Business process mapping consultant for south african national parks

{"closingDate":"01 July 2026","closingTime":"11:00 am","briefingSession":"{\"date\":null,\"time\":null,\"venue\":null,\"is_compulsory\":false}"}

{"name":"Mr Adolf Manaso Tel","email":"[email protected]","phone":"012 426 5225","department":"Supply Chain Management","address":null}

Returnable Documents: Invitation to Bid (SBD 1) must be fully completed and signed. (Refer to Annexure A), Submission of fully completed Pricing Schedule [SBD 3.3], Submission of fully completed SBD 4 (Bidder’s disclosure). (Refer to Annexure B), Submission of fully completed SBD 6.1 (Preference Claim (Refer to Annexure C), CENTRAL SUPPLIER DATABASE – MANDATORY COMPLIANCE, Bidders are required to be registered on the Central Supplier Database (CSD) of National, Treasury. Failure to submit the requested information will lead to disqualification. (Please, provide proof of registration on the Central Supplier Database in a form of CSD report.)

Functionality criteria maximum to be awarded

FUNCTIONALITY Weight Points Points

Criteria 1: strategic approach & methodology

What we will measure: Poor (10 points): Proposal

The bidder’s understanding of shows no or minimal reference

SANParks’ mandate, strategic to SANParks’ mandate, Vision

context, and operational complexity. 2040, or operational

The quality, innovation, and environment.

practicality of the proposed

• BPM/BPR methodology

approach to business process described in generic terms only

mapping and re-engineering, (e.g., standard textbook

including alignment to Vision 2040 description, not adapted to

and ERP readiness. SANParks).

• No reference to ERP alignment

What will be evaluated: or system readiness.

• The understanding of
• Implementation

SANParks’ context 35 approach/timeline absent or

(conservation, governance, unrealistic (e.g., no deliverables,

and public-sector milestones, or resource plan).

environment).

• The robustness and Fair (20 points):

adaptability of the proposed

methodology (e.g., BPMN Proposal includes basic

2.0, Lean Six Sigma etc.). contextual understanding,

• The integration of innovation referencing SANParks’ role or

and best practices. functions in general terms but

• The clarity, feasibility, and lacking insight into its

sequencing of the complexity or dual mandate

implementation roadmap. (conservation vs commercial).

• BPM/BPR methodology is

Functionality criteria maximum to be awarded

FUNCTIONALITY Weight Points Points

In order to perform the evaluation, standard but lacks SANParksthe bidder must submit: specific adaptation or innovation.

• Detailed methodology and
• Implementation roadmap

implementation plan provided but contains major

(maximum 20 pages) gaps in sequencing,

• Implementation roadmap deliverables, or roles.

with milestones and

• Mentions Vision 2040 or ERP,

timelines. but linkages are weak or

• Case studies demonstrating unsubstantiated.

innovation and results. Good (30 points):

• Proposal demonstrates clear

understanding of SANParks’

strategic goals, dual mandate,

and operational structure through

specific references to documents

or initiatives (e.g., Vision 2040,

Strategic Plan, ERP readiness).

• Methodology includes

customized elements (e.g.,

stakeholder engagement tailored

to park operations, digital

enablement aspects).

• Implementation roadmap is

structured and time-bound,

with defined phases and

responsible parties.

• ERP alignment and process

readiness are explicitly

addressed with supporting

rationale.

Excellent (35 points):

Proposal demonstrates

comprehensive and detailed

understanding of SANParks’

environment, with evidence of

prior research or benchmarking

against conservation entities.

• Methodology is innovative,

evidence-based, and tailored to

SANParks’ unique operational

model, showing proven results in

similar organizations.

• Implementation roadmap

includes clearly defined

deliverables, milestones,

Functionality criteria maximum to be awarded

FUNCTIONALITY Weight Points Points

dependencies, and quick wins.

• Strong, verifiable alignment

to Vision 2040, strategic plan,

and ERP readiness roadmap.

• Includes documented risk

mitigation strategies and

measurable success indicators

(e.g., KPIs for process efficiency,

readiness scores).

Criteria 2: change management & stakeholder engagement

What we will measure: Poor (10 points): No clear

The bidder’s ability to manage change management strategy;

organisational change, build Generic stakeholder approach;

stakeholder commitment, and Basic or no training plan; No

sustain adoption of new processes adoption measurement

across geographically dispersed approach, No CV of the change

operations. management lead.

Fair (15 points): Basic change

What will be evaluated: management framework; Some

• Structured and proven stakeholder segmentation;

change management Standard training approach;

methodology (Prosci, Limited adoption methodology,

ADKAR, ACMP, etc.). CV of the change management

• Stakeholder segmentation lead.

and engagement plan. Good (20 points): Structured

• Training and capacity- change management approach;

building approach. 25 Clear stakeholder mapping and

• Change adoption metrics engagement plan;

and sustainability plan. Comprehensive training strategy;

Defined adoption metrics;

In order to perform the evaluation, Addresses geographic

the bidder must submit: distribution challenges, CV of the

• Change management change management lead.

framework or plan template. Excellent (25 points): Proven

• Sample stakeholder matrix change management

from previous projects. methodology (Prosci, ADKAR,

• Example training materials or etc.); Detailed stakeholder

capacity-building plan. analysis with tailored

• Adoption success metrics or approaches; Multi-modal training

evidence of impact. for different user groups; Clear

• CV and certification ((Prosci, adoption metrics and

ADKAR, ACMP) of the sustainment plan; Specific

change management lead. strategies for remote locations;

Functionality criteria maximum to be awarded

FUNCTIONALITY Weight Points Points

Addresses resistance

management; Post-

implementation support included,

CV of the change management

lead.

