Documents confirming the qualifications of the procurement participant, if such a criterion for evaluating applications for participation in the procurement is specified in the procurement documentation. How to confirm qualifications to participate in a competition if there were no contracts for the work performed?

The evaluation criteria for an open competition under 44 Federal Laws are the criteria by which the customer evaluates applications and assigns them a rating. The participant whose proposal received the highest rating becomes the winner of the purchase.

Types of criteria for evaluation

For different tenders different criteria. IN electronic auction or requesting quotes, there is only one - price. There are several of them in the competition. Institutions do not come up with evaluation rules; their list is in Art. 32 44-FZ and Government Decree No. 1085 of November 28, 2013 on assessment rules.

Do not confuse assessment criteria with grounds for admission. The competition has a review stage and an evaluation stage. At the consideration stage, requirements for participants and the correctness of paperwork are important. If any document is missing or made with errors, then the participant is rejected, that is, does not participate in the procurement. And at the assessment stage, if the supplier does not attach documents confirming compliance with the requirement, then he remains on an equal footing with the others. But he will not be awarded points.

All criteria for evaluating applications for participation in the competition under 44-FZ are divided into two large groups.

Cost:

• contract price;
• expenses for operation and repair of goods, use of work results;
• price life cycle, i.e. the cost of goods or work, operation, repair and disposal;
• proposal on the amount of the customer's expenses under the energy service contract.

Non-cost:

• high quality, functional and environmental characteristics goods or work;
• participant qualification.

By law, in a competition or request for proposals, price is not the only measure of victory. Sometimes the winner is not the participant with the lowest price, but the one with the best quality scores. Be prepared to send many scanned documents as part of your application. They are needed to get points. If there are no documents, then the chances of winning are significantly lower. Evaluation of applications for participation in an open competition in electronic form carried out on the basis of criteria that the customer specified in advance in the documentation. In total, at least two of them are installed, one of which is necessarily costly.

How is it assessed based on cost criteria?

Various factors have different meaning for a government customer. It also establishes the significance of the criteria. This is their “weight” in the totality. It is expressed as a percentage. The sum of the weights is 100%. Customers do not set weights arbitrarily; Government Decree No. 1085 of November 28, 2013 has special rules in this regard.

Example: price of services (weight 60%) and qualifications of the performer (weight 40%). Evaluation based on the “price” criterion. Each proposal is evaluated using the formula:

1 application was submitted for the competition with a price of 1000 rubles, 2 - with a price of 1300 rubles.

Application 1: 1000 / 1000 × 100 = 100 b.

Application 2: 1000 / 1300 × 100 = 76.92 b.

If the price significance is 60%, then the customer will multiply the obtained figures by 0.6.

Result 1: 100 × 0.6 = 60 b.

Result 2: 76.92 × 0.6 = 46.15 points.

How to evaluate according to non-cost criteria

The customer independently formulates them, what exactly he understands by quality or qualifications of the participant. Often, within the framework of one criterion, several indicators are established in the documentation.

Let us give an example of non-cost evaluation criteria of 44 Federal Laws. Qualitative characteristics work - indicators:

• availability of a quality control system;
• environmental activities;
• technology of work execution;
• occupational health and safety measures.

Participant qualifications - indicators:

• qualifications of employees (certificates, permits, portfolios, scientific degrees);
• participant experience (number of contracts for similar work);
• availability of necessary equipment;
• business reputation of the supplier (number of reviews, letters of thanks, participation in ratings);
• availability of financial resources (the customer evaluates financial stability supplier based financial statements).

The criteria have a numerical expression. That is, not just the availability of equipment, but the number of units of a particular tool or vehicle. Not just work experience, but the number of contracts with a similar subject.

The participant will have to document his compliance (attach to the application scans of reviews, contracts, inventory cards, work records etc.).

The government customer assigns a significance coefficient (SI) to each indicator. The sum of all short circuits is equal to one.

Example: the “qualification” criterion includes the indicators “work experience” (QR 0.6), “business reputation” (0.2) and “availability of financial resources (amount of accounts payable)” (QR 0.2).

How are non-cost criteria assessed?

There are several options.

If the best value for the customer is the lowest value of the indicator (for example, the lower the volume of accounts payable, the better), then he uses the formula:

Example: application 1 was submitted to the competition with a payable of 1000 rubles, 2 - with a debt of 1300 rubles. KZ = 0.2.

Application 1: 0.2 × 100 × 1000 / 1000 = 20 b.

Application 2: 0.2 × 100 × 1000 / 1300 = 15.38 b.

