Bidding Tendering Contracting

Closing Administering
Procurement Procurement

1
 Receiving tenders and opening envelopes
 Issue clarification, where necessary
 Evaluate tenders and select the winning tenderer
 Negotiate with the shortlist of tenderers, or the
winning tenderer
 Seeking required approvals
 Prepare the Contract Documents
 Award the contract

2
A due date for submission of tenders was
provided in the bidding documents.
 Only those tenders received at the determined
place and by the due date and time will be
opened.
 If a tender is received after the due date/time, it
should not be accepted and should not be
opened.
 Tenders should be received in sealed packages.

 Tenders should be opened soon after they are

received, ideally on the same day.
 Where the technical proposals are evaluated first,
the financial offer is not read out until the results
of the technical evaluation are known. Then the
respective bidders are invited to attend the public
opening of their financial offers.

3
 Tender Opening Form

Project: Date: Time: Place:

Participants:
1 Signature

2 Signature

3 Signature

Technical Tender Financial Tender

received received
Tenderers Invited Tender Opening Price Remarks

Yes No Yes No

Tender Security submitted but with only 1 month

1 P P EGP 9,470,596.84
validity

2 P P EGP 10,259,468.34 No Tender Security Submitted

No Technical Proposal. Only Company Profile
3 P P EGP 12,935,874.00 Submitted.
No Tender Security Submitted
4 P P EGP 11,800,000.00

5 P P

 Receive tenders and open envelopes

 Issue clarification, where necessary
 Evaluate tenders and select the winning tenderer
 Negotiate with the shortlist of tenderers, or the
winning tenderer
 Seeking required approvals
 Prepare the Contract Documents
 Award the contract

10

4
 Where there is an unclear element in the tender, you
need to seek clarification from the tenderer.
 It is also necessary to deal with any arithmetical errors

11

 In case an arithmetical error is discovered in a

tender, the procedure as required in the
tender documents should be followed. The
tenderer must be notified.

12

5
 Two established ways of dealing with
arithmetical errors:
 The Tenderer may be given the choice either to
stand by his original tender or withdraw his
tender, or
 The Tenderer may be asked whether he would
like to stand by his original tender or amend his
tender.

13

 Receive tenders and open envelopes

 Issue clarification, where necessary
 Evaluate tenders and select the winning tenderer
 Negotiate with the shortlist of tenderers, or the
winning tenderer
 Seeking required approvals
 Prepare the Contract Documents
 Award the contract

17

6
 Lower Price
 System of points (weighting system)

18

 This is a two-stage process:

 Stage 1: All the technical proposals are evaluated and
either classified as accepted or rejected. A short list is
produced.
 Stage 2: Financial proposals of tenderers with accepted
technical proposals are opened and ranked. The bidder
offering an acceptable technical proposal against the
lowest cost is awarded the contract.

19

7
 Example

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Technically qualified?? P X P P
Financial Offer 5,600,000 5,250,000 6,300,000 5,350,000

RANK 2 3 1

20

 Where the tender is based on a unit price contract, every

item in the BOQ must be tabulated for each tenderer in
preparation for a detailed analysis and comparison of
tenders. These items should be compared to the
employer‟s estimate.
 Detailed example

21

8
Several Methods:

offer(1) LE 100,000, technical evaluation 80%

equivalent offer =100,000/0.08 = LE 125,000

offer (2) LE 120,000 , technical evaluation 100%

equivalent offer =120,000/1.00 = LE 120,000

Resume

24

9
 Your company owns a resort on the Red Sea. They need to design
the Detailed Master Plan of the resort. You are the Head of the
Procurement Department. You are required to evaluate four
tenderers for the design of the Detailed Master Plan on the basis
of technical evaluation (35% weighting) and financial evaluation
(65% weighting).
 The below selection criteria are to be used in evaluating the
technical offers. Your company has indicated the relative
importance given to each selection criteria by the weightings
shown.
 Score each of the tenderers on each criterion, based on the
following data. Select the most suitable tenderer.
 Scores are based on scale of 0-3 as follows:
0 - Poor
1 - Below Average
2 - Satisfactory
3 - Excellent
25

