SPEaR Good Practice Guidelines 2008: Research and evaluation contracting
Applying the Principle of Integrity to research and evaluation contracting
To ensure the integrity of their work with Contractors officials should:
- Consider using a range of EOI/RFP notification methods, including agency formal requirements when using a competitive tender process
- For contracts over $100,000 see the Ministry of Economic Development's Mandatory Rules for Procurement by Departments.
- For contracts under $100,000 see Government Procurement in New Zealand: Policy Guide for Purchasers (August 2007, Ministry of Economic Development) and Guidelines for Contracting with Non-Governmental Organisations for Services Sought by the Crown (December 2003, The Treasury).
- Websites such as NZGETS and SPEaR together with targeted mail to known contractors, both private and tertiary based and niche advertising through appropriate professional associations should be considered. Be aware that some agencies have procedures whereby if NZGETS is used; other advertising may be restricted to an e-mail that XYZ is on the NZGETS site.
- Where the proposed work is very specialized and the potential contracting field is known to be limited, 'collaborative processes' and 'preferred provider' approaches can be appropriate. Fairness and transparency are legal requirements and need to be particularly evident in these situations. Comprehensive documentation should be kept.
The Social Research Association's Commissioning Social Research, A Good Practice Guide contains a useful checklist.
Officials also need to be mindful of the relevant requirements of the Official Information Act 1982 and the Privacy Act 1993.
- The process to be followed should be clarified prior to engaging with potential contractors and should include how to deal with any conflicts of interest .
Agencies such as the Health Research Council and the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology have well developed 'conflict of interest' processes including 'direct conflict' and 'indirect conflict'.
- Be aware that your agency may well have set financial delegation levels and criteria that specify expected processes. There are likely to be specified restrictions around any exemptions and substantial application procedures for obtaining exemptions. applications. Check these and align processes and sign-outs prior to engaging with potential contractors.
- Where process alterations are considered appropriate, the imposts on potential contractors should be considered in terms of time and costs. Compensation for such costs (e.g. travel and time to attend a forum/seminar) due to agency actions, should be considered. Alterations to a previously signalled process do carry legal risk. Any proposed changes need to be able to be justified and should be well documented. Obtaining prior legal advice would be wise.
- The EOI/RFP should ask potential contractors to identify their professional Code/s of Ethics in their submission. Officials involved with the project should sight the Code/s to ascertain that its coverage and content is adequate and appropriate to the project.
The Code of Ethics for a professional association should be on their website.
- Prepare for contracting negotiations by assessing your agency standard contract template (where there is one) for clauses where variation could be required and locate appropriate clause variations which have been previously approved.
- Ensure the budget for the project is adequate for undertaking the contract.
The Budget for a research or evaluation project will almost never be sufficient to cover all stages and tasks to an 'ideal' level and 'trade-offs' are usual when scooping a project. Part of the 'skill' applied by experienced researchers and evaluators lies in making 'trade-offs' that do not compromise the project to the point where utility is seriously undermined. Seek advice at the scooping stage particularly and at any other stages where such 'trade-off's' are involved. An experienced 'potential contractor' will also have viewpoints on 'trade-offs'.
- Ensure that project milestones and reporting requirements are aligned with progress payments.
- Ensure that contracting documentation is sufficiently robust to endure for the term of the contract and through personnel changes among officials. Where additional work is sought or circumstances change significantly, contract variations should be negotiated, agreed and adequately resourced.
A major reason warranting a formal contract variation might be something like a major policy change affecting the population group/services involved in a Process or Formative evaluation, where significant fieldwork additions are needed and costs covered.
A major natural disaster in an area could impact on fieldwork timing in that area to the point where a contract extension, or a contract variation to begin again in another area, or a contract termination, is required.