If the significance of the “qualification” criterion is 40%, then the customer will multiply the received points by it.

Result 1: 20 × 0.4 = 8 b.

Result 2: 15.38 × 0.4 = 6.15 points.

If the best thing for the customer is highest value indicator (for example, the more positive customer reviews about this supplier, the better), then it uses the formula:

Example: application 1 with five reviews, 2 with twelve reviews were submitted to the competition. KZ = 0.3.

Application 1: 0.3 × 100 × 5 / 12 = 12.5 b.

Application 2: 0.3 × 100 × 12 / 12 = 30 b.

If the significance of “qualification” is 40%, then the customer will multiply the resulting numbers by it.

Result 1: 12.5 × 0.4 = 5 b.

Result 2: 30 × 0.4 = 12 b.

Formulas sometimes change. This happens if the customer has set the maximum required value. For example, when analyzing work experience, he indicated that he would be completely satisfied with the presence of 20 completed similar projects. Suppliers who demonstrate experience in 20, 30 or 50 projects will receive the same (maximum) number of points.

The third option is a rating scale based on criteria during an open competition. Here the customer sets the value ranges and the number of points that corresponds to each range.

Example: indicator - the number of top-class electricians on staff.

• 0 employees - 0 points;
• 1-4 employees - 30 points;
• 5-10 employees - 60 points;
• 11 or more employees - 100 points.

In this case, participants with 5 and 9 employees will receive the same number of points (60).

Evaluation is the process of assigning points for each criterion (and indicators within it) to each participant. The points are summed up. The winner is the supplier whose application received the most entries.

GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

RESOLUTION

On approval of the Rules for evaluating applications, final proposals of participants in the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs

Document with changes made:
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 03.21.2016, N 0001201603210007);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 10.24.2016, N 0001201610240013);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 11/17/2016, N 0001201611170023);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 01/29/2019, N 0001201901290022);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 03/07/2019, N 0001201903070013);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 03.28.2019, N 0001201903280031);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, July 30, 2019, N 0001201907300003) (for the procedure for entry into force, see paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2019 N 973);
(Official Internet portal of legal information www.pravo.gov.ru, 03.23.2020, N 0001202003230031).
____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________
Changes approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 20, 2016 N 1076 of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 20, 2016 N 1076 - paragraph 2 of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 20, 2016 N 1076.

____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
The changes approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 28, 2019 N 200 do not apply to procurements, notices of which are posted in the unified information system in the field of procurement before the date of entry into force or invitations to participate in which (draft procurement contracts) are sent before the date of entry into force of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 28, 2019 N 200 - paragraph 2 of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 28, 2018 N 200.

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________
Changes approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 21, 2019 N 293 or invitations to participate in which were sent before the date of entry into force of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 21, 2019 N 293 - see paragraph 2 of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 21 2019 N 293.
____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________
The changes introduced by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2019 N 973 apply to relations related to the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs, notices of the implementation of which are posted in the unified information system in the field of procurement or invitations to accept participation in which were sent after the day of entry into force of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2019 N 973 - see paragraph 4 of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2019 N 973.
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
The changes introduced by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 20, 2020 N 309 do not apply to relations related to the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs, notices of the implementation of which are posted in the unified information system in the field of procurement until the day entry into force, or invitations to participate in which were sent before the day of entry into force of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 20, 2020 N 309 - see paragraph 2 of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 20, 2020 N 309.
____________________________________________________________________


In accordance with the Federal Law "On the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs" the Government Russian Federation

decides:

1. Approve the attached Rules for evaluating applications, final proposals of participants in the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs.

2. To recognize as invalid:

Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated September 10, 2009 N 722 “On approval of the Rules for evaluating applications for participation in a competition for the right to conclude a state or municipal contract for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for state or municipal needs” (Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2009 , N 38, art. 4477);

paragraph 31 of the changes that are made to the acts of the Government of the Russian Federation, approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 17, 2010 N 1045 “On amendments and invalidation of certain acts of the Government of the Russian Federation” (Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2010, N 52, Art. 7104);

Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 28, 2012 N 265 “On amendments to the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated September 10, 2009 N 722” (Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2012, N 14, Art. 1659).

Chairman of the Government
Russian Federation
D.Medvedev

Rules for evaluating applications, final proposals of participants in the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs

APPROVED
Government resolution
Russian Federation
dated November 28, 2013 N 1085

I. General provisions

1. These Rules determine the procedure for evaluating applications, final proposals of participants in the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs (hereinafter referred to as procurement) in order to identify the best of the proposed conditions for the execution of the contract during the procurement, as well as the maximum significance values ​​of each evaluation criterion applications, final proposals of procurement participants (hereinafter - application, proposal).