Experience in similar projects with similar size

Tenderer 1 has completed one similar project with
similar size last year. Tenderer 2 and 3 have each
completed a few similar projects with similar sizes in
recent years. Tenderer 4 has successfully completed a
number of similar contracts in recent years.
 Similar experience in Egypt
Tenderers 1, 2 and 4 have experience working in
Egypt. Tenderer 3 has never worked in Egypt before.
 Previous positive experience with the company
Tenderer 1 has successfully designed the Conceptual
Master Plan of another resort owned by the company.
26

10
 Resource capabilities
Tenderers 1 and 2 have well qualified staff with
experience. Tenderers 3 and 4 have very well qualified
and experienced staff.
 History of delays
Tenderer 1 is known to have delayed the completion of
some projects. Tenderers 2 and 4 are known for
completing work on time. Tenderer 3 is known for
usually completing work on time.
 Quality
Tenderers 1 and 2 are known for providing services
with minimum errors. Tenderers 3 and 4 are known for
providing services that are error free and with efficient
quality systems. 27

 The financial offers of the tenderers are as follows:

Tenderer 1: EGP 5,600,000
Tenderer 2: EGP 5,350,000
Tenderer 3: EGP 6,300,000
Tenderer 4: EGP 5,750,000

28

11
Technical Evaluation
Project: Happy Resort Ref #: HR-DMP
Scope of Work: Detailed Master Plan

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Ite
Selection Criteria Weighted Weighted Weighted Weighted
m Weight Score Score Score Score
Score Score Score Score

Experience in similar projects

1 9
with similar size
2 Similar experience in Egypt 8
Previous positive experience
3 2
with the company
4 Resource capabilities 3
5 History of delays 5
6 Quality 8

TOTAL WEIGHTED SCORE 35 0 0 0 0

RANK

NOTES
Score based on scale of 0-3 as follows:
0 - Poor
1 - Below Average
2 - Satisfactory
3 - Excellent

Weighted Score = Weight * Score / 3

Financial Evaluation

Project: Happy Resort Ref #

Scope of Work: Detailed Master Plan

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Tender Sum

SCORE
RANK

NOTES

Score = Lowest financial Offer * weighting of financial evaluation / Tenderer financial offer

12
FINAL EVALUATION SUMMARY

Project: Happy Resort Ref #

Scope of Work: Detailed Master Plan

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Technical Score 0 0 0 0
Financial Score 0 0 0 0

SCORE 0 0 0 0

RANK

NOTES

 Your company owns a project on the North Coast. They need to retain
the services for the infrastructure and road networks engineering
services. You are the Head of the Procurement Department. You are
required to evaluate four tenderers for the infrastructure and road
networks engineering services on the basis of technical evaluation (35%
weighting) and financial evaluation (65% weighting).
 The below selection criteria are to be used in evaluating the technical
offers. Your company has indicated the relative importance given to
each selection criteria by the weightings shown.
 Score each of the tenderers on each criterion, based on the following
data. Select the most suitable tenderer.
 Scores are based on scale of 0-3 as follows:
0 - Poor
1 - Below Average
2 - Satisfactory
3 - Excellent
32

13
 Experience in similar projects with similar size
Tenderers 1 and 2 have completed a number of similar
projects with similar sizes last year. Tenderer 3 has
completed a few similar projects with similar sizes in recent
years. Tenderer 4 has completed one similar contract in
recent years.
 References
Tenderers 1 and 4 each have provided references from prior
customers verifying their work experience and compliance
with contractual requirements. Tenderer 2 provided 1
reference. Tenderer 3 did not provide any reference.
 Previous positive experience with the company
Tenderer 2 has successfully provided design services to
another project owned by the company.
33

 Resource capabilities
Tenderers 1 and 3 have well qualified staff with
experience. Tenderers 2 and 4 have very well qualified
and experienced staff.
 History of delays
Tenderer 3 is known to have delayed the completion of
some projects. Tenderers 1 and 4 are known for
completing work on time. Tenderer 2 is known for
usually completing work on time.
 Quality
Tenderers 1, 3 and 4 are known for providing services
with minimum errors. Tenderer 2 is known for providing
services that are error free and with efficient quality
systems. 34