Criteria 3: technical capability & delivery in complex environments

What we will measure: Poor (5 points): Small scale

The bidder’s demonstrated technical projects only (under 50

competence and experience in processes); No measurable

delivering large-scale, complex results provided; No additional

business process mapping and re- value offerings; Single

engineering initiatives in public- department/division experience

sector contexts. only, No CVs of the 3 technical

team members.

What will be evaluated: Fair (15 points): Medium-scale

projects (50-150 processes);

• The scale and complexity of Some results but not quantified;

previous projects. Minimal value-adds; Limited

• Demonstrated measurable cross-functional experience, CVs

outcomes (efficiency gains, of the 3 technical team members.

cost savings, optimisation). Good (25 points): Large-scale

• ERP readiness or pre-ERP projects (150-300 processes);

project experience. Clear, measurable results

• Strength and certification of 30 achieved; Good value-added

the proposed technical team. offerings; multi-departmental

• Value-added services or integration experience; Some

digital enablers provided. public entity transformation

experience, CVs of the 3

In order to perform the evaluation, technical team members.

the bidder must submit: Excellent (30 points):

• Project portfolio indicating Enterprise-wide transformations

project scale and client type. (300+ processes); Exceptional

• Reference letters or quantified results (efficiency

completion certificates gains, cost savings); Significant

confirming ERP/system value-adds (automation

readiness experience. recommendations, digital tools);

• Benefits realisation or Complex stakeholder

performance reports. environments mastered; Multiple

• CVs of 3 technical team successful public entity

members with BPM/Lean Six transformations; Process

Sigma/ERP certifications. optimisation metrics provided,

Functionality criteria maximum to be awarded

FUNCTIONALITY Weight Points Points

• Value-add service catalogue CVs of the 3 technical team

(automation, analytics, members.

knowledge transfer).

Relevant project track record: Poor (3 points): 3 reference

The bidder must have successfully letters submitted.

completed at least three (3)

business process mapping or re- Fair (5 points): 4 reference

engineering projects for public letters submitted.

entities within the past five (5) years.

For purposes of this criterion, a Good (8 points): 5 reference

“relevant project” means an end-to- letters submitted.

end business process mapping

and/or re-engineering assignment of Excellent (10 points): 6 or more

similar scope and complexity to this reference letters submitted.

Terms of Reference.

In order to perform the evaluation,

the bidder must submit: 10

The bidder must submit signed

reference letters, each issued by a

public-entity client on that client’s

official letterhead, for projects

completed within the past five (5)

years. Each reference letter must

confirm at least the following:

· name of the public entity client,

· project title and brief description of

the assignment; and

· that the assignment involved

business process mapping and/or

business process re-engineering.

Total points 100

Reasons for disqualification

SANParks reserves the right to disqualify any bidders who do not comply with one or

more of the following bid requirements, and disqualification may take place without prior

notice to the bidder:

• Bidder whose tax matters are not in order (Instruction Note /2018 Tax

Compliance Status will apply);

• submitted incomplete information and documentation according to the

requirements of this RFB document.

• submitted information that is fraudulent, factually untrue or inaccurate.
• received information not available to other potential bidders through fraudulent

means.

• failed to comply with [technical/mandatory or both requirements] as stipulated

in the RFB document.

• misrepresented or altered material information in whatever way or manner.
• promised, offered or made gifts, benefits to any SANParks employee.
• canvassed, lobbied in order to gain unfair advantage.
• committed fraudulent acts; and
• acted dishonestly and/or in bad faith etc.

Terms of reference – appointment of specialist consultant to

Perform business process mapping (including roll-out and

Socialisation) to increase efficiency and ensure alignment with

Organizational goals.

1. Introduction to sanparks

SANParks was initially established in terms of the now-repealed National Parks Act, and continues to exist in terms of the National Environmental Management:

Protected Areas Act, , with the mandate to conserve, protect, control, and

manage national parks and other defined protected areas and their biological diversity

(Biodiversity). As a public entity, SANParks is also governed by the Public Finance

Management Act, Act (as amended by Act ), and it is listed as

Schedule 3Apublic entity.

Our vision is to have a world-class system of sustainable National Parks reconnecting

and inspiring society.

Our mandate is to conserve, manage and expand South Africa’s national parks,

protecting biodiversity and cultural heritage while enabling responsible nature-based

tourism and public benefit..

Our mission is to develop, expand, manage and promote a system of sustainable national

parks that represent biodiversity and heritage assets, through innovation and best

practice for the just and equitable benefit of current and future generations.

The Parks under the management of SANParks are divided into 6 regions:

Regional

Region Parks managed

Office

Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park, Augrabies Falls, Ai-

Arid Region Upington

Ais/Richtersveld, Namaqua, Mokala National Parks

Table Mountain, Agulhas, West Coast, Tankwa Karoo,

Cape Region Cape Town

Bontebok National Parks

Garden Route National Park (comprising Tsitsikamma,

Garden Route Knysna

Knysna Forests, Wilderness, Knysna Estuary)

Addo Elephant, Camdeboo, Mountain Zebra, Karoo

Frontier Region Port Elizabeth

National Parks

Pretoria, Head Golden Gate Highlands, Marakele, Mapungubwe National

Northern Region

Office Parks

Kruger National Park Skukuza Kruger National Park’s numerous camps

Administrative Groenkloof (Head Office)

SANParks oversees the management of the parks and provides strategic guidance and

support from its Head Office in Pretoria.