2. These Rules apply to all purchases, with the exception of purchases carried out through an auction, request for quotations, sole supplier(contractor, performer).
Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of January 25, 2019 N 41.

3. The following terms are used in these Rules:

“evaluation” is the process of identifying, in accordance with the conditions for determining suppliers (contractors, performers) according to evaluation criteria and in the manner established in the procurement documentation in accordance with the requirements of these Rules, the best conditions for the execution of the contract specified in the applications (proposals) of procurement participants, which were not rejected;

“significance of the evaluation criterion” - the weight of the evaluation criterion in the totality of evaluation criteria established in the procurement documentation in accordance with the requirements of these Rules, expressed as a percentage;

“evaluation criterion significance coefficient” - the weight of the evaluation criterion in the set of evaluation criteria established in the procurement documentation in accordance with the requirements of these Rules, divided by 100;

“Application (proposal) rating by evaluation criterion” - a score in points received by a procurement participant based on the results of evaluation by evaluation criterion, taking into account the significance coefficient of the evaluation criterion.

4. For the purposes of these Rules, for the evaluation of applications (proposals), the customer establishes the following evaluation criteria in the procurement documentation:

a) characterized as cost evaluation criteria:

contract price or the sum of prices of units of goods, work, services;
by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of July 27, 2019 N 973.

expenses for operation and repair of goods (objects), use of work results;

the cost of the life cycle of a product (object) created as a result of performing work in the cases provided for in paragraph 5 of these Rules (hereinafter referred to as the life cycle cost);

proposal on the amount of the customer's relevant expenses that the customer will make or incur under the energy service contract;

b) characterized as non-cost evaluation criteria:

qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object;

qualifications of procurement participants, including the availability of financial resources, equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or otherwise legally, work experience related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other workers of a certain skill level.

5. In the case of a purchase, as a result of which a contract is concluded providing for the purchase of goods (performance of work), subsequent maintenance (operation) during the service life, repair, disposal (if necessary) of the delivered goods or an object created as a result of the work (life contract cycle), as well as in other cases established by the Government of the Russian Federation for the evaluation of applications (proposals), the customer has the right in the procurement documentation to establish, instead of cost criteria, the evaluation criterion “life cycle cost”.

6. The use of the evaluation criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), use of the results of work” is possible only if the contract, in addition to the delivery of goods (performance of work), provides for further operation and repair of the goods (use of the object created as a result of the work) , including the supply of consumables.

7. Evaluation in accordance with paragraph 6 of these Rules in terms of goods is carried out according to the evaluation criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), and in terms of work - according to the evaluation criterion “expenses for the use of the object created as a result of the work”.

8. In the procurement documentation, the customer is obliged to indicate the evaluation criteria used to determine the supplier (contractor, performer) and the significance of the evaluation criteria. In this case, the number of evaluation criteria used to determine the supplier (contractor, performer) when making a purchase must be at least two, one of which must be the evaluation criterion “contract price or the sum of prices of units of goods, work, services,” and in the cases provided for in paragraph 5 of these Rules, - the assessment criterion is “life cycle cost”.
by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of July 27, 2019 N 973.

9. The sum of the significance values ​​of the evaluation criteria used by the customer must be 100 percent. The value of the significance of the evaluation criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), use of the results of work” should not exceed the value of the significance of the evaluation criterion “contract price or the sum of prices of units of goods, work, services.”
(Clause as amended, put into effect on August 7, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2019 N 973.

10. In the procurement documentation in relation to non-cost evaluation criteria, indicators may be provided that reveal the content of non-cost evaluation criteria and take into account the peculiarities of evaluating purchased goods, works, services according to non-cost evaluation criteria.

11. To evaluate applications (proposals) for each evaluation criterion, a 100-point rating scale is used. If, in accordance with paragraph 10 of these Rules, the customer provides indicators in relation to the evaluation criterion in the procurement documentation, then for each indicator its significance is established, in accordance with which the assessment will be made, and a formula for calculating the number of points awarded for such indicators, or a scale limit values the significance of assessment indicators, establishing the intervals of their changes, or the order of their determination.

To evaluate applications (proposals) according to non-cost evaluation criteria (indicators), the customer has the right to establish the maximum required minimum or maximum quantitative value of qualitative, functional, environmental and qualification characteristics, which are subject to evaluation within the specified criteria. In this case, when evaluating applications (proposals) according to such criteria (indicators), procurement participants who made an offer corresponding to such a value, or best offer, is assigned 100 points.

