Archived decisions
Hampshire County Council Executive Member - Environment: South Hampshire and Resource Management 14 June 2005 Project Integra: Behavioural Change Strategy Report of the Director of Environment |
Contact: Adrian Lee, ext 7004 email: [email protected]
1. Introduction
1.1 The collection and processing infrastructure is now in place for the County Council to achieve a recycling target of 40%. What is now needed is to encourage behavioural change amongst residents to increase the range and frequency of recycling at the kerbside. If all areas could achieve current best practice in the county the diversion of waste to recycling in kerbside collections could be doubled. In order to help achieve this, Project Integra partners have embarked upon a Behavioural Change Strategy which is partly funded by the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP). Part of the strategy involves direct face to face contact with residents - `doorstepping' to advise them what materials can be recycled and how they can recycle them.
2. Contract Description
2.1 The County Council invited expressions of interest from suitably qualified and experienced candidates who wished to be considered for inclusion on a select tender list of Consultants to undertake communications delivery activities for Project Integra's Behavioural Change Strategy. The contract includes two key elements, the doorstepping programme (including monitoring) and training for collection crew and support staff.
2.2 The contract has been developed as a framework contract to enable the delivery of the WRAP funded elements of the Behavioural Change Strategy which have to be delivered by March 2006. However, the framework process enables flexibility and will enable the Behavioural Change Strategy to be developed on a longer term basis. In order to allow for this long term development, the contract will be for one year (until March 2006) with the option to extend for a further two years, if funding can be identified.
2.3 The overall value of the work in 2005/06 is up to £500,000, although the contract will be divided into smaller contracts on a call-off basis under the doorstepping and training elements. The first of those contracts are for doorstepping in Basingstoke, Rushmoor, Havant, Portsmouth, Southampton and New Forest.
Doorstepping Programme
2.4 A major element of the Behavioural Change Strategy is the delivery of communication activities in a number of target areas, with funding from WRAP to carry the County Council's doorstepping activities to 10% of Project Integra households (ie approximately 60,000 households).
2.5 A team of Recycling Advisers, recruited from the local area, will be knocking on doors to speak to local residents to find out how to make the most effective use of their kerbside recycling container and encourage more people to recycle more materials, more frequently.
2.6 Six pilot areas have been selected in areas where there is the greatest potential to increase the recycling rate. The pilot areas are in the following local authority areas - Rushmoor, Basingstoke, Portsmouth, Havant, Southampton and New Forest - and there are up to 17,000 households in each pilot area.
2.7 In order to identify which households to target and evaluate the impact of the doorstepping programme, an extensive monitoring programme will be undertaken before and after the doorstepping activity.
2.8 The monitoring will assess the following:
(i) participation rates;
(ii) the range of materials collected for recycling;
(iii) the extent to which the bin is full; and
(iv) the presence and type of any contamination.
2.9 During September and October 2005 the monitoring programme will then be repeated in order to measure the effectiveness of the doorstepping programme and establish whether this method of face to face contact with residents has enabled and encouraged more people to recycle more materials, more frequently.
Training for Collection Crew and Support Staff
2.10 To enable collection crews, supervisors and support staff to play key roles in delivering the Behavioural Change Strategy, Project Integra is seeking to appoint a consultant to develop and deliver an ongoing programme of training. The main aims of the training will be to:
(i) communicate the aims and objectives of the Behavioural Change Strategy;
(ii) enable all staff to understand the importance of their role in delivering the strategy; and
(iii) deliver customer focused awareness training.
2.11 The training will need to be developed in consultation with Project Integra and be tailored for a variety of training needs for telephone support staff, collection crews, other operatives and officers.
Delivery Timetable
2.12 The programme will be delivered to the following timetable:
Monitoring programme |
May-June 2005 |
Doorstepping programme |
July-September 2005 |
Training for collection crew and support staff |
July-October 2005 |
Post monitoring programme |
Mid-September-October 2005 |
3. Procurement Process
3.1 Procurement has followed the appropriate Financial Regulations set out in part 3 (E) and the standing orders for contracts part 3 (F) of the County Council's constitution and has been delivered to the following timetable:
Advertised in the Official Journal of the European Communities |
21 October 2004 |
Expressions of interest shortlisted |
29 November 2004-13 January 2005 |
Tender submissions deadline |
24 February 2005 |
Tender evaluation |
25 February-4 March 2005 |
Consultant interviews |
3-4 March 2005 |
Consultants short-listed to be included on a call-off list for doorstepping and a call-off list for training activities. |
4 March 2005 |
3.2 Following advertisement, six consultants were invited to tender for the contracts. In response, five consultants tendered for the doorstepping element and five tendered for the training contract.