2. Governance and business unit responsible for the bid

The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is spearheading a strategic project to improve

SANParks’ business and financial management processes and systems and will serve

as the Project Sponsor for this initiative, providing overall direction and strategic oversight

on behalf of the SANParks EXCO and Board. As sponsor, the CEO will ensure that the

initiative aligns with SANParks’ transformation agenda, strengthens governance and

compliance, and supports long-term organisational sustainability.

The project is being executed collaboratively between the Chief Operating Officer (COO),

the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), and the Head: Human Capital Management (HCM).

Each plays a distinct yet interdependent role to ensure an integrated approach. The COO

leads the operational, strategic, and ICT dimensions; the CFO oversees financial

governance, budgeting, procurement, and contract management, and the Head: HCM

provides leadership on human capital processes and organisational change, ensuring

that workforce planning, accountability structures, and capacity-building elements are

embedded in the redesign. A Project Steering Committee (PSC) will oversee and direct

the execution of the project, which will also ensure sound cross-divisional alignment,

collaboration, and consistent implementation across all divisions.

Project management will be located in the Office of the COO. The COO Office will

coordinate the day-to-day delivery of the initiative, manage project resources, oversee

stakeholder engagement, and ensure adherence to timelines and milestones.

Reporting and oversight will be done through SANParks’ existing governance

mechanisms, including EXCO and formal approval to the Board.

3. Context of this procurement

3.1 Institutional Background

South African National Parks (SANParks) is a Schedule 3A public entity reporting to the

Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE). It operates within a

comprehensive statutory framework that includes the Public Finance Management Act

(PFMA), the associated Treasury Regulations, the National Environmental Management:

Protected Areas Act (NEMPAA), and other applicable governance instruments. As a

public entity, SANParks is required to uphold the highest standards of financial

management, accountability, and service delivery while advancing its core conservation

and tourism mandate.

This procurement forms part of SANParks’ broader transformation agenda and is directly

linked to the organisation’s long-term vision, Vision 2040. Vision 2040 positions

SANParks as an agile, caring, and responsive organisation that delivers sustainable

conservation outcomes and inclusive socio-economic benefits. The current initiative

supports this objective by addressing structural, process, and compliance challenges that

constrain organisational performance, ensuring that SANParks’ operating model evolves

in line with its strategic direction and stakeholder expectations.

3.2 Purpose of the Assignment

The purpose of this assignment is to strengthen SANParks’ business and financial

management capabilities through an organisation-wide process re-engineering exercise.

The project seeks to ensure that end-to-end enterprise-wide business planning,

budgeting, execution, monitoring, and reporting processes are integrated, efficient,

and compliant with all relevant legislative and governance requirements.

A critical outcome of this work is to lay the foundation for a future Enterprise Resource

Planning (ERP) system by standardising business processes, clarifying accountabilities,

and ensuring seamless information flows across functional areas. The initiative aims to

enhance operational efficiency, improve decision-making, and strengthen organisational

accountability and governance. It also seeks to deliver tangible short-term improvements

while positioning SANParks for sustained transformation and digital readiness.

3.3 Project Phasing Overview

To ensure depth, focus, and manageable implementation, the project will be executed in

two sequential but interconnected phases.

Phase 1 - Core Functional Re-engineering (HCM, SCM and Finance):

This phase will address the organisation’s most critical and high-risk business areas,

focusing on Human Capital Management, Supply Chain Management, and Finance. It

will diagnose performance and compliance challenges, streamline processes, and deliver

immediate improvements that establish the foundation for broader organisational reform.

Phase 2 - Enterprise-wide Re-engineering (Remaining Divisions):

The second phase will extend the re-engineering framework across all other divisions,

ensuring consistent standards, cross-functional alignment, and full enterprise integration.

Lessons from Phase 1 will inform the design of a coherent, agile, caring, and responsive

operating model aligned with SANParks’ Vision 2040.

4.1 PHASE 1: Core Functional Re-Engineering (HCM, SCM and Finance)

4.1.1 Current-State (“As-Is”) Assessment

The service provider must:

• Map and document all HCM, SCM, and Finance processes using BPMN 2.0 or an

equivalent standard.

• Conduct an organisation-wide assessment of any available and existing Business

Process Maps (BPMs) and review existing and develop Standard Operating

Procedures (SOPs) where necessary.

• Identify inefficiencies, overlaps, bottlenecks, accountability gaps, and control

weaknesses across mapped processes.

• Identify misalignments between strategic and operational planning instruments and

related processes that enable the organisation to achieve its deliverables.

• Review compliance with the PFMA, Treasury Regulations, and internal frameworks.
• Assess technology utilisation, data-management practices, and overall digital

readiness.

• Map system-enabled (digitalised) processes to understand how existing applications

support or constrain workflow efficiency. This review must be conducted from a user-

perspective and will not extend to system design or architecture. Where systems are

found to be obsolete or a constraint, such limitations must be reflected in the process

analysis and addressed through re-engineered business processes rather than

through technical system redesign.

• Analyse interdependencies between core and support processes to determine

integration requirements and ensure operational execution is cohesive across

SANParks’ functional areas.

.

4.1.2 Diagnostic Review and Gap Analysis

The service provider must:

• Analyse accountability structures, decision pathways, and delegation

frameworks.

• Assess performance constraints and workflow inefficiencies.

• Identify misalignments between strategic planning, budgeting, and operational

execution.

• Conduct a root-cause analysis of compliance and performance risks.

• Develop a diagnostic report with gap-closure recommendations and prioritised

quick-win actions.

4.1.3 Re-Engineering (“To-Be”) Design

The service provider must:

• Design optimised, standardised, and integrated processes for HCM, SCM, and

Finance.

• Define clear roles, responsibilities, and decision pathways supported by

RACI/RASCI matrices.