The sum of the significance values ​​of the evaluation criterion indicators should be 100 percent.

The significance of the evaluation criteria should be established depending on the purchased goods, works, and services in accordance with the maximum values ​​of the significance of the evaluation criteria according to the appendix.

In the case of a procurement, the results of which result in a contract providing for the provision of services for organizing children’s recreation and their health, or the provision of services to ensure the protection of educational and educational facilities (territories) scientific organizations, the customer is obliged to establish the following values ​​of the significance of the evaluation criteria:
(The paragraph was additionally included from March 15, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 28, 2019 N 200 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 20, 2020 N 309.

the importance of cost evaluation criteria - 40 percent;
Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 20, 2020 N 309)

the significance of non-cost evaluation criteria is 60 percent.
(Paragraph additionally included from March 31, 2020 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 20, 2020 N 309)

In the event of a procurement, the results of which result in a contract for construction, reconstruction work, major renovation, the demolition of particularly dangerous, technically complex and unique capital construction projects, as well as artificial road structures included in highways of federal, regional or intermunicipal, local significance, it is allowed to establish in the procurement documentation as non-cost evaluation criteria exclusively the evaluation criterion "qualification of participants procurement, including the availability of financial resources, equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or other legal basis, work experience related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other employees of a certain skill level,” indicators of such criteria specified in paragraph 27 of these Rules.
(Paragraph as amended, put into effect on April 5, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 21, 2019 N 293; as amended by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2019 N 973.

In the case of a procurement, as a result of which a contract is concluded providing for the provision of services for organizing children's recreation and their health, or the provision of services for ensuring the protection of objects (territories) of educational and scientific organizations, the customer is obliged to establish the indicator specified in subparagraph "b" of paragraph 27 of these Rules In this case, the significance of the indicator must be at least 45 percent of the significance of all non-cost evaluation criteria.
(The paragraph was additionally included on November 1, 2016 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated October 20, 2016 N 1076; as amended, put into effect on March 31, 2020 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 20, 2020 N 309.

12. The clause has lost force since February 6, 2019 - Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated January 25, 2019 N 41..

13. The customer is not allowed to use evaluation criteria (indicators) or their significance values ​​not provided for by these Rules. The customer is not allowed to use evaluation criteria or their significance values ​​that are not specified in the procurement documentation.
(Clause as amended, put into effect on February 6, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated January 25, 2019 N 41.

15. The winner is the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is assigned the highest final rating. The application (proposal) of such a procurement participant is assigned the first serial number.

II. Evaluation of applications (proposals) according to cost evaluation criteria

16. The number of points awarded according to the evaluation criteria “contract price or the sum of prices of units of goods, work, services”, “life cycle cost” (), is determined by the formula:
(Paragraph as amended, put into effect on August 7, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2019 N 973.

a) if > 0,

Where:

b) if< 0,

where is the maximum offer among the proposals for the criterion made by the procurement participants.

17. Evaluation of applications (proposals) according to the evaluation criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), use of the results of work” can be carried out when purchasing goods or work to create objects that, while meeting the basic functional and quality requirements of the customer, may vary in cost operation and repair (use of work results).

Based on the characteristics of the purchased goods created as a result of the work of the facilities, the customer has the right to establish in the procurement documentation and take into account when assessing one or more types of operating costs or a set of expected costs.

The types of estimated operating costs taken into account during the assessment are established by the customer in the procurement documentation based on the characteristics of the purchased product (object) and the expected conditions of its operation and repair (use of work results).

The number of points awarded according to the evaluation criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), use of work results” () is determined by the formula:

Where:

- the minimum proposal from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;

- proposal of the procurement participant on the amount of expenses for the operation and repair of goods (facilities), use of the results of work during deadline service or service life of the product (object), the application (proposal) of which is being evaluated.

18. The procurement participant’s proposal on the amount of expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), the use of work results during the established service life or service life of the goods (object), the application (proposal) of which is evaluated () is determined by the formula:

Where:

n is the number of types of operating costs taken into account in the assessment;

- the amount of operating costs provided for i-th application by type of expense (t), during the service life or operation of the product (object) specified in the procurement documentation.

19. If all applications contain the same proposals according to the criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (facilities), use of work results,” applications (proposals) are not evaluated according to this criterion. In this case, the value of the significance of the criterion “contract price or the sum of prices of units of goods, work, services” increases by the value of the significance of the criterion “expenses for the operation and repair of goods (objects), use of work results.”
(Clause as amended, put into effect on August 7, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2019 N 973.