3.3 All bids were assessed against price and quality. The quality element considered the consultants previous experience, response to the brief, innovative thinking and general competencies for the task. Details of the assessment framework are included as Appendices 1 and 2. Details of the overall assessment of the doorstepping tender are included in confidential Appendix 3, and is summarised below.
3.4 Five companies tendered for the doorstepping (and monitoring) element of the project. The assessment of the tenders was based upon quality (40%) and price (60%). It is proposed that the three companies that scored the highest aggregated mark are included on the call-off list for the delivery of the Behavioural Change Strategy doorstepping programme. These are companies A (62), C (69) and E (98) on the attached evaluation sheet. Whilst company D also scored 62 in the aggregated scores for price and quality, this company scored very poorly on the quality element of the evaluation, being 30 points behind the next nearest company (A), and therefore has not been recommended for the call-off list. The company that received the lowest aggregated score was company B (24). Five companies tendered for the training element of the project and the tender assessment was based upon quality only (100%). It is proposed that the three companies which scored the highest mark for quality are included on the call-off list for delivery of the training element of the Behavioural Change Strategy. As shown on the attached evaluation sheet these are companies A (66), C (82) and E (86). The next nearest score was awarded to company B (59).
3.5 The following consultants were considered to have met the basic requirements for quality and competency and offered best value:
(i) Business Eco Network
(ii) Community Recycling Services
(iii) Environmental Resources Management.
Recommendation
That to assist delivery of Project Integra's £1.6 million Behavioural Change Strategy, a framework contract be awarded to Business Eco Network, Community Recycling Services and Environmental Resources Management for expenditure of up to £500,000 for doorstepping and training work over a three year period.
Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers | |
The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report. | |
NB the list excludes: | |
1. |
Published works. |
2. |
Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act. |
TITLE |
LOCATION |
Project Specification |
Environment Department Room 216 |
Tender Documents |
Room 216 |
397Rpt/AWL
Appendix 1 |
||||||
Project Integra Behavioural Change Strategy |
||||||
Tender assessment matrix for doorstepping and participation rate monitoring |
||||||
The proposal submitted for the tender for the Project Integra Behavioural Change Strategy will be assessed on the basis of quality. In order for the tenderer to submit the highest quality proposal, the following matrix has been provided. Each of the five sub-sections is weighted. The sub-sections also consist of a number of smaller elements which are intended to provide further detailed guidance on what is expected in the proposal. |
||||||
Weighted Score |
Mark awarded |
Weighted Marks |
||||
POINTS |
||||||
1. Interpretation of the brief |
Proposal meets or exceeds the brief requirements in this area |
20 |
||||
Understanding |
Demonstrates a thorough appreciation of the content, aims and outputs required and makes suggestions for added value. |
|||||
Innovation |
Goes beyond the brief to suggest innovative, complementary and appropriate activities that could be included. |
|||||
2. Delivery |
45 |
|||||
Community engagement |
Clear proposals for working closely with the local community (e.g. through employment of Recycling Advisors) to engage residents, raise awareness and change behaviour. |
|||||
Evidence |
Methods proposed have proven success and are accompanied by evidence of their success and examples of previous relevant work using this methodology. |
|||||
Field operation |
Detailed outline of intended field operation with reference to the methods for checking quality and accuracy of information gathered. |
|||||
Monitor and review |
Strongly shows importance and method of monitoring, reviewing and reporting with appropriate methodologies given. Demonstrates ability to change programme focus if needed. |
|||||
3. Programme and timetable |
Proposal meets or exceeds the brief requirements in this area |
10 |
||||
Programme scope |
Scope of programme activities is logical, timely and linked clearly to reachable targets |
|||||
Management structure |
Clearly acknowledges the need for contingency measures to enable flexibility of delivery and project completion. |
|||||
4. Working practices and reporting |
15 |
|||||
Adaptability |
Acknowledges the need to be flexible and indicates willingness and ability to adapt the programme in consultation with the client. |