• Incorporate ERP-readiness and data-integration requirements into redesigned

processes.

• Propose both short-term process improvements and long-term structural

reforms.

• Ensure that redesigned processes address accountability, performance, and

control requirements.

4.1.4 Validation and Change Enablement

The service provider must:

• Conduct validation workshops with divisional teams and selected park clusters

to confirm the accuracy and practicality of redesigned processes.

• Develop targeted change-management and communication plans to support

adoption and build institutional ownership.

• Produce user-friendly materials (e.g., process maps, wall charts, visual aids) for

reference and training.

• Establish feedback mechanisms to capture lessons learned for use in Phase 2.

4.2 PHASE 2: Enterprise-Wide Re-Engineering (Remaining Divisions)

Phase 2 will extend the re-engineering process to all remaining SANParks divisions to

ensure enterprise-wide alignment, integration, and performance improvement. It will build

on the foundations established in Phase 1 to achieve full organisational coherence and

operational optimisation.

4.2.1 Current-State (“As-Is”) Expansion

• Extend the diagnostic review to all remaining divisions and functions, i.e. the

whole enterprise, including Conservation, Tourism and Socio-Economic

Transformation, KNP and the Parks Division.

• Map and document cross-functional processes, interfaces, and

interdependencies with HCM, SCM, and Finance, amongst others.

• Map system-enabled (digitalised) processes to understand how existing

applications support or constrain workflow efficiency

• Identify inefficiencies, overlaps, and integration barriers affecting enterprise

performance.

• Assess operational practices across head office, regional, and park levels to

capture actual workflows.

4.2.2 Organisational and Governance Review

• Evaluate organisational structure, policy frameworks, and governance

arrangements.

• Assess the effectiveness of decision-making structures, reporting lines, and

coordination mechanisms.

• Identify opportunities for simplification, alignment, and policy harmonisation.
• Recommend governance and structural adjustments to strengthen

accountability and responsiveness.

4.2.3 Future-State (“To-Be”) Design

• Develop an integrated, organisation-wide operating model that aligns all

divisions with SANParks’ strategic intent and governance framework.

• Align divisional and functional processes with enterprise strategy and the ERP

roadmap.

• Define governance and accountability structures to support the re-engineered

operating model.

• Ensure standardisation and interoperability of processes to enable digital

transformation and service delivery efficiency.

4.2.4 Change Management and Capacity Building

• Expand engagement to all divisions, regional offices, and park operations.
• Deliver targeted training and knowledge-transfer programmes to support

adoption and sustainability.

• Develop user-friendly process documentation, visual materials, and reference

guides.

• Embed institutional capability to maintain and continuously improve the new

operating model.

5. Methodology and documentation standards

The service provider must apply a structured and technically sound methodology to the

mapping, analysis, and re-engineering of SANParks’ business processes. The approach

must conform to recognised business process management (BPM) standards to ensure

that all process artefacts are consistent, comparable, and ERP-ready.

• Use Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) 2.0 (or equivalent standard)

to model all processes at appropriate levels of granularity, including end-to-end,

cross-functional, and sub-process views.

• Ensure each process map clearly defines process boundaries, triggers, inputs,

outputs, roles, systems, decision points, and control activities.

• Document process dependencies, data flows, and integration points between

divisions, ensuring full visibility of linkages across SANParks’ operating model.

• Apply RACI/RASCI frameworks to all mapped processes to clarify role

accountability, decision authority, and segregation of duties.

• Embed compliance and control checkpoints directly within process maps,

referencing PFMA, Treasury Regulations, internal policies, and other statutory

requirements.

• Include risk identification and mitigation measures within each process,

specifying where risks may arise and how they are managed or controlled.

• Establish a version-controlled process repository to store, manage, and track all

process artefacts, ensuring change traceability and institutional continuity.

• Develop process maturity assessments and capability ratings to inform

prioritisation of re-engineering interventions and continuous improvement

efforts.

• Ensure all documentation and process artefacts are delivered in editable,

interoperable formats (e.g., Visio, ARIS, Bizagi, Excel, or equivalent) that allow

future modification and integration with the ERP design environment.

6. Deliverables

The service provider must produce the following deliverables across both project phases.

All outputs must be delivered in editable, version-controlled formats (e.g. MS Word,

Excel, Visio or equivalent) and must be formally validated and signed off by SANParks

before progression to subsequent stages.

6.1 Project Inception

• Inception Report and Project Charter: confirmation of scope,

methodology, governance and reporting arrangements, project-

management approach, stakeholder-engagement and change-

management plan, risk register, and detailed implementation schedule.

6.2 “As-Is” Baseline Business Process Maps

• Current-State (“As-Is”) Assessment: Phase 1- comprehensive

mapping of HCM, SCM and Finance processes using BPMN 2.0,

documenting process boundaries, interfaces, data flows, controls, and

dependencies.

• Current-State (“As-Is”) Expansion: Phase 2 - extension of the baseline

assessment to all remaining divisions, capturing cross-functional linkages

and enterprise interdependencies.

6.3 Diagnostic and Analysis Deliverables

These deliverables form the analytical bridge between the “As-Is” baseline and the re-

engineered (“To-Be”) state, identifying performance gaps, compliance risks, and

improvement opportunities.

Phase 1: HCM, SCM and Finance

• Process Diagnostic and Root-Cause Analysis: evaluation of the three core

functions to identify bottlenecks, duplications, control weaknesses, non-

compliance, and systemic causes of inefficiency, validated through field

consultation.

• Gap Analysis and Improvement Opportunities: structured comparison of

current performance against best practice, legislative requirements, and

SANParks’ strategic objectives, highlighting reform priorities.

