √ √
42
4 Financial Standing of the applicant

Must Meet Criteria
GC ng
4.1 Historical Financial Performance √ √ √ √
4.2 Annual Construction Turnover √ √ √ √
5 Declaration of site visit and understanding of the work

5.1 Site visit Report √ √ √ √
Conclusion for must meet evaluation
As shown on the above table the must meet criteria stated on bidding document have
been fulfilled by all contractors. Therefore, all contractors found to be responsive
43
B. Point Allotted Evaluation Criteria
1 Adequacy of Technical Proposal in responding to the Schedule of Requirements
(25%)
Bidders Name and Award point
Point allotted Criteria Allotte
d Gutema MCG Yirgale Samket
point Firisa GC m GC Engineering
GC
General for the specific project construction 3% 3% 3% 3% 3%
a and whole steps in quality, Cost and time
control (3%)
Compound Safety and Modern Construction 8% 8% 8% 8% 8%
planning and methodology including each
and every appropriate step followed (8%)
b Work plan, Organization Staffing and 4% 0% 4% 4% 4%
scheduling (4%)
c Demolishing and Construction Procedures and 4% 4% 4% 4% 4%
project management for Specific Project
Location (4%)
d Site Handling Methods (3%) 3% 3% 3% 3% 3%
e Methods of Protection for public property (3%) 3% 3% 3% 3% 3%
Subtotal 25% 21% 25% 25% 25%
44
2 Equipment required for the implementation of the contract
Min. Min Allott Bidders Name and Award point
Point allotted Criteria capacity no.Requi ed Gutem MCG Yirgale Samket
required red point a Firisa GC m GC Engineeri
GC ng
1 Dump truck 14cum 4 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
2 Concrete Mixer 750lit 2 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
3 Mobile Concrete Mixer 2.5cum 2 3% 3% 3% 3% 3%
4 Pick Up 4WD 2 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
5 Formwork steel sqm 3000 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
6 Concrete Vibrator 37diam 5 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
7 Welding Generator 75KVA 2 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
8 Loader >=1cum 1 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
9 Excavator >=2cum 1 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
10 Grinder of any type Pcs 5 .5% 0% .5% .5% .5%
11 Driller or core cutter or jaw crusher Pcs 3 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
of any type
12 Power saw of any type Pcs 2 .5% .5% .5% .5% .5%
13 Jack Hammer of any type Pcs 2 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
Subtotal 18% 17.5% 18% 18% 18%
45
3 Specific experience of the Bidder(15%)
Bidders Name and Awarded point
Point allotted Criteria Allotted Gutema MCG Yirgalem Samket
point Firisa GC GC Engineering
GC
Bidder has substantially, Successfully
and satisfactorily completed (100%)
at least Two (2) G+5 and above
buildings (labor plus material contract
and with all the civil and finishing
3.1 works executed by the bidder - not to
be semi-finished) as a Main 15% 15% 15% 15% 15%
Contractor, within the last five (5)
years, with a contract value of at
least ETB 100 million each and
above. Note: - That experience for
more than one (1) project, under a
single (one) contract, existing at
different locations shall not be listed or
considered.
Subtotal 15% 15% 15% 15% 15%
46
4 Qualifications and competence of the key professional staff (30%)
Point allotted Criteria Bidders Name and Award point
Experience Allott Gutema MCG Yirgale Samket
Point allotted Criteria Educational Level
required Specifi Gener ed Firisa GC GC m GC Engineering
c al point
Req Req
1 Project Manager BSC /MSc in civil 6/4 12/10 9% 9 9 9 9
engineering/construction
technology(PE-IV)
2 Construction/ Site B.sc/MSc in civil 4/2 10/8 6% 6 6 6 6
Engineer engineering/construction
technology (PE-III)
3 Office Engineer BSC in Civil 3 4 2.5% 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
engineering/construction
technology(PE-I)
4 Structural Engineer BSC in Civil 5 10 2.5% 2.5 2.5 2.5 0
engineering(PSTE-I)
5 Electrical Engineer BSC in Electrical 3 7 2.5% 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
engineering(PEE-I)
6 Sanitary Engineer BSC in Water Supply 3 7 2.5% 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
Sanitary Engineering or
related(PSNE-I)
7 Construction Forman Advanced Diploma in 6 10 2% 2 2 2 2
Construction Technology
8 Sanitary Installation BSC/Diploma in sanitary 3/6 4/8 1.5% 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Forman engineering
9 Electrical Installation BSC/Diploma in electrical 3/6 4/8 1.5% 1.5 1.5 1.5 0
Forman engineering
Subtotal 30% 30% 30% 30% 26%

47
5 Financial Standing of the Bidder: (12%)
Allotted Bidders Name and Award point

Point allotted Criteria point
Firisa GC GC GC Engineering
5.1 Submission of audited balance sheets

and other financial statements for the 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
last three (3) years to
5.2 The peak annual turnover within the 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%

last five (5) Year
5.3 access or availability of financial

resources as liquid cash - Minimum of 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%
5 million Birr
Subtotal 12% 12% 12% 12% 12%
48
Summary of Technical Evaluation Result
Allotted Bidders Name and Awarded point