|||||
Partnership working |
Outlines clear proposals for partnership working, supported by examples of previous, relevant, successful partnership working arrangements. |
|||||
5. Staff resources and deployment |
Proposal meets or exceeds the brief requirements in this area |
10 |
||||
Management structure |
Project management team structure is defined clearly and is appropriate. Staff identified have extensive and relevant project management skills |
|||||
Staff roles and experience |
Project staff have relevant training, experience and qualifications. Senior management have strong track record in delivering similar programmes successfully. |
|||||
Staff costs |
Staff costs for each are clearly stated, are in line with market rates and appropriate for the programme proposed. |
|||||
Total score |
100 |
|||||
Assess to Standard Table (Doorstepping Programme Tender)
Assessed Standard |
Marks | |
Using high standard with no reservations High standard Good standard: but minor reservations Acceptable; but significant reservations Not acceptable |
10 9 7 4 0 |
Overall Assessment
60% Price 40% Quality
Tender |
Aggregate Mark |
A |
62 |
B |
24 |
C |
69 |
D |
62 |
E |
98 |
Appendix 2 |
||||||
Project Integra Behavioural Change Strategy |
||||||
Tender assessment matrix for training programme |
||||||
The proposal submitted for the tender for the Project Integra Behavioural Change Strategy will be assessed on the basis of quality. In order for the tenderer to submit the highest quality proposal, the following matrix has been provided. Each of the six sub-sections is weighted. The sub-sections also consist of a number of smaller elements which are intended to provide further detailed guidance on what is expected in the proposal. |
||||||
Weighted Score |
Mark awarded |
Weighted Marks |
||||
POINTS |
||||||
1. Interpretation of the brief |
Proposal meets or exceeds the brief requirements in this area |
20 |
||||
Understanding |
Demonstrates a thorough appreciation of the content, aims and outputs required and makes suggestions for added value. |
|||||
Innovation |
Responds to the brief by suggesting innovative, complementary and appropriate activities that could be included. |
|||||
2. Delivery |
35 |
|||||
Evidence |
Methods proposed have proven success and are accompanied by evidence of their success and examples of previous relevant work using this methodology. |
|||||
Flexibility |
The programme is flexible with options for delivering the training in-house, off site or at the point of service delivery. |
|||||
Tailored |
The training programme is clearly tailored, with different approaches identified for different target groups. |
|||||
Monitor and review |
Identifies methods of monitoring, reviewing and reporting. Demonstrates ability to change programme focus if needed. |
|||||
3. Programme and timetable |
Proposal meets or exceeds the brief requirements in this area |
10 |
||||
Programme scope |
Scope of programme activities is logical, timely and linked clearly to reachable targets |
|||||
Management structure |
Clearly acknowledges the need for contingency measures to enable flexibility of delivery and project completion. |
|||||
4. Costs |
10 |
|||||
Realistic predictions |
The proposal must include detailed and realistic spending predictions that match the programme and include contingency planning |
|||||
Best Value |
A breakdown of the costs and how the methods/techniques chosen represent best value in comparison to other options. |
|||||
5. Working practices and reporting |
15 |
|||||
Adaptability |
Acknowledges the need to be flexible and indicates willingness and ability to adapt the programme in consultation with the client. |
|||||
Partnership working |
Outlines clear proposals for partnership working, supported by examples of previous, relevant, successful partnership working arrangements. |
|||||
6. Staff resources and deployment |
Proposal meets or exceeds the brief requirements in this area |
10 |
||||
Management structure |
Project management team structure is defined clearly and is appropriate. Staff identified have extensive and relevant project management skills |
|||||
Staff roles and experience |
Project staff have relevant training, experience and qualifications. Senior management have strong track record in delivering similar programmes successfully. |
|||||
Staff costs |
Staff costs for each are clearly stated, are in line with market rates and appropriate for the programme proposed. |
|||||
Total score |
100 |
|||||
ASSESSED STANDARD TABLE (TRAINING PROGRAMME TENDER)
Assessed Standard |
Marks | |
Using high standard with no reservations High standard Good standard: but minor reservations Acceptable; but significant reservations Not acceptable |
10 9 7 4 0 |
OVERALL ASSESSMENT
100% Quality
1 |
2 |
Tender |
Quality Mark |
A |
66 |
B |
59 |
C |
82 |
D |
53 |
E |
86 |