14
  The financial offers of the tenderers are as follows:
Tenderer 1: EGP 1,150,000
Tenderer 2: EGP 1,100,000
Tenderer 3: EGP 900,000
Tenderer 4: EGP 1,750,000

35

Technical Evaluation
Project: XXXX Ref #: XXXX
Scope of Work: Infrastructure and road networks engineering services

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Item Selection Criteria Weighted Weighted Weighted Weighte

Weight Score Score Score Score
Score Score Score d Score

Experience in similar projects with

1 9
similar size
2 References 6
Previous positive experience with
3 2
the company
4 Resource capabilities 5
5 History of delays 5
6 Quality 8

TOTAL WEIGHTED SCORE 35 0 0 0 0

RANK

NOTES
Score based on scale of 0-3 as follows:
0 - Poor
1 - Below Average
2 - Satisfactory
3 - Excellent

Weighted Score = Weight * Score / 3

15
 Financial Evaluation

Project: Ref #

Scope of Work:

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Tender Sum

SCORE
RANK

NOTES

Score = Lowest financial Offer * weighting of financial evaluation / Tenderer financial offer

FINAL EVALUATION SUMMARY

Project: Ref #

Scope of Work:

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Technical Score 0 0 0 0
Financial Score 0 0 0 0

SCORE 0 0 0 0

RANK

NOTES

16
 Itis not advisable to select the tenderer with the
unreasonably low tender price.
 More likely, he will have cash flow problems. The
Employer might end up terminating his contract
and going through the steps of employing
another contractor and disputing his
entitlements from the original contractor. This
could end up with additional costs.
 Furthermore, he might be under-pricing his
tender with the hope of recovering the shortfall
by making various claims after the
commencement of the works.
39

 Where the lowest tender is significantly below all

the others, this may be due to the following:
 Arithmetical errors in the calculation of the tender sum.
 The tenderer may have underpriced an item because he
might have misunderstood the respective requirements.
 The tenderer may have deliberately submitted a very
low tender sum, out of desperation to win.

Sample Tender Evaluation Report

40

17
 Receive tenders and open envelopes
 Issue clarification, where necessary
 Evaluate tenders and select the winning tenderer
 Negotiate with the shortlist of tenderers, or the
winning tenderer
 Seeking required approvals
 Prepare the Contract Documents
 Award the contract

41

 You may need to negotiate with a shortlist of

tenderers or the winning tenderer.
 You may also require presentations or
demonstrations to be made, to get a better
understanding of the proposal.

42

18
 Receive tenders and open envelopes
 Issue clarification, where necessary
 Evaluate tenders and select the winning tenderer
 Negotiate with the shortlist of tenderers, or the
winning tenderer
 Seeking required approvals
 Prepare the Contract Documents
 Award the contract

43

 The selected tenderer is submitted for approval,

according to the Schedule of Authorities (usually
included in the company‟s policies)

44

19
 Schedule of Authorities
Procurement Activity Limit Approval Authority
Goods up to EGP 15,000 Head of Department
EGP 15,001 to EGP 500,000 Head of Department + CFO
Head of Department + CFO +
> EGP 500,000 CEO
Services up to EGP 500,000 Head of Department
EGP 500,001 to EGP 10,000,000 Head of Department + CFO
Head of Department + CFO +
> EGP 10,000,000 CEO
Works up to EGP 1,000,000 Head of Department
EGP 1,000,001 to EGP
10,000,000 Head of Department + CFO
Head of Department + CFO +
> EGP 10,000,000 CEO
45

 Receive tenders and open envelopes

 Issue clarification, where necessary
 Evaluate tenders and select the winning tenderer
 Negotiate with the shortlist of tenderers, or the
winning tenderer
 Seeking required approvals
 Prepare the Contract Documents
 Award the contract

46

20
 Bid Documents

Input by Tenderer

Tender Documents

Input by Parties

Contract Documents

Tender Documents
Contract Documents
• Contract Agreement (if any)
• Letter of Acceptance
• Letter of Tender
• Special Conditions of Contract;
• General Conditions of Contract;

• Specification; signed and

stamped
• Drawings;