• Strategic Alignment and Governance Review: assessment of alignment

between operational processes and Vision 2040, the 5-Year Strategic Plan, and

Annual Performance Plan, identifying misalignments between strategy,

budgeting, and execution.

• Preliminary Recommendations and Quick-Win Opportunities: prioritised set

of short-term interventions to address critical issues ahead of full re-engineering.

Phase 2: Remaining Divisions

• Process Diagnostic and Root-Cause Analysis: application of the same

analytical framework across all other divisions, identifying performance

constraints, inefficiencies, and control weaknesses.

• Gap Analysis and Improvement Opportunities: assessment of divisional and

cross-functional processes to identify overlaps, handoff failures, and integration

challenges with Phase 1 functions.

• Strategic Alignment and Governance Review: evaluation of decision-making

effectiveness, policy coherence, and compliance with PFMA, Treasury

Regulations and internal directives.

• Consolidated Diagnostic Report: enterprise-wide synthesis of Phase 1 and

Phase 2 findings forming the analytical foundation for re-engineering.

• Alignment Report (Combined Phases): integrated analysis linking business

processes, governance mechanisms, and compliance frameworks, showing

how diagnostic insights inform the future operating model.

6.4 Re-engineering (“To-Be”) Design Deliverables

These define the redesigned operating models for both phases and ensure ERP-

readiness, governance alignment, and practical implementability.

Phase 1: HCM, SCM and Finance

• Re-engineered Core Business Model: optimised, standardised processes for

the three core functions; defined roles, responsibilities, control points, and

integration requirements.

• ERP-Readiness and Data-Flow Documentation: detailed mapping of system

touchpoints, interfaces, and integration dependencies.

• Quick-Win Implementation Plan: short-term, high-impact reforms with

assigned ownership, sequencing, and resource implications.

Phase 2: Remaining Divisions

• Re-engineered Enterprise-Wide Operating Model: extension of re-

engineering to all other divisions; integration of divisional processes with Phase

1 outputs to create a single enterprise framework.

• Governance and Accountability Framework: consolidated structure defining

decision pathways, delegation boundaries, and control responsibilities.

• Strategic and ERP Alignment Matrix: mapping of redesigned processes to

SANParks’ strategic intent and ERP architecture.

Combined Phases

• Implementation Roadmap: phased reform plan setting out sequencing,

dependencies, ERP linkages, resource requirements, and milestones for full

organisational roll-out.

6.5 Change Management and Validation Deliverables

• Stakeholder Engagement and Change-Management Plan: structured

engagement framework covering consultation milestones, communication

methods, and adoption metrics.

• Training and Capacity-Building Resources: user manuals, facilitator guides,

and materials supporting skills transfer and institutional ownership.

• Visual and Communication Tools: wall maps, posters, and process toolkits

illustrating redesigned workflows for internal dissemination.

6.6 Reporting and Sign-off Reports

• Progress and Governance Reports
• Board / EXCO Briefing Packs
• Validation and Sign-off Packages.

Timeframe and budget

The contract period will commence on the date that both parties sign the contract and will

remain in force for a duration of twenty-four (24) months. The assignment represents a

comprehensive, organisation-wide initiative that will require sustained engagement,

substantial resourcing, and phased delivery over the contract period.

Service providers are expected to plan and cost accordingly, taking into account the scale

and complexity of the work, the multi-divisional scope, and the level of consultation

required across SANParks’ operations.

The pricing proposal must clearly reflect the total cost of the project, broken down by

phase, deliverable, and milestone. Costing must be transparent and aligned with the

phased implementation framework, enabling SANParks to assess value relative to

outputs.

In line with SANParks’ SCM policies and public-sector financial regulations, payments

will be made strictly based on approved deliverables and formal validation by the PSC.

No advance or interim payments will be considered outside of the agreed deliverable-

based milestones.

DETAILED PRICING 3.3 (Professional Services)

Bidders are required to provide a detailed and comprehensive price proposal i.e., all

costs associated the bidder’s proposal must be clearly specified and included in the

Total Bid Price.

Price quoted is fully inclusive of all costs, including disbursements and other

overheads, delivery to the specified SANParks Business Unit geographical address

and includes value- added tax, income tax, unemployment insurance fund

contributions, and skills development levies.

Price changes, whether as a result of CPI, PPI, extensions or expansions will be

allowed in terms of the signed contract by both parties.

TOTAL BID PRICE FOR A PERIOD OF 24 MONTHS (VAT Inclusive):

R...................................

Annexure B-SBD 4

Bidder’s disclosure

1. Purpose of the form

Any person (natural or juristic) may make an offer or offers in terms of this invitation to

bid. In line with the principles of transparency, accountability, impartiality, and ethics as

enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and further expressed in

various pieces of legislation, it is required for the bidder to make this declaration in respect

of the details required hereunder.

Where a person/s are listed in the Register for Tender Defaulters and / or the List of

Restricted Suppliers, that person will automatically be disqualified from the bid process.

2. Bidder’s declaration

2.1 Is the bidder, or any of its directors / trustees / shareholders / members / partners

or any person having a controlling interest1 in the enterprise,

employed by the state? YES/NO

2.1.1 If so, furnish particulars of the names, individual identity numbers, and, if

applicable, state employee numbers of sole proprietor/ directors / trustees / shareholders

/ members/ partners or any person having a controlling interest in the enterprise, in table

below.

Full Name Identity Number Name of State

institution

1 the power, by one person or a group of persons holding the majority

of the equity of an enterprise, alternatively, the person/s having the

deciding vote or power to influence or to direct the course and

decisions of the enterprise.