Point allotted Criteria point
Firisa GC GC GC Engineering
1 Adequacy of Technical Proposal in 25% 21 25 25 25

responding to the Schedule of
Requirements
2 Equipment required for the 18% 17.5 18 18 18

implementation of the contract
3 Specific experience of the Bidder 15% 15 15 15 15
4 Qualifications and competence of the 30% 30 30 30 26

key professional staff
5 Financial Standing of the Bidder 12% 12 12 12 12
Grand Total 100% 95.5 100 100 96
49
1.5.Recommendation
Reference to the detail evaluation conducted above ,all bidders found to be

responsive and can accordingly proceed to Second Bid Opening (Financial Proposal
Opening) since their technical point is above the requirement set under the evaluation
criteria which is Section 3: Evaluation Methodology and Criteria (Bidders shall score
70 percent or above in the technical evaluation so that they shall qualify for financial
opening).
1.6.Financial Evaluation
The financial proposal of each of the bidders were opened on October 4 2022 at Rang
Real Estate Building 7th floor in the presence of procurement committee officers,
construction projects office officials, and representatives of bidders who choose to attend.
50
1.7.Financial Bid Opening attendance
51
1.7.1.Picture Captured During Financial Opening
52
1.8.Summary of Financial Evaluation
Item Bidders Before Arithmetic After Arithmetic Differences

No. check in Birr check in Birr
1 Gutema Firisa 452,844,441.21 457,465,984.21 4,621,543.00
2 MCG Construction PLC 382,267,002.98 382,246,916.78 -20,086.20
3 Yirgalem Construction 317,450,206.20 316,716,729.64 -733,476.56
4 Samket Engineering 452,446,571.11 452,542,478.81 95,907.70
53
1.9.Consolidated Evaluation
Technical score
Item Bidders Technical Score out Converted Technical Remark

No. of 100% score to 60%
1 Gutema Firisa 95.5 57.3
2 MCG Construction PLC 100 60
3 Yirgalem Construction 100 60

4 Samket Engineering 96 57.6
Financial score
Item Bidders Financial offer Financial score 40% Remark

No.
1 Gutema Firisa 457,465,984.21 27.69
2 MCG Construction PLC 382,246,916.78
33.14
3 Yirgalem Construction 316,716,729.64 40.00
4 Samket Engineering 452,542,478.81 27.99
54
Combined Score
Item Bidders Technical Score Financial score Total

No. out of 60% 40%
1 Gutema Firisa 57.3 27.69 84.99
2 MCG Construction PLC 60
33.14 93.14
3 Yirgalem Construction 60 40.00 100.00
4 Samket Engineering 57.6 27.99 85.59
1.10.Recommendation
Having seen the outcome of the combined evaluation result as outlined in the above ., the
team recommends Yirgalem Construction to be the tentative winner of the bid with
financial offer of Birr 316,716,729.64 (Birr Three Hundred Sixteen Million Seven
Hundred Sixteen Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Nine and 64/100).
.
55
Galatomaa!
Thank You

Harar Procurement Process - December 31 2022

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Harar Procurement Process - December 31 2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Harar Office Building [ New ]

(B+G+6– New Design Preparation and Contractor

© Cooperative Bank of Oromia. https://coopbankoromia.com.et/ 1

The third part deals with about contractor selection through

Building Address ▪ The building located at Harar town

Building Height ▪ B+G+4

Built up area ▪ 4,152.63sqm

Development status ▪ Partially completed

Consultant name ▪ YEMA Architectural PLC

▪ Contract Administration & Site

▪ Remedial action for structural

2.2. Why We Need Retrofitting

S/No Merits of Retrofitting's Demerits of Retrofitting's

3 Retrofitting also helps to make Difficult of bonding might be arise between

▪ Column-Some of the columns at Ground floor are overstressed needed Jacketing

Structural designs to be rechecked in Every necessary test has already been

▪ Although the contractor cited the aforementioned reasons as an impediment, the

Parameters for Analysis For Jima Project For Hara project

Building Size: B+G+7 B+G+6

Built Up area 7,600 sqm 5,577.6sqm

Date final price offer issued February 18,2019 February 9 2021

Design service Items Design-Options

S/No Bidders Name S/No Bidders Name

1. Obbo Anteneh Demirew • Manager ,Construction Project Management

2. Obbo Shiferaw kumbi • Senior Civil Engineer

3. Obbo Derara Emana • Senior Civil Engineer

4. Obbo Million Andarge • Associate Civil Engineer

5. Obbo Alemisa Gebisa • A/Manager, Procurement Team

1.12.Compiled Technical result

Item No. Bidders Total Score (Out of Remark

1 HAKICON Engineering P.L.C 88.00 pass

2 Gutema Firisa Construction GC-I 91.00 pass

3 MCG Construction PLC 95.00 pass

4 Yirgalem Construction 86.00 pass

5 HEBRON Construction PLC 86.50 pass

S/N Bidders Before Arithmetic After Arithmetic Differences

3 MCG Construction PLC 310,871,421.97 317,986,824.61 7,115,402.64

Item No. Bidders Remark

1 Gutema Firisa Construction GC-I

2 MCG Construction PLC

Item No. Bidders Remark

1 Gutema Firisa Construction GC-I

2 MCG Construction PLC

1 Legal Status Qualification Criteria

Bidders Name and Award

Bidders Name and Award

2.1 Number of staff √ √ √ √

3.4 Pending litigation √ √ √ √

Bidders Name and Award

5 Declaration of site visit and understanding of the work

Conclusion for must meet evaluation

Subtotal 30% 30% 30% 30% 26%

Allotted Bidders Name and Award point

5.1 Submission of audited balance sheets

5.2 The peak annual turnover within the 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%

5.3 access or availability of financial

Subtotal 12% 12% 12% 12% 12%

Allotted Bidders Name and Awarded point

1 Adequacy of Technical Proposal in 25% 21 25 25 25

2 Equipment required for the 18% 17.5 18 18 18

4 Qualifications and competence of the 30% 30 30 30 26

Grand Total 100% 95.5 100 100 96

Reference to the detail evaluation conducted above ,all bidders found to be