• Bill of quantities (completed)

• Form of Agreement

21
  Bill
of Quantities
 General conditions
 Drawings
 Special Conditions
 The Contract Agreement
 The Letter of Tender
 The Letter of Acceptance
 Specifications

 Receive tenders and open envelopes

 Issue clarification, where necessary
 Evaluate tenders and select the winning tenderer
 Negotiate with the shortlist of tenderers, or the
winning tenderer
 Seeking required approvals
 Prepare the Contract Documents
 Award the contract

50

22
 When does the Contract come into existence?
Unless otherwise agreed or required by the law,
the contract comes into existence when the
contractor receives the letter of acceptance.
 A signed contract is not necessarily required.

51

Subject: Tender for Contract XXX

Dear Sir,

I refer to your tender for the above contract and I am

pleased to inform you that your tender has been
accepted for the Accepted Contract Amount of XXX.
May I take this opportunity to thank you for participating
in this process. You are requested to furnish the
Advance Payment Guarantee and the Performance
Guarantee, in accordance with the Conditions of
Contract.

Yours Sincerely,
Head of Procurement Department

23
 Agreement is composed of an offer and an
acceptance.
 In order to see whether a contract has been made
the law looks to see whether one party has made
an offer to do or refrain from doing something,
and, if so, whether that offer has been accepted
by the other party.

53

 For
acceptance of an offer to lead to a binding
contract, the acceptance must be unconditional
and it must be communicated to the person
who makes the offer.
 Acceptance can also be effected by conduct,
but not by mere silence and inaction.
 The acceptance of an offer must be
unconditional.

54

24
 In order to be unconditional the terms of the
acceptance must correspond precisely with the
terms of the offer.
 If the person to whom the offer is made
introduces new term/s that is either contrary
to a term of the offer or that is not contained
in the offer, the acceptance is not
unconditional and forms a counter-offer and
does not bring a binding contract into
existence.
55

 The effect of a counter-offer made in this way

is to destroy the original offer.
 The counter-offer is subject to the same rules
about acceptance as the original offer.

56

25
 Qualified Acceptance, an acceptance which is
made 'subject' to anything does not give rise
to a contract.
 Though this may eventuate when the matter
to which it is subject occurs.
 For example, if an acceptance is made 'subject
to planning permission being received', then a
contract would arise on the receipt of planning
permission.
 This practice can give rise to problems, and
possibly claims, and is therefore to be avoided.
57

58

26
 An employer offers to employ a contractor to do
specified works on specified terms for a specified
price, and the contractor without further negotiations
and without consenting to the specified price, does
the work. After a while, the contractor requested a
higher price than the specified one.
 Is the contractor entitled to change the specified
price?

59

 Answer: No, the contractor will be deemed to have

accepted the employer‟s offer by his conduct, and
will not afterwards be able to seek a higher price.

60

27
 You have received tenders on 1 February for the
construction of a garage. The lowest tender is in
the sum of LE 500,000.00 and the construction
period is 10 months. Draft a letter of acceptance to
be sent to the tenderer with the lowest tender.

61

 Unless you have agreed to change any conditions

with the contractor, your letter of acceptance need
say no more than this:
Dear Sirs,
Re: Construction of Garage at XX
We hereby accept your tender dated 1 February,
pertaining to the above mentioned subject, in
accordance with the tender documents sent to you on
1 January. with the following terms:
Sincerely yours, Price = £85,000.00
Duration for completion = 10 months

Acknowledge receipt (authorized signatory)

62

28
Continuing on from the previous case, you want to decrease the
duration of the last activity, so that the construction of the garage
would last a period of 8 months. Accordingly, you send the
following letter to the tenderer:
Dear Sirs,
We accept your tender dated 1 February in accordance with the
tender documents sent to you on 1 January, subject to the
following amendment:
The period for completion of the works shall be 8 months from the
date of commencement.
Sincerely yours,
The contractor did not acknowledge your letter but commenced
work and completed in 10 months. You claim damages for delay.
The contractor claims that his offer to complete in 10 months
entitled him to take that time to complete the works and he was
not liable for damages. Which conditions apply? Is the contractor
liable to pay damages? 63

Answer: The contractor did not send any written notice

that he accepted to complete in 8 months instead of 10
months. However, since the contractor commenced
work, he has accepted the counter offer by conduct and
he is bound to complete in 8 months. Accordingly, the
contractor would be liable to damages for delay.

