Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Toluwase, thank you for your insightful contribution. You raise an important point regarding the definition and monitoring of outcomes. The complexity of this sector requires a carefully structured set of indicators that are both meaningful and feasible to track. Clear definitions, consistent monitoring, and transparent reporting are essential to ensuring accountability while giving providers the flexibility to innovate.
I also agree that the factors such as family violence and rising inflation are root causes of homelessness. These variables should be be integrated into the consideration during the procurement plan phrase to ensure the commissioning model is resilient to external social and economic pressure.
Michael, thank you for your thoughtful comment. Your example of “procuring tents” versus improving “quality of living” clearly illustrates the distinction between outputs and outcomes. In my view, increases in homelessness driven by broader economic conditions fall outside a shelter provider’s control, and it would be inappropriate to evaluate their performance solely on those external factors.
You also raise an important point regarding the difficulty of defining measurable metrics. This remains one of the most challenging, yet most critical elements of an outcomes‑based commissioning approach. As noted in my initial post, the evaluation framework in this context should focus on outcomes such as reducing repeat shelter use and supporting clients in transitioning to stable housing. These indicators better reflect the provider’s actual contribution to long‑term, sustainable improvements.
I agree with Toluwase. Reducing wait times is a clear and measurable outcome, but it should not be the only measure. A well-designed outcomes-based contract would combine timeliness with quality-of-care metrics, such as surgical outcomes, complication rates, and patient-reported recovery. This way, providers are incentivized to improve the entire care pathway, rather than just focusing on speed.
Michael, you raise a great question. I believe a competitive market definitely supports outcomes-based commissioning, but it’s not the only condition for success. Even in monopolized or limited markets, outcomes-based models can drive improvement as long as commissioners set clear expectations, monitor performance, and tie payment to meaningful results. The real issue is governance and accountability rather than competition alone. Curious to hear what others think.
Thank you for raising the risk‑management dimension. The link between Fair Trade and reduced supply‑chain and reputational risk is increasingly relevant for public sector procurement. Ethical sourcing requirements can help strengthen due‑diligence practices, particularly in areas where labour or environmental risks are more prevalent. Ensuring these considerations are integrated into procurement planning allows contracting authorities to balance responsible‑sourcing expectations with value‑for‑money and competition requirements.
Thank you for highlighting this point. It is true that the primary economic benefits of Fair Trade are provided at the production source, with limited direct impact on local economic development. Supporting local businesses is also a key part of our mandate in my organization, and balancing these objectives requires deeply consideration. Assessing Fair Trade requirements on a case‑by‑case basis during the procurement planning phase ensures that both local‑economic priorities and broader ethical‑sourcing goals are addressed in a proportionate and evidence‑based manner.
Thank you for your considered response. I agree that scalability is an important factor when determining the suitability of Fair Trade requirements in public procurement. While Fair Trade can deliver meaningful social outcomes in certain categories, it is not always proportionate or commercially feasible to apply it broadly. A targeted, evidence‑based approach allows contracting authorities to incorporate Fair Trade where it clearly supports public‑value objectives, while still upholding value for money and maintaining efficient, competitive procurement processes.
Hi Chris,
Generally, we conduct the following types of tenders in my organization:
• Request for Bids (RFB) — used for price‑driven procurement.
• Request for Proposal (RFP) — used for value‑driven procurement.
• Request for Qualification (RFQ) — used as the first stage of procurement. A second stage is required if the value exceeds the direct‑award threshold.
• Request for Standing Offer Arrangement (RSO) — used to establish Standing Offer Arrangements (SOAs).We do not use Requests for Tenders (RFTs).
Thank you,
Anny Guan
The Whitehorse Emergency Shelter (WES), which was transferred from the Government of Yukon to a non-profit organization in 2022, is a strong example of a service that could benefit from an outcomes-based commissioning approach. While the methodology used to select the current operator is unclear, in my opinion, success in this context should be measured by outcomes such as reducing repeat shelter use and helping clients transition to stable housing, rather than simply the number of beds provided.
This approach would give service providers greater flexibility to design programs that address root causes of homelessness, such as mental health challenges, substance use, and unemployment. It would also encourage innovation and collaboration with other community organizations, ultimately leading to better long-term results.
A fair trade policy can enhance income stability for producers, improve labour and environmental standards, and contribute to community development through social premiums. However, these benefits come with higher production and certification costs, which are often passed on to consumers, and may introduce market inefficiencies such as price distortions or limited scalability. From my perspective, adopting a balanced approach by incorporating fair trade products where they demonstrably deliver social value, while still ensuring overall value for money and maintaining competitive procurement processes, is essential.
Hello everyone,
My name is Huici (Anny) Guan, and I am currently working as a Purchasing Officer with the Government of Yukon. In my role, I am responsible for managing procurement processes from planning through to contract award. This includes developing solicitation documents such as RFBs, RFPs and RSOs, advising client departments on appropriate procurement strategies, ensuring compliance with applicable policies and trade agreements, and supporting contract management and supplier performance.
A key part of my work involves collaborating closely with internal clients to understand their operational needs, establish realistic timelines, and ensure that procurement activities are conducted in a fair, transparent, and efficient manner. I also assist with resolving contract issues and providing guidance throughout the lifecycle of agreements.
I have completed several courses within the Public Sector Procurement Program, and I am currently taking this final course to obtain my certification. I’m looking forward to strengthening my expertise in complex procurement and learning from the experiences of others in this cohort.
Thank you all,
Anny Guan
