The Contract Award Notice shall include, at a minimum, the following information as relevant and applicable for each selection method:

1. Name and address of the borrower's Project Implementing Unit undertaking the procurement, and if different, the borrower's contracting agency;
2. Name and reference number of the contract being awarded, and the selection method used;
3. Names of all bidders, proposers, or consultants that submitted bids/proposals, and their bid/proposal prices as read out at bid/proposal opening, and as evaluated;
4. Names of all bidders, proposers, or consultants whose bids/proposals were rejected either as nonresponsive or as not meeting qualification criteria, or were not evaluated, with the reasons therefor; and
5. The name of the successful bidder, proposer, or consultant; the final total contract price; the contract duration; and a summary of its scope.

If the bid/proposal that results in the lowest evaluated cost/best evaluated proposal is, in the borrower's opinion, seriously unbalanced or front-loaded, the borrower may require the bidder to provide written clarifications, including detailed price analyses to demonstrate the consistency of the prices with the scope of works, proposed methodology, and schedule. After evaluating the detailed price analyses (for contracts subject to prior review, with the Bank's non-objection), the borrower may as appropriate:

1. Accept the bid/proposal;
2. Require that the total amount of the performance security be increased, at the expense of the bidder/proposer, to a level not exceeding 20% of the contract price; or
3. Reject the bid/proposal.

An abnormally low bid/proposal is one in which the bid/proposal price, in combination with other elements of the bid/proposal, appears so low that it raises material concerns with the borrower as to the capability of the bidder/proposer to perform the contract for the offered price.

Where the borrower identifies a potentially abnormally low bid/proposal, the borrower shall seek written clarifications from the bidder/proposer, including detailed price analyses of its bid/proposal price in relation to the subject matter of the contract, scope, proposed methodology, schedule, allocation of risks and responsibilities, and any other requirements of the request for bids/request for proposals document.

If, after evaluating the price analyses, the borrower determines that the bidder/proposer has failed to demonstrate its capability to deliver the contract for the offered price, the borrower shall reject the bid/proposal.

The use of Alternative Procurement Arrangements (APAs) was approved by the Board of the World Bank in July 2015 as part of the New Procurement Framework.

An assessment methodology has been developed and is being tested to assess the legal and regulatory framework, and the capacity and capability of a borrower implementing agency. It uses as its base the OECD Methodology for Assessing Procurement Systems (MAPS). The assessment methodology has been designed to include an additional pillar, covering procurement operations and the use of minimum standards. It also uses an evidence based approach, analyzing procurement data and, gathering the views of the private sector and civil society organizations.

The principles governing APAs consider whether agency procurement arrangements, including procurement performance and governance, provide assurance that the Bank's financing will be used for the intended purpose(s), and in accordance with the Bank's Core Procurement Principles:

• Value for money
• Economy
• Efficiency
• Integrity
• Fit for purpose
• Transparency
• Fairness