Whole Life & Life Cycle Costing
When awarding public contracts on the basis of the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT), organisations must determine the balance between price/cost and the best price quality ratio.
To determine the price/cost of a contract, organisations can calculate the total cost of the goods or services based on the whole lifecycle rather than only the purchase price. Using a life-cycle costing (LCC) or whole life costing (WLC) model can help organisations identify the MEAT, support obligations to improve the economic, social and environmental wellbeing of their area, and ultimately achieve value for money.
Any costs requested in a tender process should be accessible and free for bidders to provide.
Use of the Life Cycle Impact Map in the Sustainable Procurement Tools will help buyers establish where in the life cycle major social and environmental impacts occur which may be:
|
|
|
|
Completion of a life cycle impact map can then help to identify whether a LCC or WLC approach may be appropriate.
LCC is set out in regulation 68 of the Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 2015.
Although this provision does not extend to regulated procurements below the 2015 thresholds, the use of a life cycle approach will support an organisation’s responsibility to consider how to support its sustainable procurement duty to improve the economic, social and environmental wellbeing of its area, achieve the MEAT and help achieve value for money. Using this approach will also help increase the transparency of possible future costs to organisations.
LCC will cover part or all of the costs relating to the lifecycle of the goods or services. These can include costs such as:
Purchase price
Operating costs such as fuel costs, consumables
Maintenance costs such as servicing, repairs and spare parts
Disposal costs such as decommissioning, dismantling and final disposal
environmental and social impacts such as emissions, waste generation and climate change mitigation costs
Training costs
Insurance costs
Revenue generated
LCC can provide a flexible approach to costing, where buyers can focus on specific areas of the lifecycle which will have the greatest impact.
This is a technique to calculate the total cost value of goods or services over their full useful life, from cradle to grave, taking into account all the total relevant costs of purchasing, operating, maintaining and disposal which can include, but is not limited to the costs listed above.
Unlike LCC which may consider only part of the costs, a WLC approach should consider all the relevant costs relating to the goods or services.
Where LCC or WLC are being used to assess the costs of a contract, organisations must establish the method in advance and share with bidders:
The costing method being used must be objective, based on non-discriminatory criteria, accessible to all interested parties and not favour a particular bidder.
Where any common methods have been made mandatory by legislation, they must be used e.g. the clean vehicles Directive requires that energy and environmental impacts linked to the operation of vehicles over their whole lifetime are taken into account in all purchases of road transport vehicles, as covered by the public procurement Directives and “The Cleaner Road Transport Vehicles (Scotland) Regulations 2010”.
Costs attributable to environmental factors linked to goods or services during their life cycle can be considered where the financial value can be determined and verified in an objective and non-discriminatory way.
The data required from bidders must be accessible by all and gathered without unnecessary burden.
Tools and Guidance
Please find below links to resources which may be useful in building cost models, providing considerations and guidance:
Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) Whole Life Appraisal Tool
Produced for the Scottish Government in response to the Review of Public Sector Procurement in Construction 2013, the SFT provided guidance and a whole life appraisal tool which, although created from a construction perspective, may provide information and models useful for complex service contracts. Buyers may also find further information on whole life costing and sustainability in chapter 11 and 18 of the Construction Procurement Handbook.
Should Cost Modelling
UK GCF developed an extensive suite of guidance, tools and templates on “Should Cost Modelling” (SCM), a term used to describe Whole Life Cost Modelling. SCM can provide a forecast of what a service, project or programme ‘should’ cost over its whole life, provide a structure for bids to be received, support the evaluation of bids (including helping to identify abnormally low bids), and provide a baseline to compare forecasted costs to the actuals during the contract performance.
Whole Life Costing (+CO2)
Forum for the Future in partnership with Fife Council developed a Whole Life Costing (+CO2) tool and guidance, which may be helpful to assess the whole life costs including CO2 emissions (from point of purchase to end of life (but does not include embedded or embodied carbon incurred during supply chain activities)) of any product or service which consumes electricity, gas, oil, vehicle fuel and/or water. As above, any method to calculate emissions must be determined and verified in an objective and non-discriminatory way, accessible by all bidders and gathered without unnecessary burden.
The Knowledgehub
The Knowledgehub is a free service where public sector buyers can find helpful guidance, templates and share best practice which includes information on costing models.
The document found below, provides some Life Cycle Costing examples.
(file type: docx)
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024 (UNCRC Act) incorporates requirements set out under the UNCRC into domestic law, and makes provision to ensure compliance with duties relating to the UNCRC.
Section 6 of the UNCRC Act makes it unlawful for public bodies to act in a way that is incompatible with the UNCRC requirements when delivering relevant functions under powers conferred by an Act of the Scottish Parliament. This is referred to as the compatibility duty and applies to functions of a public nature. This includes functions of a public nature carried out under a contract with a public body. This duty comes into force on 16 July 2024.
A Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment (CRWIA) is a process which identifies any anticipated impact on children’s human rights and wellbeing as part of policy development. Where a CRWIA has been done, it and/or other relevant sources of information should inform the procurement process. Further information on CRWIA is available from the Scottish Government website. Although produced to assist Scottish Government officials comply with the Scottish Minister’s legal requirement to undertake CRWIAs, other organisations may find the guidance helpful.
Consideration of children’s rights and compatibility with UNCRC requirements will be especially relevant, for example, in a procurement to provide a direct service to children such as early learning, childcare and health services. However, there may be other services for which children will be an end user (alongside others) such as transportation, or services provided in public buildings and which could have an impact on access to children’s rights.
Further information on children’s rights is available from the Scottish Government website including non-statutory guidance to support public authorities and other organisations to deliver a children’s human rights approach in policy and practice.
As per our previous correspondence, we would like to remind you that from 1 April 2024 the Word version of the Single Procurement Document (SPD) will no longer be supported or updated by Scottish Government
Following user research, the Word version of the SPD will be removed from the Procurement Journey website on 31st March 2024. All of the guidance relating to the SPD and the supplier selection process will continue to be available.
From this date, the fully online versions of the SPD, available within PCS and PCS-Tender, will be the only ones updated, supported, and maintained by Scottish Government.
The precursor to the SPD, the ESPD, came into force in April 2016. In the eight years since then, the online capability of both buyers and suppliers has increased dramatically, just as it has for the general population, and the pandemic has further increased the rate of transition. The SPD was always intended to be an entirely online process, and this change will simplify the landscape, especially for SMEs, who have told us that continued support and use of the offline SPDs causes them issues when engaging with public procurement in Scotland.
If you’re already using PCS-Tender, or the SPD module in PCS to run your procurement exercises, then you should continue to do so.
If you currently use the Word version of the SPD, (or any other offline version) to create your SPD requests, then you are advised to familiarise yourself with SPD functionality within PCS as soon as possible.
The SPD module is intuitive and straightforward to use, and there are a number of additional resources to support users:
We are continuing to run a series of buyer awareness sessions to support buyers with the transition. You can book a slot here.
The SPD module is designed to be ‘self-contained’ and this means that buyers can include any requirements specific to their procurement exercise, such as qualifications, experience, financial stability etc, within their SPD request. Buyers can also request and receive supporting evidence, such as copies of company accounts, certifications relating to quality management, environmental management and other ‘means of proof’, from within the system.
For suppliers, it simplifies and streamlines the selection process, enabling them see the buyer’s requirements within the SPD itself, without the need to cross refer to other procurement documents. Suppliers are also able to store and re-use their answers to standard SPD questions, and upload evidence documents, such as company accounts, once but use them multiple times.
The SPD module is integrated into PCS, so there’s no need to re-register or create a separate log-in.
The SPD module with PCS enables you to export your SPD request in various formats, including PDF and Word, which can then be shared with other stakeholders for review or comment.
Buyers will still be able to use a Word, or other offline version of the SPD, and issue it as an attachment, but this approach will not be actively promoted or supported by Scottish Government. It would be the responsibility of individual buyers and contracting authorities to ensure that any offline versions of the SPD remain aligned to the latest official Scottish Government versions within PCS and PCS-Tender and to seek their own legal advice to support this.
If you need any further information, please contact Laura Martin (laura.martin@gov.scot) or Steve Patterson (Steven.Patterson@gov.scot)
There are no absolute criteria for defining the best route to market for innovation as every project is different, however in making your decision there are two important factors you should consider:
Appetite for risk in the public sector is usually low. This means that staff, including budget holders and senior decision makers, will often choose a procurement procedure which offers the least risk. Unfortunately, this can lead to using procurement procedures that may not be optimal to deliver innovation.
Whatever procurement procedure is chosen, it is important to actively identify potential risks and create a mitigation and management plan from the outset. Risk should continue to be managed throughout the full procurement process. This should involve good risk management and strong governance of innovation projects.
There is uncertainty in all innovation projects, whether it’s related to the outcome of the project, or parts of the project that are unknown. However, as the project develops, you may realise there are metrics that an be recorded and measured over time.
Unlike typical regulated procurement exercises, for innovation you may not have fully documented specific background information and/or a history of potential products or services. This is particularly the case when the innovation project involves creating new goods or services that do not yet exist.
You may not for example have:
Even if some research has been carried out in the Discovery and Definition phase, it is normal that levels of uncertainty will remain. You may still be uncertain as to what the final solution will be, however you will have information gathered from your research to inform the decision for the most appropriate procurement procedure for your project.
The further away from the market the potential goods or service is from implementation, the larger the R&D gap will be for the project.
Understanding the current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of the goods or services helps to assess the gap between the current status of a product/service and the desired outcome.
TRL’s help those involved in R&D to make decisions concerning the development and transitioning of technology. There are a number of online tools available to assist users in defining the TRL level such as those for Horizon Europe
Having defined the gap, you need to detail the R&D steps and resources required to close this gap.
The greater the uncertainty in closing the gap, the more likely it is that specific R&D is required to reduce that level of uncertainty.
