This document provides a strategy for evaluating tenders submitted in response to an invitation to tender. It outlines the purpose of the evaluation strategy, which is to ensure a fair, reasonable, and compliant process for evaluating tenders against the objectives of the project. The strategy will be approved by the Senior Responsible Officer and Project Board. It describes the business aims of the project, critical success factors, evaluation criteria, evaluation process, methodology, communication plan, and approval process to obtain sign-off for the strategy.

1. Invitation To Tender:
Tender Evaluation Strategy
Version 0.1
1

2. Table of Contents
1.Purpose........................................................................................................................3
2.Executive Summary....................................................................................................3
3.Business Aims.............................................................................................................3
4.Critical Success Factors...............................................................................................4
5.Evaluation Criteria......................................................................................................5
6.Evaluation Process......................................................................................................7
7.Evaluation Methodology.............................................................................................7
8.Communication ..........................................................................................................7
9.Approval Process.........................................................................................................8
2

3. 1.Purpose
1.1. The purpose of the Evaluation Strategy is to:
• Record the overall approach to the appraisal of Tenders
• Ensure consistency with the EU Regulations
• Provide a baseline against which all other evaluation
documentation (Evaluation Process, Evaluation Methodology,
Guidance for Evaluators and Evaluation Report) can be
measured
• Provide assurance to the [Senior Responsible Officer, Project
Board, Contracting Authority, CPD Director] that the proposed
process is fair, reasonable and able to deliver the objectives of
the Project
• Seek formal approval of the proposed strategy from the [Senior
Responsible Officer, Project Board, Contracting Authority, CPD
Director]
2.Executive Summary
2.1. This section is designed to summarise the purpose of the Evaluation
Strategy. Be clear and concise, keeping wording to a minimum. It is
recommended that content is limited to:
• A statement regarding the specific collaborative procurement
• A statement highlighting the purpose of the Evaluation
Strategy document e.g. to obtain approval of the proposed
strategy, including person(s) or Board from whom approval is
sought and the date approval required.
• A statement verifying that the Evaluation Strategy will be fully
compliant with the EU Regulations and will support the delivery
of the business aims and critical success factors identified in
the Source Plan.
• Identification of key dependencies e.g. impact on drafting other
procurement / project documentation, timescales etc.
3.Business Aims
3.1. All organisations have aims and objectives they must achieve. Business
aims generally demonstrate the long term intentions of the organisation and
can include but are not resticted to:
3

4. • Commercial aims – which impact on the commercial
efficiency of the organisation
• Social aims – which are for the good of society e.g. social
and environmental change
• Service aims – which focus on increasing the efficiency
and effectiveness of the service provision
3.2. The business aims for a collaborative procurement project are likely to be
linked to wider government policy and / or strategy e.g. Transforming
Government Procurement; Government’s Sustainable Procurement Action
Plan. These drivers should have already been identified within the Feasibility
Study and / or Source Plan documents.
3.3. The Evaluation Strategy document should therefore set the procurement
within a wider business context by including high-level detail to identify:
• What business aims the project will meet (refer to 4.2)
• How the aims will be met
• When the aims will be met
• Who is responsible for ensuring the aims are met
4.Critical Success Factors
4.1. Critical Success Factor (CSF) is a business term for an outcome which is
necessary for an organisation or project to achieve its mission or business
aims.
4.2. In a collaborative procurement the Critical Success Factors are likely to have
been agreed at the Source Plan stage and will be the means by which the
procurement will be judged successful or otherwise.
4.3. In this section of the document identify project specific Critical Success
Factors and how they will be quantified or measured. Examples of CSF may
include but are not restricted to:
• The solution must meet or exceed [business aims,
government policy, technical requirements etc]
• Potential Providers must demonstrate the capacity and
flexibility to meet the changing business needs
• The solution must attract an increase in uptake of Public
Sector Organisations accessing a collaborative deal
• The cost of the solution must be within budget
• The solution must deliver significant savings for the Master
Category
4

5. • Potential Providers must meet all commercial and / or legal
requirements
• Potential Providers must successfully deliver against the
defined service targets
5.Evaluation Criteria
5.1. Under EU Regulations Potential Providers must be notified of the award
criteria either within the OJEU Contract Notice or in the Invitation to Tender.
5.2. Subject to regulation 18(27) and to paragraphs (6) and (9) of the Public
Contracts Regulations (2006), a Contracting Authority shall award a public
contract on the basis of the offer which either –
• Is the most economically advantageous from the point of
view of the Contracting Authority or
• Offers the lowest price
When awarding a Framework Agreement on the basis of the most
economically advantageous offer, the Contracting Authority shall use
criteria linked to the subject matter of the contract to determine which offer
is the most economically advantageous, including quality, price, technical
merit, aesthetic and functional characteristics, environmental
characteristics, running costs, cost effectiveness, after sales service,
technical assistance, delivery date and delivery period and period of
completion.
By assigning criteria to the qualitative (e.g. technical, delivery, quality) and
commercial (e.g. price, cost, risk, legal) elements of the requirement you
are communicating to Tenderers the basis on which their entire Tender
Response will be evaluated.
5.3. The proposed evaluation criteria (likely to have been identified at the Data
gathering and Strategic Analysis stages through activities including Supplier
Research, Supply Market Research or Request for Information) should be
included in this section of the Strategy document. It is anticipated that a
lower level of criteria will emanate from high-level criteria, providing
increasing levels of granularity against which to assess Tender Responses.
For example the After Sales Service criteria for a Car Hire contract may
require the development of low-level criteria to cover the various elements of
the service desk requirement e.g. order, breakdown assistance, reporting of
accidents or damage to the hire vehicle, end of hire etc. Details of the lower
level criteria will be included within the Evaluation Methodology document.
5.4. Indicate which approach the Contracting Authority proposes to adopt in
terms of weighting the evaluation criteria. Regulation 30: Criteria for the
award of a public contract, identifies 3 potential strategies for weighting
award criteria.
5