III. Evaluation of applications (proposals) according to non-cost evaluation criteria

20. Assessment according to non-cost criteria (indicators), with the exception of cases of assessment according to the indicators specified in subparagraphs “a” and “c” of paragraph 25 of these Rules, and cases when the customer has established a rating scale, is carried out in the manner established by paragraphs 21-24 of these Rules.

21. If for the customer best condition performance of a contract by evaluation criterion (indicator) is the lowest value of the evaluation criterion (indicator), with the exception of the case provided for in paragraph 20 of these Rules, the number of points awarded by evaluation criterion (indicator) () is determined by the formula:

Where:



- the minimum proposal from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;

- proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated.

22. If for the customer the best condition for fulfilling the contract according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) is the lowest value of the evaluation criterion (indicator), the customer, in accordance with paragraph two of paragraph 11 of these Rules, has established the maximum required minimum value specified in paragraph two of paragraph 11 of these Rules, the number of points awarded according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) () is determined by:

a) if > , - according to the formula:

b) if , - according to the formula:

in this case = KZ100,

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator. If one indicator is used, KZ = 1;

- the minimum proposal from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;


- proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

- the number of points according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) awarded to procurement participants whose supply is less than the maximum required minimum value, installed by the customer.

23. If for the customer the best condition for fulfilling the contract according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) is the highest value of the evaluation criterion (indicator), except for the case provided for in paragraph 24 of these Rules, the number of points awarded according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) () is determined according to the formula:

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator. If one indicator is used, KZ = 1;

- proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

- the maximum offer from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants.

24. If for the customer the best condition for fulfilling the contract according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) is the highest value of the criterion (indicator), the customer, in accordance with paragraph two of paragraph 11 of these Rules, has established the maximum required maximum value specified in paragraph two of paragraph 11 of these Rules Rules, the number of points awarded according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) () is determined by:

a) if< , - по формуле:

b) if, - according to the formula:

in this case = KZ100,

Where:

KZ - coefficient of significance of the indicator. If one indicator is used, KZ = 1;

- proposal of the procurement participant whose application (proposal) is being evaluated;

- the maximum offer from the proposals for the evaluation criterion made by the procurement participants;

- the maximum value of characteristics required by the customer, specified in paragraph two of clause 11 of these Rules;

- the number of points according to the evaluation criterion (indicator) awarded to participants whose proposal exceeds the required maximum value established by the customer.

25. Indicators of the non-cost evaluation criterion “qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object” may include:

a) quality of goods (quality of work, quality of services);

b) functional, consumer properties goods;

c) compliance with environmental standards.

26. The number of points assigned to an application (proposal) for the indicators provided for in paragraph 25 of these Rules is determined as the arithmetic average of the scores (in points) of all members of the procurement commission awarded to the application (proposal) for each of the specified indicators.

27. The indicators of the non-cost evaluation criterion are “the qualifications of procurement participants, including their availability of financial resources, equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or on another legal basis, work experience related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other workers of a certain skill level" may be the following indicators (taking into account the features provided for in paragraphs 27_1 and 27_4 of these Rules):
(Paragraph as amended, put into effect on March 15, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated February 28, 2019 N 200; as amended by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 20, 2020 N 309.

a) qualifications of labor resources (managers and key specialists), offered to perform work or provide services;

b) the participant’s experience in successfully delivering goods, performing work, providing services of a comparable nature and volume;

c) provision of the procurement participant with material and technical resources in terms of whether the procurement participant has its own or leased production capacity, technological equipment necessary to perform work or provide services;

d) security of the procurement participant labor resources;

e) business reputation of the procurement participant.

27_1. When making a purchase, as a result of which a contract is concluded providing for the provision of services for organizing children’s recreation and their health, the customer establishes that the indicator of the non-cost evaluation criterion provided for in subparagraph “b” of paragraph 27 of these Rules is formed exclusively from the following sub-indicators:

the total cost of executed contracts (agreements) for the provision of services for organizing children's recreation and their health;

the total number of executed contracts (agreements) for the provision of services for organizing children's recreation and their health;

the highest price of one of the executed contracts (agreements) for the provision of services for organizing children's recreation and their health improvement.