Complexity refers to both organisational complexity and the technical complexity of the project.
It relates to areas such as the:
These factors will help you determine the type of process or procurement procedure that should be used. Please note the above is not a comprehensive list – every situation will have differing areas of complexity which need to be considered.
An example of differing complexity:
An innovation project within a single organisation is required to develop a new automated technology to receive payment for a visitor attraction. This offers little complexity.
Whereas a project to create and codevelop highly specialised zero emissions vehicles, based on data from 3 pilot areas, for all public sector organisations, each with differing requirements, may present both technical and organisational complexities that require different consideration from a procurement procedure.
The below diagram shows how the level of complexity and uncertainty influences the procurement procedure chosen:
The above diagram is a matrix with two axis. The x axis shows increasing complexity and the y axis shows increasing uncertainty due to an increasing research and development gap.
A combination of the complexity and uncertainty axis result in four possible outcomes in terms of which procurement procedure to use. These possible outcomes are:
Outcome 1: Low complexity and low R&D gap. This can result in using either an open or restricted procurement procedure or the possible use of an existing Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) or existing Framework Agreement. The use of an existing DPS or Framework Agreement are subject to the applicability of the original terms of the Contract Notice.
Outcome 2: High complexity and low R&D gap. This can result in using a procurement procedure involving negotiation where the highly complex aspects of the project would benefit from a process of negotiation working in partnership with contractors.
As a result there are a number of negotiated procurement procedure options that can be used. These include -
Outcome 3: Low complexity and high R&D gap. This is where there is a large gap between what the market can supply and your needs. In such cases a research and development only phase may be used to determine whether and how the need can be met. This research and development only phase (a Pre Procurement Process) can produce the necessary data to allow you to then carry out a further procurement exercise for implementation. To aid your research, you should consider undertaking market analysis through a preliminary market consultation.
And finally Outcome 4: high complexity and high R&D gap. This is is where a possible innovation project would benefit from trials or pilots, research and/or development to gauge its possible success or scalability. In such situations it is usually thought that the project has potential and, as a result, other funding methods are sometimes used. For example to conduct trials or a pilot you may have sourced finance via grants, endowment funds, charity funds, etc. Where a pilot or trial has been carried out, for example via a pre-commercial procurement, a further procurement exercise is likely to be required to scale up the project.
The next page includes information on the Pre-Commercial Procurement Notice and Award Notice.
Regulation 13(8) of the Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 2015 states when a procurement exercise is exempt from the Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 2015 i.e. when the person and/or organisations involved in the procurement exercise are “controlled”. You can find out more information about this by reading Regulation 13(8).
For the exemption to apply to a procurement exercise there must be genuine co-operation between the parties involved to achieve common objectives. The exemption cannot be used where one organisation commissions another to carry out services solely in return for consideration.
As a result an exemption is unlikely for contracts between organisations and suppliers where Higher/Further education institutions assess/test innovative goods and services.
This DPS agreement is live until December 2027. Please note: other contracts may be more suitable for your work.
Please note before selecting any procurement procedure:
Please note that other procurement procedures can be used for innovation. Examples are direct awards, the light touch regime and Voluntary Ex-Ante Transparency Notices (also known as VEAT). However these other processes can be used only where appropriate conditions apply and where regulations permit.
Identifying a potential innovative product or service does not automatically provide a route to market. You will need to choose the best procurement route to follow to achieve your objective.
Before proceeding you are asked to read the guidance on the Procurement Journey with regards to:
Approval of your innovation project will be subject to your local governance procedures.
It should be clear at the point of initial funding and from the commencement of every project:
When using procurement processes, the approach taken must adhere to the principles of transparency, equal treatment and non-discrimination, proportionality and mutual recognition.
Irrespective of the procurement procedure you chose, for innovation to be successful it will normally need to satisfy three essential criteria:
If innovation projects do not contain data or information on these three criteria then implementing the innovation becomes more risky and expensive with an increased risk of failure.
Providing evidence of these criteria can be extremely challenging particularly in complex organisations.
Your innovation project may involve moving through stages e.g. from fundamental research through to solution design, prototyping, testing and ultimately commercialisation.
The overall aim is to commercialise the product or service i.e. bring a successful product or service to market that is commercially viable.
Please be aware that, as a result, it may be necessary to undertake more than one procurement exercise e.g. a procurement to undertake research and/or development and then a later procurement exercise to buy the product/service.
The above diagram shows that there are two alternative approaches to innovation once the Discovery and Definition Phase of Innovation has been completed.
Option one is a Pre-Commercial Procurement (PCP). This allows you to contract for R&D services, engage with suppliers and identify the best option(s) that the market can deliver to meet your needs. Then if you decided that the products or services developed through the PCP meets your needs, and is viable, you will need to conduct a further procurement exercise to purchase commercial volumes of the good or service.
Option two uses a regulated procurement procedure to cover the route to market (sometimes referred to as Public Procurement of Innovation (PPI)). This route to market can include research and/or development activity.
For more information on routes to market for innovation please refer to Innovation: Selecting a Procurement Process