2.2 Do you, or any person connected with the bidder, have a relationship with any

person who is employed by the procuring institution? YES / NO

2.2.1 If so, furnish particulars:

.........................................................................................................

...........................................................................................................

2.3 Does the bidder or any of its directors / trustees / shareholders / members /

partners or any person having a controlling interest in the enterprise have any

interest in any other related enterprise whether or not they are bidding for this

contract? YES/NO

2.3.1 If so, furnish particulars:

...........................................................................................................

...........................................................................................................

in this RFB document, please refer queries, in writing, to the contact person(s) listed above in

SBD 1 or above. Under no circumstances may any other employee within SANParks be

approached for any information. SANParks reserves the right to place responses to such

queries on the website.

Criteria 1: strategic approach & methodology

What we will measure: Poor (10 points): Proposal

The bidder’s understanding of shows no or minimal reference

SANParks’ mandate, strategic to SANParks’ mandate, Vision

context, and operational complexity. 2040, or operational

practicality of the proposed

• BPM/BPR methodology

approach to business process described in generic terms only

mapping and re-engineering, (e.g., standard textbook

including alignment to Vision 2040 description, not adapted to

and ERP readiness. SANParks).

• No reference to ERP alignment

What will be evaluated: or system readiness.

• The understanding of
• Implementation

SANParks’ context 35 approach/timeline absent or

(conservation, governance, unrealistic (e.g., no deliverables,

and public-sector milestones, or resource plan).

environment).

• The robustness and Fair (20 points):

adaptability of the proposed

methodology (e.g., BPMN Proposal includes basic

2.0, Lean Six Sigma etc.). contextual understanding,

• The integration of innovation referencing SANParks’ role or

and best practices. functions in general terms but

• The clarity, feasibility, and lacking insight into its

sequencing of the complexity or dual mandate

implementation roadmap. (conservation vs commercial).

• BPM/BPR methodology is

In order to perform the evaluation, standard but lacks SANParksthe bidder must submit: specific adaptation or innovation.

• Detailed methodology and
• Implementation roadmap

implementation plan provided but contains major

(maximum 20 pages) gaps in sequencing,

• Implementation roadmap deliverables, or roles.

with milestones and

• Mentions Vision 2040 or ERP,

timelines. but linkages are weak or

• Case studies demonstrating unsubstantiated.

innovation and results. Good (30 points):

• Proposal demonstrates clear

understanding of SANParks’

strategic goals, dual mandate,

and operational structure through

specific references to documents

or initiatives (e.g., Vision 2040,

Strategic Plan, ERP readiness).

• Methodology includes

customized elements (e.g.,

stakeholder engagement tailored

to park operations, digital

enablement aspects).

• Implementation roadmap is

structured and time-bound,

with defined phases and

responsible parties.

• ERP alignment and process

readiness are explicitly

addressed with supporting

rationale.

Excellent (35 points):

comprehensive and detailed

understanding of SANParks’

environment, with evidence of

prior research or benchmarking

against conservation entities.

• Methodology is innovative,

evidence-based, and tailored to

SANParks’ unique operational

model, showing proven results in

similar organizations.

• Implementation roadmap

includes clearly defined

deliverables, milestones,

dependencies, and quick wins.

• Strong, verifiable alignment

to Vision 2040, strategic plan,

and ERP readiness roadmap.

• Includes documented risk

mitigation strategies and

measurable success indicators

(e.g., KPIs for process efficiency,

readiness scores).

Criteria 2: change management & stakeholder engagement

What we will measure: Poor (10 points): No clear

The bidder’s ability to manage change management strategy;

organisational change, build Generic stakeholder approach;

stakeholder commitment, and Basic or no training plan; No

sustain adoption of new processes adoption measurement

across geographically dispersed approach, No CV of the change

operations. management lead.

Fair (15 points): Basic change

What will be evaluated: management framework; Some

• Structured and proven stakeholder segmentation;

change management Standard training approach;

methodology (Prosci, Limited adoption methodology,

ADKAR, ACMP, etc.). CV of the change management

• Stakeholder segmentation lead.

and engagement plan. Good (20 points): Structured

• Training and capacity- change management approach;

building approach. 25 Clear stakeholder mapping and

• Change adoption metrics engagement plan;

and sustainability plan. Comprehensive training strategy;

Defined adoption metrics;

the bidder must submit: distribution challenges, CV of the

• Change management change management lead.

framework or plan template. Excellent (25 points): Proven

• Sample stakeholder matrix change management

from previous projects. methodology (Prosci, ADKAR,

• Example training materials or etc.); Detailed stakeholder

capacity-building plan. analysis with tailored

• Adoption success metrics or approaches; Multi-modal training

evidence of impact. for different user groups; Clear

• CV and certification ((Prosci, adoption metrics and

ADKAR, ACMP) of the sustainment plan; Specific

change management lead. strategies for remote locations;

All outputs must be delivered in editable, version-controlled formats (e.g. MS Word,

Excel, Visio or equivalent) and must be formally validated and signed off by SANParks

before progression to subsequent stages.

6.1 Project Inception

• Inception Report and Project Charter: confirmation of scope,

methodology, governance and reporting arrangements, project-

management approach, stakeholder-engagement and change-

management plan, risk register, and detailed implementation schedule.

6.2 “As-Is” Baseline Business Process Maps

• Current-State (“As-Is”) Assessment: Phase 1- comprehensive

mapping of HCM, SCM and Finance processes using BPMN 2.0,

documenting process boundaries, interfaces, data flows, controls, and

dependencies.

• Current-State (“As-Is”) Expansion: Phase 2 - extension of the baseline

assessment to all remaining divisions, capturing cross-functional linkages

and enterprise interdependencies.