The customer does not have the right to change the significance of the sub-indicators specified in paragraphs two to four of this paragraph, as well as establish other sub-indicators in relation to the non-cost evaluation criterion provided for in subparagraph “b” of paragraph 27 of these Rules.
(The paragraph was additionally included on March 15, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated February 28, 2019 N 200)

27_2. In the case of a procurement, the results of which result in a contract for the construction, reconstruction, major repairs, demolition of particularly dangerous, technically complex and unique capital construction projects, as well as artificial road structures included in federal, regional or intermunicipal highways, of local importance, according to the non-cost evaluation criterion "qualification of procurement participants, including their availability of financial resources, equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or other legal basis, work experience related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other employees of a certain skill level" the procurement documentation establishes one or more of the following indicators:
(Paragraph as amended, put into effect on August 7, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2019 N 973.

a) the total cost of executed contracts (agreements) for construction, reconstruction, major repairs, demolition work;

b) the total number of executed contracts (agreements) for construction, reconstruction, major repairs, demolition work;

c) the highest price of one of the executed contracts (agreements) for construction, reconstruction, major repairs, or demolition work.
(The paragraph was additionally included on April 5, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 21, 2019 N 293)

27_3. To evaluate applications (proposals) according to the indicators provided for in paragraph 27_2 of these Rules, the customer has the right to provide for an assessment of work experience related to the subject of contracts (agreements) providing for the performance of construction, reconstruction, major repairs, demolition work only on to the following groups objects:
(Paragraph as amended, put into effect on August 7, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2019 N 973.

a) capital construction projects;

b) especially dangerous, technically complex and unique capital construction projects, as well as artificial road structures included in highways of federal, regional or intermunicipal, local significance;

c) especially dangerous, technically complex or unique capital construction projects, or artificial road structures included in the highways of federal, regional or intermunicipal, local significance, related to the type of capital construction project, artificial road structure, construction, reconstruction work, major repairs, the demolition of which is the subject of procurement;

d) capital construction objects, including especially dangerous, technically complex and unique capital construction objects, as well as artificial road structures included in federal, regional or intermunicipal, local highways, related to the type of capital construction object, artificial road structure, execution works on construction, reconstruction, major repairs, demolition of which are the subject of procurement.
(Clause 27_3 was additionally included on April 5, 2019 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 21, 2019 N 293)

27_4. When making a purchase, as a result of which a contract is concluded providing for the provision of services to ensure the protection of objects (territories) of educational and scientific organizations, the customer establishes that the indicator of the non-cost evaluation criterion provided for in subparagraph “b” of paragraph 27 of these Rules is formed exclusively from the following sub-indicators:

the total cost of executed contracts (agreements) for the provision of services to ensure the protection of objects (territories);

the total number of executed contracts (agreements) for the provision of services to ensure the protection of objects (territories);

the highest price of one of the executed contracts (agreements) for the provision of services to ensure the protection of objects (territories).

The customer does not have the right to establish other sub-indicators in relation to the non-cost evaluation criterion provided for in subparagraph “b” of paragraph 27 of these Rules, except for those specified in paragraphs two to four of this paragraph.
(The paragraph was additionally included from March 31, 2020 by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated March 20, 2020 N 309)

28. Evaluation of applications (proposals) according to the non-cost evaluation criterion “qualification of procurement participants, including their availability of financial resources, equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or on another legal basis, work experience related to the subject of the contract, and business reputation, specialists and other employees of a certain level of qualification" is carried out if indicators are established in the procurement documentation in accordance with paragraph 10 of these Rules, revealing the content of the corresponding evaluation criterion, indicating (if necessary) the minimum or maximum value required by the customer, provided paragraph two of clause 11 of these Rules.

29. To use a rating scale for the purpose of evaluating applications (proposals), the customer must establish in the procurement documentation the number of points awarded for a certain value of the evaluation criterion (indicator) proposed by the procurement participant. If several indicators are used, the value determined in accordance with the rating scale must be adjusted taking into account the significance coefficient of the indicator.

30. If procurement participants are presented with additional requirements in accordance with Part 2 of Article 31 of the Federal Law "On the contract system in the field of procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs", such additional requirements cannot be used as criteria for evaluating applications (proposals).

Appendix to the Rules. Limit values ​​for the significance of criteria for evaluating applications, final proposals of participants in the procurement of goods, works, services to meet state and municipal needs

Application
to the Rules for evaluating applications, final
proposals from participants in the procurement of goods,
works, services to ensure
state and municipal needs

Revision of the document taking into account
changes and additions prepared
JSC "Kodeks"

Acceptance Federal Law dated April 5, 2013 No. 44-FZ "" (hereinafter referred to as Law No. 44-FZ), which came into force on January 1, 2014, entailed the need to develop many by-laws for each stage of public procurement.

Scheme. Criteria for evaluating applications from procurement participants (according to approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 28, 2013 No. 1085)

Cost criteria

As before, when determining the winner of a purchase, the at least two criteria, one of which is price ().