64

29
 The lesson learned from the above cases is what
is called `the battle of the forms‟, i.e. the battle
is usually won by he who fires the last shot.

 Mutual consent is the best way to avoid conflict

and expensive litigation to resolve the problem.

65

Company X advertises to sell a product in the

local paper. Company Y comes to see the
product and is prepared to buy it for LE 300,000,
the advertised price, as long as it can take
delivery of the product that day. Company X
advises that it cannot make delivery until one
week later. Company Y wants the product that
day. Company X insists on delivery one week
later.
 Is there a binding contract?

66

30
 No, there is agreement on the product and the
price, but not on the delivery date. The result
is that there is no contract at all.

67

 Sometimes the communication does not amount

to an offer, but it furthers the bargaining
process.
 If the communication is an invitation to treat, it
cannot legally be accepted. There can be no
offer and acceptance, and no legally enforceable
contract.

68

31
 The claimants sent a telegram to the defendants, which stated:
“Will you sell us X farm? Send us by telegram lowest cash price.”
 The defendants replied:
“Lowest cash price for X farm is £900”
 The reply to this from the claimants was:
“We agree to buy X farm for £900 asked for by you”
 This last communication was not replied to and the defendants
subsequently refused to sell the property to the claimants. The
claimants sued the defendants, arguing that a contract had been
agreed, and that the defendants were legally bound to sell the
property at the agreed price of £900.
 Is there a binding contract between the claimants and the
defendants?

69

Held:
 No contract existed.
 The initial telegram was simply an inquiry to see if the
owners of the property were willing to sell and to discover
what their bargaining position would be.
 The claimant's reply was simply an indication of what the
lowest price was, not an offer of a definite price. This reply,
then, was not an offer, open for acceptance to form a legally
binding contract, but was an invitation to treat, an invitation
to further the negotiation process.

70

32
 A argued that displays of goods were an "offer" and when
a shopper selected and put the goods into their shopping
basket, that was an "acceptance".
 B argued that the sale was effected only at the cash point.
 When does the contract come into existence?

71

 Although goods are displayed and it is intended that

customers should go and choose what they want, the
contract is not completed until, the customer having
indicated the articles which he needs, the shop-keeper or
someone on his behalf accepts that offer. Then the
contract is completed.
 Thus, the court decided that the display of goods was an
invitation to treat, not an offer.

72

33
Lord Justice Somervell in Pharmaceutical Society of Great
Britain v. Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd [1953] 1 QB
401 :
 If the Plaintiffs are right, once an article has been placed in
the box the customer himself is bound and he would have
no right without paying for the first article to substitute an
article which he saw later of the same kind and which he
perhaps preferred.
 Picking up an article is a convenient method of enabling
customers to see what there is and choose and possibly
put back and substitute articles which they wish to have
and then go up to the cashier and offer to buy what they
have so far chosen. 73

Resume

74

34
 Followingan exchange of correspondence
(offer and counter offer), the prospective
Buyer stated in a letter „we confirm that we
have accepted your offer…we would highly
appreciate if you could take into consideration
the points we have raised‟. Is there a binding
contract?

75

 The contractor offered to execute the works

for $100,000.
 A counter-offer of $950,000 was made by the
client, but rejected.
 The client later tried to accept the original
offer of $100,000, but the contractor refused
to execute the works.
 Was the contractor entitled to refuse?

76

35
 The pursuer sent a communication to the defender in the
following terms:
 “I am offering to construct the building Y and have pleasure
in quoting you $3,000,000. I shall be glad to hear if you
accept, and await your esteemed reply.”
 The defenders accepted, but then argued that the initial
communication was an invitation to treat, not an offer.
 Is there a binding contract?

