• Demonstrate awareness on how to develop a network from various  regulatory sectors to build partnerships;  • Demonstrate awareness of EFSA needs in the area of systems-based  regulatory environmental risk assessment taking into account the  information in the theme paper (Annex 3) and in the tender specifications; • Demonstrate that the proposal is within the scope of this Open Call.  2. METHODOLOGY PROPOSED FOR IMPLEMENTATION (max. 25 points -  minimum threshold 60%, i.e. 15/25 to pass minimum quality threshold for  this criterion)  3. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND ORGANISATION OF THE TASKS WITHIN  PROJECT TEAM AND RESPECT OF TIMELINES (max. 20 points  – minimum  threshold 60% i.e. 12/20 to pass minimum quality threshold for this  criterion) The tenderer should:  the tenderer should provide: The degree to which the proposed methodology shows the capacity to address the  tasks underlined in the tender specifications, including convincing justification for the  choice of proposed methodology highlighting advantages and disadvantages. This is to assess the extent to which the team set-up is suitable for the implementation  of the assignment, and to meet the agreed deadlines for deliverables. More specifically  • Provide quality parameters and details of the approach to follow to identify  the partners of relevant sectors that should be part of PERA.  2 points • Provide methodology on how to identify and select the sectors, institutions  and disciplines experts be chosen, how interviews with selected experts  should be conducted  5 points • Describe what databases and resources are proposed to gather the relevant  information;  5 points • Describe what methods are proposed to map activities and identify overlaps,  knowledge gaps, challenges and blockers in relation to Objective 3, 4, 5 and  6;  5 points • Describe how to assure that activities and milestones identified to achieve  a next generation ERA are feasible and can be addressed by PERA once it  is established;  3 points • Provide a logical and well-structured step by step explanation of  methodology; 5 points • Clear and detailed information on distribution of the tasks among the project  team; in case of joint offer & subcontractors, clarity on who does what, when  and why (justify why the partner/subcontractor is proposed to do the  particular task/work-package);  5 points • Clarity of organization of project into work packages, including project  phases, timelines, milestones, deliverables, providing a Gantt chart; 10  points • Clear and detailed information on the frequency and type of communication  with EFSA and internal team communication (in case of joint offers &  subcontractors also the frequency and type of communication between  partners and/or subcontractor), the role of project leader in the coordination  and tasks allocation in relation to the methodology and tools proposed;  5  points 50 