True, now a mandatory evaluation criterion may turn out to be "life cycle cost"– in the event that it is intended to conclude a so-called “life cycle contract”, which provides for the purchase of a product (or performance of work), its subsequent maintenance, repair, and, if necessary, disposal of the product or work item (). Moreover, at the discretion of the customer, the “life cycle cost” criterion can replace all cost criteria ().

It should be noted that it has changed weight of cost evaluation criteria. If previously the significance of the “contract price” criterion had to be at least 35%, now the approach to determining the maximum values ​​of the significance of evaluation criteria has changed - in general view it can be presented in the form of the following table:

Table. Limit values ​​for the significance of evaluation criteria

True, exceptions are made to these rules. Thus, the ratio of the minimum importance of cost and maximum importance of non-cost criteria "40/60" established for such types of goods, works and services as:

• development of documents regulating training, education, quality control of education;
• emergency rescue work;
• restoration of cultural heritage sites;
• medical, educational, legal services;
• services of a specialized organization.

Ratio "30/70" established for examination services, as well as work on the creation, development and technical support state and municipal information systems and official websites of authorities.

An even greater maximum weight of non-cost criteria (ratio "20/80" ) is intended to evaluate applications for financing the distribution or screening of national films, performing R&D or technological work, as well as performance (as a result of intellectual activity - for example, the performer in accordance with may be a performing artist, stage director or conductor).

Finally, only according to non-cost criteria (ratio "0/100" ) applications for the creation of works of literature and art, including choreographic works and pantomimes, works of architecture, urban planning and landscape art and photographic works can be assessed (the full list of objects is enshrined in).

In any case, as before, the sum of the significance values ​​of the evaluation criteria should be 100%. In this case, the weight of the “operation and repair costs” criterion (which can only be established if further servicing of the product or work object is expected) cannot be greater than the weight of the “contract price” criterion ( , ).

In 2010, there was a case when the FAS of Russia considered a negative value of the final cost of a government contract acceptable, but the court did not agree with this interpretation. However, the court recognized the possibility of reducing the contract price below zero for the contract for the provision of services for opening and maintaining bank accounts (FAS of the Ural District dated July 6, 2010 No. F09-5137/10-S1 in case No. A60-49614/2009- SR). However, the special clause of Part 6.1 of Art. 37 of the Federal Law of July 21, 2005 No. 94-FZ " " on the specifics of the contract price for the provision of this type of service has not been transferred to Law No. 44-FZ.

By the way, during the period of validity of the old law on public procurement, situations arose when, during the procurement, participants reduced the contract price to zero, which gave rise to contradictory judicial practice. The conclusion of a contract on a gratuitous basis was recognized by the courts as legal (FAS of the Ural District dated October 19, 2010 No. F09-8056/10-S5 in case A50-331/2010, Nineteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated November 29, 2011 No. 19AP-4855/ 11), and not in accordance with the law (FAS Volga District dated March 18, 2010 in case No. A72-10398/2009, FAS Ural District dated October 19, 2010 No. Ф09-8056/10-С5 in case No. A50-331 /2010).

Non-cost criteria

These criteria may apply to both to the procurement object(quality, functional, environmental), and directly to procurement participant(qualification of the participant). In the latter case, the qualifications of participants should be assessed depending on the availability of:

• financial resources;
• equipment and other material resources belonging to them by right of ownership or other legal basis;
• work experience related to the subject of the contract;
• business reputation;
• specialists and other workers of a certain skill level.

By the way, customers retained the right to install indicators each individual non-cost criterion, revealing its content, and determine their weight on one's own. To do this, the procurement documentation must provide for one of the following calculation methods:

• formula for calculating the number of points awarded to indicators;
• a scale of limit values ​​for the significance of assessment indicators, establishing intervals for their changes;
• the procedure for determining such formulas or scales.

It should be taken into account that the customer has the right to establish the maximum necessary minimum or maximum quantitative value of non-cost characteristics, which are subject to assessment within the framework of the criteria or their individual indicators (paragraph 2) - for example, 10 years, 50 employees, etc. Let's look at this in more detail using examples.

EXAMPLE 1

The customer has decided to assess the qualifications of procurement participants, and therefore must establish indicators that reveal this criterion (). Let’s say that the greatest importance for the customer is the experience of the procurement participant and the availability of his labor resources (using the terminology of the Rules - “the best condition for fulfilling the contract according to the indicator is the highest value of the indicator”). Then the weight distribution of the qualification criterion indicators may look like this:

• experience of the procurement participant in the production of the procurement object (importance - 60%);
• number of workers employed in the production of the facility (importance – 40%).

