In response to (a), five RFPs have been issued since 2001. Prior to 2001, all health and safety training delivered by Marine Atlantic Inc. was delivered in house.
In response to (b):
2001 – RFP = 1 – Number of Responses = An undetermined number of replies were received (the file had been removed to off-site storage);
2002 – RFP = 1 – Number of Responses = 6;
2003 – RFP = Nil – Number of Responses = Nil;
2004 – RFP = 2 – Number of Responses = NFP No. 1-16, RPF No. 2-7;
2005 – RFP = 1 – Number of Responses = 14.
In response to (c), four companies received contracts.
In response to (d), one company received two contracts.
In response to (e), the client department and/or the training department reviews the requirements for training. This may involve marine regulatory requirements, government regulations arising from legislation, requirements arising from the collective agreements, for the purposes of due diligence relative to employee awareness of various elements of their positions, or for the purpose of enabling employees to carry out their assigned functions in a safe and orderly manner so as to ensure the safety of both the employees and customers of Marine Atlantic Inc.
In response to (f), the individual or group reviewing the responses checks the response against the requirements as set out in the RFP. The responses are rated against the RFP requirements and each other to determine: which satisfy the basic criteria as set out in the RFP; which company has the better experience with similar projects, number of personnel with necessary qualifications to carry out the requirements of the project, good references, financial stability, reasonable cost, and so on. Other factors may be included in the review depending on the nature of the particular project under consideration.
In response to (g), the normal technical review panel consists of a minimum of two individuals. Specific projects may employ a larger number of individuals, depending on the nature and scope of the technical review. A department head or director then vets recommendations prior to final award.
In response to (h), of the five contracts awarded, none of the companies receiving the contracts are known to be owned outside Canada.