77

 Is the advertisement for tenders or RFP an offer or

invitation to Treat?
The advertisement for tenders is usually regarded as an
invitation to treat
 The company advertising for tenders can choose which tender
to accept.
 This consideration may not be guided exclusively by price, but
other factors such as timescales, quality of service, damages,
reputation of the tenderer, …
 The analysis might be different where, for example, the
request for bids includes an obligation to accept the most
competitive bid.
 Is the Submitted Tender an offer or invitation to Treat?
A tender is an offer. 78

36
Does the Letter of Intent constitute
acceptance?
 The effect of a letter of intent depends on the
wording of the letter rather than its heading.
 A „letter of intent‟ per se is not necessarily an
acceptance.

79

 Any „suggestion‟ or „request‟ to start work or

even an „instruction‟ to do some such work
should not be acted upon unless accompanied
by some undertaking as to payment.
 This would thus set up a „mini-contract‟ which
would be absorbed into the main contract if and
when it comes into existence, or stand on its
own feet if not.

80

37
 Once the winning tenderer confirms acceptance,
your company policy might require that the
unsuccessful tenderers be notified.

82

Subject: Tender for Contract XXX

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your tender for the above contract.

The evaluation process has now been completed
and we wish to inform you that on this occasion
your tender has not been successful.
May we take this opportunity to thank you for
participating in this process and we look forward to
the opportunity of working together in future.

Yours Sincerely,
Head of Procurement Department

38
Brook, Martin. Estimating and Tendering for Construction Work, Third Edition,
Elsevier Ltd., Great Britain, 2004 84

 Procurement is the mechanism by which

suppliers of goods or services are selected.
 Contracts are the means by which risks and
responsibilities are allocated between the buyer
and the seller.

85

39
 Brook, Martin, Estimating and Tendering for Construction
Work, (3rd Edition, Elsevier Ltd., Great Britain, 2004)
 Fisk, Edward, Construction Project Administration, (5th
Edition, Prentice-Hall, United States of America, 1997)
 MacRoberts, Solicitors, MacRoberts on Scottish Building
Contracts, (2nd Edition, Blackwell Publishing Limited,
2008)
 Murdoch John and Hughes Will, Construction Contracts
Law and management, (4th Edition, Taylor & Francis,
London and New York, 2008)

87

40
 Your company owns a resort on the Red Sea. They need to design
the Detailed Master Plan of the resort. You are the Head of the
Procurement Department. You are required to evaluate four
tenderers for the design of the Detailed Master Plan on the basis
of technical evaluation (35% weighting) and financial evaluation
(65% weighting).
 The below selection criteria are to be used in evaluating the
technical offers. Your company has indicated the relative
importance given to each selection criteria by the weightings
shown.
 Score each of the tenderers on each criterion, based on the
following data. Select the most suitable tenderer.
 Scores are based on scale of 0-3 as follows:
0 - Poor
1 - Below Average
2 - Satisfactory
3 - Excellent
1
Experience in similar projects with similar size
Tenderer 1 has completed one similar project with
similar size last year. Tenderer 2 and 3 have each
completed a few similar projects with similar sizes in
recent years. Tenderer 4 has successfully completed a
number of similar contracts in recent years.
 Similar experience in Egypt
Tenderers 1, 2 and 4 have experience working in
Egypt. Tenderer 3 has never worked in Egypt before.
 Previous positive experience with the company
Tenderer 1 has successfully designed the Conceptual
Master Plan of another resort owned by the company.
2
 Resource capabilities
Tenderers 1 and 2 have well qualified staff with
experience. Tenderers 3 and 4 have very well qualified
and experienced staff.
 History of delays
Tenderer 1 is known to have delayed the completion of
some projects. Tenderers 2 and 4 are known for
completing work on time. Tenderer 3 is known for
usually completing work on time.
 Quality
Tenderers 1 and 2 are known for providing services
with minimum errors. Tenderers 3 and 4 are known for
providing services that are error free and with efficient
quality systems. 3
 The financial offers of the tenderers are as follows:
Tenderer 1: EGP 5,600,000
Tenderer 2: EGP 5,350,000
Tenderer 3: EGP 6,300,000
Tenderer 4: EGP 5,750,000

4
Technical Evaluation
Project: Happy Resort Ref #: HR-DMP
Scope of Work: Detailed Master Plan

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Ite
Selection Criteria Weighted Weighted Weighted Weighted
m Weight Score Score Score Score
Score Score Score Score

