Sustainable Procurement Tools

Evaluation and Award

Evaluation and award criteria will of course be set at the beginning of the procurement process. These will be criteria and questions that seek appropriate evidence. For example, evaluation of a bidder’s approach to assessing and managing risks relating to climate change so that it is clear whether they demonstrate an understanding of how to achieve the required outcomes.

Award criteria are of course used to determine which bidder is best placed to deliver a contract. While you decide what award criteria to apply, ensure that you are not duplicating questions at the selection stage (for example, relating to their relevant availability of environmental management systems). This is because at this stage suppliers are being assessed on the merits of how they will delivery contract requirements (such as how they will manage climate change risks), rather than their suitability to bid.

Award criteria must be proportionate and relevant to the works, supplies or services that are the subject-matter of the contract, and there must be a clear methodology to evaluate responses. An outcome/ performance-based specification can be more challenging for evaluators. An ideal response should be understood, based on intended outcomes agreed by relevant stakeholders including within a User Intelligence Group, where relevant. When evaluating therefore:

  • Is it clear what an excellent response should look like?
  • Who is doing the evaluation? Do they have the necessary skills and understanding regarding the intended outcomes? Do they need the support of subject matter experts to ensure an objective evaluation and to build capability – this may include getting subject matter experts to provide specific questions or guidance on them, ensuring they are provided with full guidance to ensure compliance with and understanding of the procurement process. This is of course particularly relevant where specifications are outcome based.
  • Ensure that innovation is applied in an appropriate manner.         

Evaluating Bids

  1. Ensure the response answers the question – does it provide evidence of how the requirement to manage resilience of supplies and services will be delivered during the lifetime of the contract?

Responses which state the existence of policies or strategies are only relevant if such detail has been requested and evidence is provided of how commitments contained within these will be applied in a relevant way to the contract.

  1. The best responses will be clearly aligned with the specification and the tender question, depending on the extent to which you are relying on technical (prescriptive) specifications and/or outcome based (functional) specifications.

If the tender question for example asks for evidence of ‘how the contractor will support [the contracting authority’s] objectives in contract delivery to minimise risks to resilience of [supplies], [services] or [assets], including through innovative solutions, while ensuring this is capable of being objectively monitored through contract management’, then:

    1. How will they assess risks to resilience of supply, services, assets as a result of known or anticipated climate change, according to the subject matter of the contract? What measures will they undertake during contract delivery to minimise such risks (e.g. design standards, supply chain management or other)?

Is evidence provided of how this may be objectively monitored e.g. ongoing evidence of supply chains/ sources of supplies and climate change risk assessment and mitigation measures.

Within the Annex are examples of wording relating to evaluation criteria that may be relevant within procurements.

Return to Specification                                                                     Continue to Contract and Supplier Management