1. ENPROTEX 10th December 2015 Smart@Fire Christophe Veys
Project Director
& Procurement legal advisor
Innovation Agency of Flanders (IWT)

2. 1 innovation management company
Partners
1 Confederation
1 Notified body
2 Innovation Agencies
5 Procurers
1 University
1 innovation management company

3. Objectives
Develop innovative Personal Protective Systems to reduce risks inherent to firefighting.
Create a commonly agreed approach for pre-commercial procurement (PCP) that can be deployed and duplicated in the EU.
Project duration: 01/2013 till 12/2016

4. PPI-PCP- Innovation friendly
Public procurement
Innovation
Innovation- friendly
PPI
Pre-commercial procurement

5. Definitions
Innovation-friendly procurement encourage procurers to leave room for innovation in their purchasing proces (mindset and procedural aspects)
Public Procurement of Innovation (PPI): purchase of innovative solutions available (or partly available) on the market (new for the procurer)
Pre-commercial procurement
is a phased approach of purchasing R&D services by procurers for the development of innovative products, services or processes (not yet available on the market) by enterprises/ research centres with as goal:
To solve socio-economic challenges
To improve the performance, functionality of public services

6. Risks vs distance to market
PCP
Risks
R&D
PPI
Innovation- friendly
Distance of the solutions (to be developed) to the market

7. PCP
Phase 1: Needs assesment of firefighters & state-of-the-art Febrary 2013 till June 2013
Phase 2: Market consultations
Phase 3: Pre-commercial
procurement
Phase 4: Commercial purchasing
Development of prototypes
Purchase of a final product
September –December 2013
July 2014 – December 2015
Januray 2016 7

8. Phase 1: Needs assesment of firefighters & state-of-the-art
Needs assessment
Phase 1: Needs assesment of firefighters & state-of-the-art
How can I increase my safety and reduce risks undertaking fire fighting and other civil protection work?

9. Phase 2: Market consultations
> 450 participants (enterprises/universities/procurers) attended the different market consultation sessions
Feasability check & Risks assessment
Summary of the findings both innovation expectations vs technological feasability. Prioritization!
Preparation of the tender documents and submitted in February 2014 for approval to the EC
Phase 2: Market consultations
September – November 2013 9

10. Prototype priorities Prototype Scope: value vs. riskDO
DERISK H
Priorities on prototype roadmap
Innovative for end-user =
Significant technological risk
Added Value
Innovation potential from end-user perspective L
Off-the-shelf
Avoid if possible L H
Risk
Innovation potential from technological perspective

11. Market consultations Belgium (Brussels, 10 & 11/9/2013)
Localisation systems
Integration of ICT solutions in PPE
France (Marseille, 17 & 18/9/2013
Data transfer & visualisation systems
Germany (Dortmund, 1 & 2/10/2013)
Sensors
Wrap-up session (10/10/2013)

12. Overall participants per country
Total number of participants: 470/170 different/18 countries

13. Phase 2: Market consultations
PCP in 4 phases
Phase 2: Market consultations
September – October 2013 13

14. Pre-commercial procurement phase
Stage 1
Solution Exploration
Stage 2
Prototyping & Demo
Stage 3
Testing first batch of complete products
Phase 3: Pre-commercial
procurement

15. Scope of the Pre-commercial tender:

16. 6

17. State of play Solution Exploration
Tender launched in OJEU 11 June 2014 (2014/S ) + Information day 1st of July (65) :
Challenge brief
Invitation to Tender
Framework agreement
Bids submitted in October,
Award on the 26 of November
4 consortia were selected
Stage 1
Solution Exploration

19. Submit deliverables Solution Design & End of Phase 1:
Stage 1
Solution Exploration
Submit deliverables Solution Design & End of Phase 1:
On April , after 4 months of preparing their solution design, all 4 consortia submitted the following 4 deliverables:
End of Phase Report
Detailed solution Design
Request for clarification
List Background IPR
In order to evaluate the quality of all submitted deliverables, a jury was appointed
2 representatives of the end-users (SDIS13 – IBZ)
1 IWT advisor
2 independant external experts
1. End of Phase report: Within this document, an overview has been given about the undertaken activities during the 4 months of Phase 1. Detailed, but to the point, answers on the questions mentioned in the end of phase report template were given.
2. Detailed solution Design: The solution design consisted out of a detailed description of the chosen PPS architecture from which prototyping would start. Therefore it was recommended that the Phase I deliveries include technical detail of selected hardware and software, to a detail which allows evaluation on main targets (e.g. precision of location determination, signal integrity in view of penetration depth in buildings, expected battery autonomy, operational costs, functional temperature range, time based external temperature load in view of temperature shielded components). Important, within the solution design, a clear description had to be given of different test procedures which will be used to demonstrate that the prototype at the end of phase 2 will meet the minimal functional requirements mentioned in the challenge document and the other promised PPS capabilities mentioned in your solution design.
3. Request for clarification: A written document has been provided giving clear and detailed answers to the different questions mentioned in the request for clarification.
4. List Background IPR: a complete and accurate list of all Background Intellectual Property the Contractor (or any of its subcontractors) holds and that pertains or may pertain to the Project or any part thereof as well as a complete and accurate list of all software required for the project, thereby specifying which software is closed source software.

20. The Jury Criteria evaluated the satisfactory completion
Solution Exploration
The Jury Criteria evaluated the satisfactory completion
The jury evaluated the deliverables in order to see if the execution of phase 1 was in line with the work submitted in the bids.
Results:
All four participating consortia completed their first phase in a satisfactory way.
As a result, all four participating consortia received their requested payments for phase 1 1/ Applycon 2/ Texport: 3/ E-Bo enterprises: 4/ Prevent & Deloza
Detailed assessment of the solution design and the request for clarification were evaluated by scoring these deliverables on 4 evaluation criteria.
For Successful completion of phase 1 and to obtain the access to phase 2, the following minimum scoring requirements had to be attained.
The end of phase report should be evaluated as satisfactory
The average score over all 4 criteria, taking the different weightings into account, should be min. 50%.
The contractors should score min.  60% on criteria I and criteria IV.

21. Invitation To Tender phase 2 (ITT2): Prototyping & Demonstration
Based on the original Invitation to Tender (ITT 1), a new Invitation to Tender (ITT2), with specific requirements for Phase 2, was produced by IWT in cooperation with Addestino and appointed partners.
A lot of efforts went to the development of a more accurate description of the Evaluation Process at the end of phase 2 and a list of expectations regarding the results to be achieved at the End of Phase 2.
On May 18, 2015 all 4 consortia were invited to submit a bid for phase 2. All eligible bids had to be submitted before June 11, 2015.
After evaluation 3 Tenderers with the highest ranking were selected

22. www.smartatfire.eu Christophe Veys Project Director Smart@Fire
& Procurement legal advisor