Tender Report Preparation

Section 1

Purpose

The Tender Report is the formal document through which the QS presents the tender analysis results and makes a reasoned recommendation to the client on the appointment of a preferred contractor. It is the culmination of the entire pre-tender and tendering process: it must be comprehensive, objective and sufficiently documented to enable the client to make an informed award decision. For public sector clients, the Tender Report also forms the primary evidence of compliance with procurement regulations and procurement strategy obligations.

RICS Tendering Strategies (2015) sets out the minimum content requirements for a tender report. The report must cover the tender process summary, the tender comparison (normalised and un-normalised), the PTE variance analysis, the qualifications review, the quality/price scoring results (if applicable), clarification outcomes, and a clear recommendation with supporting rationale. It must be endorsed by the whole project team — not just the QS — before being presented to the client.

The Tender Report is also the document that triggers the standstill period for public sector contracts above the procurement threshold. Once approved by the client, the preferred tenderer and unsuccessful tenderers must be notified simultaneously, and the standstill period clock starts from that notification.

Section 2

Key Principles

RICS Tendering Strategies (1st edition, 2015), Section 3.14 — Tender Report and Notifying Tenderers, Section 4.4 — Further Advice on Tender Reports: mandatory content requirements; confirmation that the report must be team-endorsed before client presentation.
RICS Cost Prediction (Professional Statement, 1st edition, effective 1 July 2021): where the tender sum differs materially from the PTE, the report must explain the variance — this is a mandatory PS obligation.
Public Contracts Regulations 2015, Regulation 86 — Contract Award Notice; Regulation 87 — Standstill Period: the award notification letter must inform unsuccessful tenderers of the standstill period, the score of the winning tender, and the reasons the unsuccessful tenderer was not selected.
RICS Procurement and Tendering Guide (2021): confirms that the tender report should include the scoring matrix results, normalised tender comparison, QS recommendation and reasons, and a summary of the tender process from PQQ to receipt.
Six reasons for robust tendering (RICS Tendering Strategies, 2015): the Tender Report is the document that demonstrates accountability, auditability, completeness, parity, integrity and value for money — the six pillars of a defensible tender process.

Section 3

Practical Application

Step 1

Structure the Tender Report using the RICS minimum content framework: (i) project overview and tender process summary; (ii) list of tenderers and tender sums received; (iii) tender opening record summary; (iv) arithmetic error and compliance check findings; (v) normalised tender comparison table; (vi) PTE vs tender variance analysis; (vii) quality/price scoring results (if applicable); (viii) qualifications review; (ix) clarification outcomes; (x) recommendation.

Step 2

Prepare the tender process summary: state the tendering strategy used (single-stage/two-stage/negotiated); tender period dates; number of addenda issued; number of queries received and responded to; tender return rate (number invited vs number received). This demonstrates that the process was conducted correctly.

Step 3

Present the tender comparison table: show all tender sums in order from lowest to highest, with the spread expressed as a percentage. Present both the un-normalised totals and the normalised totals. Identify the lowest compliant tender. Flag any non-compliant tenders and the reasons for non-compliance.

Step 4

Analyse the PTE variance: compare the lowest compliant tender against the sealed PTE. Where the variance exceeds 5–10%, provide a trade-by-trade or elemental breakdown of the variance, explaining whether the difference relates to market conditions, scope differences, specification interpretation, or specific abnormals.

Step 5

Present quality/price scoring results (where a quality/price evaluation was used): show each tenderer's quality score, price score and combined weighted score. Confirm that the scoring matrix was applied in accordance with the criteria stated in the Instructions to Tenderers. The recommendation should be for the highest-scoring tenderer, not necessarily the lowest price.

Step 6

Summarise the qualifications review: list all qualifications submitted by tenderers and state the outcome of each (withdrawn/accepted/rejected and reasons). Confirm the recommended tenderer's position is qualification-free (or identify any residual qualifications that have been accepted by the client).

Step 7

Make the recommendation: state clearly which tenderer is recommended for appointment and why. The recommendation must be based on the normalised analysis, scoring results, qualifications review and clarification outcomes — not on relationship, programme pressure or other factors not stated in the evaluation criteria.