6.3 Diagnostic and Analysis Deliverables

These deliverables form the analytical bridge between the “As-Is” baseline and the re-

engineered (“To-Be”) state, identifying performance gaps, compliance risks, and

improvement opportunities.

Phase 1: HCM, SCM and Finance

• Process Diagnostic and Root-Cause Analysis: evaluation of the three core

functions to identify bottlenecks, duplications, control weaknesses, non-

compliance, and systemic causes of inefficiency, validated through field

consultation.

• Gap Analysis and Improvement Opportunities: structured comparison of

current performance against best practice, legislative requirements, and

SANParks’ strategic objectives, highlighting reform priorities.

• Strategic Alignment and Governance Review: assessment of alignment

between operational processes and Vision 2040, the 5-Year Strategic Plan, and

readiness, governance alignment, and practical implementability.

Phase 1: HCM, SCM and Finance

• Re-engineered Core Business Model: optimised, standardised processes for

the three core functions; defined roles, responsibilities, control points, and

integration requirements.

• ERP-Readiness and Data-Flow Documentation: detailed mapping of system

touchpoints, interfaces, and integration dependencies.

• Quick-Win Implementation Plan: short-term, high-impact reforms with

assigned ownership, sequencing, and resource implications.

Phase 2: Remaining Divisions

• Re-engineered Enterprise-Wide Operating Model: extension of re-

engineering to all other divisions; integration of divisional processes with Phase

1 outputs to create a single enterprise framework.

• Governance and Accountability Framework: consolidated structure defining

decision pathways, delegation boundaries, and control responsibilities.

• Strategic and ERP Alignment Matrix: mapping of redesigned processes to

SANParks’ strategic intent and ERP architecture.

remain in force for a duration of twenty-four (24) months. The assignment represents a

comprehensive, organisation-wide initiative that will require sustained engagement,

substantial resourcing, and phased delivery over the contract period.

compliance with RFB requirements, should the bidder not submit the compliance and

governance documents, PAJA will be applied.

Invitation to Bid (SBD 1) must be fully completed and signed. (Refer to Annexure A)

Submission of fully completed Pricing Schedule [SBD 3.3]

Submission of fully completed SBD 4 (Bidder’s disclosure). (Refer to Annexure B)

Submission of fully completed SBD 6.1 (Preference Claim (Refer to Annexure C)

Certificate), accompanied by the original or certified B-BBEE

based milestones.

DETAILED PRICING 3.3 (Professional Services)

[A B-BBEE STATUS LEVEL VERIFICATION CERTIFICATE/ SWORN AFFIDAVIT (FOR EMES & QSEs) MUST BE SUBMITTED IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR PREFERENCE POINTS FOR B-BBEE] 2.1 ARE YOU 2.2 THE ARE YOU A ACCREDITED FOREIGNREPRESENT BASED Yes No Yes No ATIVE IN SUPPLIER SOUTH FOR THE [IF YES, ENCLOSE PROOF] [IF YES, ANSWER PART B:3 ] AFRICA FOR GOODS THE GOODS /SERVICES /SERVICES /WORKS /WORKS OFFERED? OFFERED? QUESTIONNAIRE TO BIDDING FOREIGN SUPPLIERS IS THE ENTITY A RESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA (RSA) YES NO DOES THE ENTITY HAVE A BRANCH IN THE RSA YES NO DOES THE ENTITY HAVE A PERMANENT ESTABLISHMENT IN THE RSA? YES NO DOES THE ENTITY HAVE ANY SOURCE OF INCOME IN THE RSA? YES NO IS THE ENTITY LIABLE IN THE RSA FOR ANY FORM OF TAXATION? YES NO IF THE ANSWER IS “NO” TO ALL OF THE ABOVE, THEN IT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT TO REGISTER FOR A TAX COMPLIANCE STATUS SYSTEM PIN CODE FROM THE SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICE (SARS) AND IF NOT REGISTERED AS PER 2.3 BELOW. PART B TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR BIDDING

Bid submission: 1.1. Bids must be delivered by the stipulated time to the correct address. Late bids will not be accepted for consideration. 1.2. All bids must be submitted on the official forms provided–(not to be re-typed) or in the manner prescribed in the bid document. 1.3. This bid is subject to the preferential procurement policy framework act, 2000 and the preferential procurement regulations, 2022, the general conditions of contract (gcc) and, if applicable, any other special conditions of contract. 1.4. The successful bidder will be required to fill in and sign a written contract form (sbd7) and/or an SLA.