Let's imagine that the customer did not set the limit values ​​of these indicators in numbers, and the most experienced government procurement participant working in a certain area was recognized four years. Then the number of points scored for this indicator by other participants whose work experience is less than four years must be assessed using the following formula ():

NCB i= short circuit x 100 x (K i/K max)

• NCB i– number of points;
• KZ – indicator significance;
• K i
• K max– the maximum offer of all those made by procurement participants.

In relation to our example, calculating the number of points of a participant working in a certain field, let’s say three years, will look like this:

NCB i= 0.6 x 100 x (3 / 4) = 45 points

Thus, for the most experienced procurement participant, the number of points for this indicator will be 60 points(a coefficient of 0.6 reflects the significance of the indicator - 60%, but if only one indicator is used, then the coefficient will be equal to 1, and the maximum number of points will be 100).

EXAMPLE 2

Let’s imagine that the customer considers the period at least five years And wishes to reflect this in the requirements for procurement participants. In this case, in the procurement documentation, he should set the required maximum value for the “work experience” indicator (five years).

The formula used to calculate the points depends on whether any of the participants have work experience equal to or greater than five years.

Situation 1. None of the participants have such work experience. In this case, the points assigned to the applications of absolutely all participants will be calculated according to the formula that was discussed in example 1: NCB i= short circuit x 100 x (K i/K max) – based on the best offer for this indicator (item “a”) (if the best offer was four years, then a participant with three years of work experience, taking into account the weight of the indicator, will score 45 points).

Situation 2. Some procurement participants have the required or extensive work experience. They are assigned the maximum number of points (if one indicator is used - 100 points, since KZ = 1), and applications of other participants are evaluated according to the following formula (item "b"):

NCB i= short circuit x 100 x (K i/K n edit)

• NCB i– number of points;
• KZ – indicator significance;
• K i– proposal of the procurement participant whose application is being evaluated;
• K before– the maximum value of characteristics required by the customer.

Returning to our example, let’s calculate the number of points for a procurement participant working in a certain area three years:

NCB i = 0.6 x 100 x (3/5) = 36 points

EXAMPLE 3

The Rules also give the customer the right to develop for the evaluation of applications scale of limit values ​​of the significance of evaluation indicators. This scale involves the awarding of points depending on which interval of requirements the procurement participant falls into (). For example, the rating scale for the “work experience” indicator might look like this:

• 0-1 year– 50 points;
• 2-3 years– 70 points;
• 4-5 years or more– 100 points.

Do not forget about the need to take into account the significance of the “work experience” indicator as part of the evaluation criterion “qualification of the procurement participant.” Taking into account the adjustment for the weight of the indicator (in our example - 60%), we obtain the scale in its final form:

• 0-1 year– 30 points (50 x 0.6);
• 2-3 years– 42 points (70 x 0.6);
• 4-5 years or more– 60 points (100 x 0.6).
  

Rules only in one case oblige the customer, regardless of his discretion, to apply a non-cost criterion - this is the participant’s experience in the successful delivery of goods (performance of work, provision of services) of a comparable nature and volume, which should be taken into account when conducting procurement for execution construction work ().

Additional criteria

The legislator reserved the right to establish more high demands to participants in procurements of special technical or technological complexity, as well as those of an innovative, high-tech or specialized nature (). This must be taken into account by customers when organizing certain types of procurement, since such requirements must be reflected in the documentation about the procurement ().

Currently additional conditions established for the procedure for conducting a competition with limited participation for:

• provision of services catering and (or) supply of products for institutions education, medicine, social services and organizing children's recreation and their health;
• performing work in the field nuclear energy And nuclear weapons;
• carrying out construction (reconstruction, major repairs) work that is especially dangerous, technically complex capital construction projects, and also roads– if the initial (maximum) contract price exceeds RUB 150 million. (for federal or regional purchases) or 50 million rubles. (when conducting procurement to meet municipal needs).

Additional requirements for participants in such procurements are as follows:

• availability experience execution of similar contracts within three years before the date of filing the application for participation in the competition (in this case, the cost of the previously executed contract must be at least 20% initial (maximum) contract price);
• availability of own and (or) rented for the duration of the contract equipment and others material resources, and also rights to the results of intellectual activity(to the extent established by the tender documentation).

The Government of the Russian Federation has also established a closed list of documents that must be provided to the customer to confirm compliance with the requirements (Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation dated November 28, 2013 No. 1089 "").