Step 8

Obtain project team endorsement before presenting to the client. Present the Tender Report to the client for approval. After approval, notify all tenderers simultaneously — preferred tenderer of intention to appoint; unsuccessful tenderers of the outcome with feedback. For public sector: initiate the standstill period from notification.

Step 9

Include an assessment of the recommended tenderer's financial standing and relevant experience in the Tender Report. Verify the tenderer's ability to deliver: financial strength (recognised credit check or published accounts), track record on comparable projects, and resource availability. An abnormally low tender warrants particular scrutiny — the PTE exists precisely to flag suspiciously low returns that may signal an unviable bid or misunderstanding of scope.

Section 4

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Making the recommendation before the full analysis is complete — the recommendation must be based on all factors (normalised price, quality score, qualifications, clarifications), not just the headline tender sum.
Not obtaining project team endorsement — a QS-only recommendation that is not agreed by the full project team lacks the authority needed for a defensible award decision.
Failing to explain a PTE variance exceeding 5–10% — the RICS Cost Prediction PS requires an explanation of material differences from the previous cost plan or estimate; a PTE-to-tender variance above this threshold requires documented analysis.
Disclosing tender sums to unsuccessful tenderers before the standstill period ends — for public sector contracts, premature disclosure may compromise the standstill period and expose the award to challenge.
Recommending a higher-priced tenderer over a lower-priced one without a documented quality/scoring justification — for public sector projects, this must be defensible against a procurement challenge from the lower-priced tenderer.

Section 5

APC Competency & Quick Reference

APC Competencies: Procurement & Tendering (L2) | Cost Management (L2) | Legal & Regulatory Compliance (L1) | Commercial Management (L2)

What are the mandatory content requirements for a Tender Report per RICS guidance?

Per RICS Tendering Strategies (2015) and RICS Procurement and Tendering Guide (2021): project overview and process summary; list of tender sums; opening record summary; compliance/error check findings; normalised tender comparison; PTE variance analysis; quality/price scoring results; qualifications review; clarification outcomes; team-endorsed recommendation with reasons.

What information must be provided to unsuccessful tenderers in the award notification?

Per Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (Regulation 86): the notification must state the standstill period end date; the score of the successful tenderer; the score of the unsuccessful tenderer; the reasons the unsuccessful tenderer was not selected; and a summary of the characteristics and relative advantages of the successful tender. For private sector contracts, a debrief should be offered as best practice even where not legally required.

How should a significant PTE-to-tender variance be handled in the Tender Report?

Per RICS Cost Prediction PS (2021): where the tender varies materially from the PTE (>5–10%), the Tender Report must provide a trade-by-trade or elemental analysis of the variance, classifying each difference as: market conditions, scope misinterpretation, specification difference, or specific site/project abnormals. The analysis determines whether the variance is acceptable or whether further negotiation or re-tender is warranted.

Section 6

Tender Report Preparation Checklist

☐

Tender process summary prepared (strategy, dates, addenda, queries, return rate)

☐

Tender comparison table prepared (un-normalised and normalised; spread; lowest compliant tender identified)

☐

PTE vs lowest tender variance analysed (trade/elemental breakdown if >5–10%)

☐

Quality/price scoring results presented (where applicable; scoring matrix applied as stated in ITT)

☐

Qualifications review summarised (each qualification: outcome and reasons)

☐

Clarification outcomes incorporated

☐

Recommendation stated with clear rationale

☐

Tender Report endorsed by full project team

☐

Tender Report presented to client and approval obtained

☐

All tenderers notified simultaneously (preferred: intention to appoint; unsuccessful: outcome + feedback)

Section 7

CPD Learning Outcomes

Prepare a Tender Report in accordance with RICS Tendering Strategies (2015) minimum content requirements, incorporating a normalised tender comparison, PTE variance analysis, qualifications review and team-endorsed recommendation.
Apply quality/price scoring methodology to a tender evaluation, confirm compliance with the criteria stated in the Instructions to Tenderers, and present results in the Tender Report.
Identify the notification obligations for public sector award decisions under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, including the mandatory standstill period and minimum debrief information.

Section 8