6. 30(3) “Where a contracting authority intends to award a public contract on
the basis of the offer which is most economically advantageous it shall
state the weighting which it gives to each of the criteria chosen in the
contract notice or in the contract documents…”
30(4) “When stating the weightings referred to in paragraph (3), a
contracting authority may give the weightings a range and specify a
minimum and maximum weighting where it considers it appropriate in
view of the subject matter of the contract.”
30(5) “Where, in the opinion of the contracting authority, it is not possible
to provide weightings for the criteria referred to in paragraph (3) on
objective grounds, the contracting authority shall indicate the criteria in
descending order of importance in the contract notice or contract
documents…”
Further details will be included within the Evaluation Methodology
document.
5.5. It is imperative that criteria is not developed in isolation but in conjunction
with the business / project aims, critical success factors, specification,
Evaluation Process, Evaluation Methodology etc. It is therefore important to
know how you propose to evaluate Tender Responses before the criteria are
agreed. For example,
• Will the evaluation be paper-based or undertaken via an
electronic application e.g. AWARD?
• Will Tenderers be required to provide mandatory
information as part of their Tender Response and will
failure to provide this information result in exclusion from
progressing further in the Evaluation Process?
• Will Tenderers failing to meet the mandatory response
requirements within their Tender Response be
automatically excluded from progressing further in the
Evaluation Process?
• Will the initial qualitative evaluation be undertaken
independently?
• Will individual scores be moderated?
• Will qualitative evaluation be undertaken without sight
(blind) of price / cost?
• Will an eAuction (price only, weighted price or MEAT
points) be utilised at the end of the qualitative evaluation?
• High-level consideration of the above points (plus any
others) should be included within the Evaluation Strategy
document.
6

7. 6.Evaluation Process
6.1. This section of the Evaluation Strategy document should refer to the
Evaluation Process. To avoid duplication with corresponding documents,
content should be limited to describing the purpose of the Evaluation
Process and reference to the Evaluation Process document e.g.
The Tender Evaluation Process covers a number of discrete stages i.e.
Tender opening, clarification, award recommendations etc. Although the
collaborating organisations will be familiar with the process, for the purpose of
consensus, transparency and audit, it is advisable to formally agree and
record the procedures that will be undertaken. A comprehensive description
of the proposed process is contained within the Evaluation Process
document, available on request from [insert name / title].
7.Evaluation Methodology
7.1. This section of the Evaluation Strategy document should refer to the
Evaluation Methodology. To avoid duplication with corresponding
documents, content should be limited to describing the purpose of the
Evaluation Methodology and reference to the Evaluation Methodology
document e.g.
The Evaluation Methodology describes how Tender Responses will be
evaluated including application (electronic or paper-based) criteria weighting,
scoring matrices, pass / fail thresholds, e-Auction etc. A comprehensive
description of the proposed methodology is contained within the Evaluation
Methodology document.
Guidance for Evaluators will be produced in order to assist the Evaluation
Team in their assessment and scoring of Tender Responses. This guidance
will be divided into 2 discrete documents providing separate instructions for
evaluators responsible for assessing the qualitative and commercial
responses. Guidance note: There may be instances where you wish to
evaluate price / cost in isolation to the other elements of the commercial
response. In this instance a third evaluation document may be required.
A copy of the Evaluation Methodology and Guidance for Evaluators
documents, are available on request from [insert name / title].
8.Communication
8.1. In this section of the document refer to the importance of communicating the
Evaluation Strategy. To avoid duplication with corresponding documents,
content should be limited to describing the purpose of the communication
and reference to the Communication Plan document e.g.
To ensure the ongoing participation of the collaborating organisations,
projects of this nature require an enhanced approach to communications.
7

8. For details of how, when and by whom the Evaluation Strategy and
supporting documentation will be communicated to [insert Stakeholders
(internal & external), Project Team, Project Board, Senior Responsible
Officer, CPD Director, Lead, Category Manager etc.] refer to the
Communication Plan document, available on request from [insert name /
title].
9.Approval Process
9.1. Approval of the Evaluation Strategy must be been obtained from either the
[Senior Responsible Officer, Project Board, Contracting Authority, CPD
Director etc]
9.2. A copy of the collaborative procurement Approval Record is available via the
VPMO.
9.3. You may wish to include in this section of the document:
• Person(s) or Board from whom approval is sought
• Date approval required
• A sign-off template for signatures
8