TAX COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS 2.3 BIDDERS MUST ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THEIR TAX OBLIGATIONS. 2.4 BIDDERS ARE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THEIR UNIQUE PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (PIN) ISSUED BY SARS TO ENABLE THE ORGAN OF STATE TO VERIFY THE TAXPAYER’S PROFILE AND TAX STATUS. 2.5 APPLICATION FOR TAX COMPLIANCE STATUS (TCS) PIN MAY BE MADE VIA E-FILING THROUGH THE SARS WEBSITE WWW.SARS.GOV.ZA. 2.6 BIDDERS MAY ALSO SUBMIT A PRINTED TCS CERTIFICATE TOGETHER WITH THE BID. 2.7 IN BIDS WHERE CONSORTIA / JOINT VENTURES / SUB-CONTRACTORS ARE INVOLVED, EACH PARTY MUST SUBMIT A SEPARATE TCS CERTIFICATE / PIN / CSD NUMBER. 2.8 WHERE NO TCS IS AVAILABLE BUT THE BIDDER IS REGISTERED ON THE CENTRAL SUPPLIER DATABASE (CSD), A CSD NUMBER MUST BE PROVIDED. 2.9 NO BIDS WILL BE CONSIDERED FROM PERSONS IN THE SERVICE OF THE STATE, COMPANIES WITH DIRECTORS WHO ARE PERSONS IN THE SERVICE OF THE STATE, OR CLOSE CORPORATIONS WITH MEMBERS PERSONS IN THE SERVICE OF THE STATE. NB: FAILURE TO PROVIDE / OR COMPLY WITH ANY OF THE ABOVE PARTICULARS MAY RENDER THE BID INVALID. SIGNATURE OF BIDDER: ................................................... CAPACITY UNDER WHICH THIS BID IS SIGNED: ................................................... (Proof of authority must be submitted, e.g. company resolution) DATE: .............................. Bidders are not allowed to contact any other SANParks staff in the context of this tender other than the indicated officials under SBD 1 above or as mentioned under “correspondences”. There will be no briefing session. Technical questions may be directed to the Project Manager: Irene Sinovich @ No Briefing [email protected] and SCM-related queries may be Session directed to Adolf Manaso @ [email protected]. All questions/enquiries must be forwarded in writing not later than 13 days before closing date and time of this bid. Validity Period from Date of 150 Days Closure: The tender proposal must remain valid for 150 days after the Bid Validity closing date and time. All proposals/prices indicated in the proposal and other recurrent costs must remain valid for the period of one hundred and fifty (150) days after the closing date and time. CORRESPONDENCES – Queries Should it be necessary for a bidder to obtain clarity on any matter arising from or referred to in this RFB document, please refer queries, in writing, to the contact person(s) listed above in SBD 1 or above. Under no circumstances may any other employee within SANParks be approached for any information. SANParks reserves the right to place responses to such queries on the website. Any queries regarding the bidding procedure may be directed to: Department: Supply Chain Management Contact Person: Mr Adolf Manaso Tel: 012 426 5225 E-mail address: [email protected] CONDITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS TO THE BIDDER

The Bid forms should not be retyped or redrafted, but photocopies may be prepared and used.

Only documents completed in black ink will be accepted. (Black ink should be used when completing Bid documents.)

Bidders should check the number of pages to satisfy themselves that none are missing or duplicated. SANParks will accept NO liability regarding anything arising from the fact that pages are missing or duplicated.

Counter Conditions: SANParks draws bidders’ attention that amendments to any of the Bid Conditions or the setting of counter conditions by bidders will result in the invalidation of such bids.

Response preparation costs: SANParks is NOT liable for any costs incurred by a bidder in the process of responding to this Bid Invitation, including on-site presentations.

Cancellation prior to awarding: SANParks reserves the right to withdraw and cancel the Bid Invitation before making an award. The cancellation grounds include insufficient funds, where the award price is outside of the objectively determined fair market-related price range or any process impropriety.

Collusion, Fraud and corruption: Any effort by Bidder/s to influence evaluation, comparisons, or award decisions in any manner will result in the rejection and disqualification of the bidder concerned.

Fronting: SANParks, in ensuring that bidders conduct themselves in an honest manner, will, as part of the bid evaluation processes where applicable, conduct or initiate the necessary enquiries/investigations to determine the accuracy of the representation made in the bid documents. Should SANParks establish any of the fronting indicators as contained in the Department of Trade and Industry’s “Guidelines on Complex Structures and Transactions and Fronting” during such inquiry/investigation, the onus is on the bidder to prove that fronting does not exist. Failure to do so within a period of 7 days from the date of notification will invalidate the bid/contract and may also result in the restriction of the bidder to conduct business with the public sector for a period not exceeding 10 years, in addition to any other remedies SANParks may have against the bidder concerned.

SANParks reserve a right to conduct due diligence. NB: BIDDERS' TERMS AND CONDITIONS ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE. INTENTION TO SELL Is the bidder in the process of selling the bidding company? ❑ YES ❑ NO Does the bidder have any intention of selling the bidding company ❑ YES ❑ NO within the next 12 months? Does the bidder have any intention of selling the bidding company ❑ YES ❑ NO within the next 12 months to 60 months? SANParks reserves the right not to award to any bidder who answers any of the questions above “yes” should the bidder be the overall highest points scorer. However, the decision not to award will be on a case-by-case basis DISCLAIMERS SANParks has produced this document in good faith. SANParks, its agents, and its employees and associates do not warrant its accuracy or completeness. To the extent that SANParks is permitted by law, SANParks will not be liable for any claim whatsoever and however arising (including, without limitation, any claim in contract, negligence or otherwise) for any incorrect or misleading information contained in this document due to any misinterpretation of this document. SANParks makes no representation, warranty, assurance, guarantee or endorsement to any provider/bidder concerning the document, whether with regard to its accuracy, completeness or otherwise, and SANParks shall have no liability towards the responding service providers or any other party in connection therewith. NB: Important Notice: Bidders are to be aware of scammers who pose as SANParks employees selling bid documents or offering monetary gratuity in exchange for information or awarding of bids. SANParks is in no way selling the bid document; all documents shall be found on the SANParks website and eTender Portal and awarded bids are notified through the website under “bids awarded”, and SANParks shall never ask any bidder for monetary gratuity in exchange for information or manipulating the outcome of bids. BID DOCUMENTS Bidders must submit the following documents in the bid envelope: Requirement Quantity Format Original bid document 1 Hard copy Copy of the original bid 1 Hard copy document Electronic copy of the full bid 1 USB / memory stick

B-BBEE Details: STATUS

Tick applicable box] status [tick applicable box]

Level

Yes LEVEL Yes

Verificatio

No SWORN No

N

Affidavit