Experience in similar projects

1 9
with similar size
2 Similar experience in Egypt 8
Previous positive experience
3 2
with the company
4 Resource capabilities 3
5 History of delays 5
6 Quality 8

TOTAL WEIGHTED SCORE 35 0 0 0 0

RANK

NOTES
Score based on scale of 0-3 as follows:
0 - Poor
1 - Below Average
2 - Satisfactory
3 - Excellent

Weighted Score = Weight * Score / 3

 Financial Evaluation

Project: Happy Resort Ref #

Scope of Work: Detailed Master Plan

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Tender Sum

SCORE
RANK

NOTES

Score = Lowest financial Offer * weighting of financial evaluation / Tenderer financial offer
FINAL EVALUATION SUMMARY

Project: Happy Resort Ref #

Scope of Work: Detailed Master Plan

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Technical Score 0 0 0 0
Financial Score 0 0 0 0

SCORE 0 0 0 0

RANK

NOTES
 Your company owns a project on the North Coast. They need to retain
the services for the infrastructure and road networks engineering
services. You are the Head of the Procurement Department. You are
required to evaluate four tenderers for the infrastructure and road
networks engineering services on the basis of technical evaluation (35%
weighting) and financial evaluation (65% weighting).
 The below selection criteria are to be used in evaluating the technical
offers. Your company has indicated the relative importance given to
each selection criteria by the weightings shown.
 Score each of the tenderers on each criterion, based on the following
data. Select the most suitable tenderer.
 Scores are based on scale of 0-3 as follows:
0 - Poor
1 - Below Average
2 - Satisfactory
3 - Excellent
8
 Experience in similar projects with similar size
Tenderers 1 and 2 have completed a number of similar
projects with similar sizes last year. Tenderer 3 has
completed a few similar projects with similar sizes in recent
years. Tenderer 4 has completed one similar contract in
recent years.
 References
Tenderers 1 and 4 each have provided references from prior
customers verifying their work experience and compliance
with contractual requirements. Tenderer 2 provided 1
reference. Tenderer 3 did not provide any reference.
 Previous positive experience with the company
Tenderer 2 has successfully provided design services to
another project owned by the company.
9
 Resource capabilities
Tenderers 1 and 3 have well qualified staff with
experience. Tenderers 2 and 4 have very well qualified
and experienced staff.
 History of delays
Tenderer 3 is known to have delayed the completion of
some projects. Tenderers 1 and 4 are known for
completing work on time. Tenderer 2 is known for
usually completing work on time.
 Quality
Tenderers 1, 3 and 4 are known for providing services
with minimum errors. Tenderer 2 is known for providing
services that are error free and with efficient quality
systems. 10
 The financial offers of the tenderers are as follows:
Tenderer 1: EGP 1,150,000
Tenderer 2: EGP 1,100,000
Tenderer 3: EGP 900,000
Tenderer 4: EGP 1,750,000

11
Technical Evaluation
Project: XXXX Ref #: XXXX
Scope of Work: Infrastructure and road networks engineering services

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Item Selection Criteria Weighted Weighted Weighted Weighte

Weight Score Score Score Score
Score Score Score d Score

Experience in similar projects with

1 9
similar size
2 References 6
Previous positive experience with
3 2
the company
4 Resource capabilities 5
5 History of delays 5
6 Quality 8

TOTAL WEIGHTED SCORE 35 0 0 0 0

RANK

NOTES
Score based on scale of 0-3 as follows:
0 - Poor
1 - Below Average
2 - Satisfactory
3 - Excellent

Weighted Score = Weight * Score / 3

 Financial Evaluation

Project: Ref #

Scope of Work:

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Tender Sum

SCORE
RANK

NOTES

Score = Lowest financial Offer * weighting of financial evaluation / Tenderer financial offer
FINAL EVALUATION SUMMARY

Project: Ref #

Scope of Work:

Tenderer 1 Tenderer 2 Tenderer 3 Tenderer 4

Technical Score 0 0 0 0
Financial Score 0 0 0 0

SCORE 0 0 0 0

RANK

NOTES