Prepared for
Calder Electrical Services Ltd fictional
Sample tender analysis · electrical
Electrical testing (EICR) & remedial works framework
1Opportunity summary
The buyer is letting a four-year framework for electrical safety testing and remedial works across its housing stock, split into four geographic/size lots. Suppliers may bid for up to two lots. Award is 60% quality / 30% price / 10% social value. Quality is scored on five method-statement questions (word-limited), so a small, well-evidenced bidder can genuinely compete with nationals — price alone won't win it.
Why Lot 2: its annual value (~£150k) sits comfortably under the financial-standing cap given Calder's £680k turnover, the patch is within 40 minutes of the depot, and the volume profile (planned EICR programme with measured-term remedials) matches Calder's current mix of work.
2Deadline register
| Date | Time | Event | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mon 10 Aug 2026 | — | Portal registration & document download | Register early — portal approval can take 24–48h |
| Fri 21 Aug 2026 | 17:00 | Clarification questions close | Ask about equivalent-QMS acceptance (see M3) before this date |
| Wed 26 Aug 2026 | — | Buyer clarification answers published | Re-check compliance matrix against answers |
| Tue 8 Sep 2026 | 12:00 | Submission deadline | Portal upload — allow 2h buffer; late = rejected, no exceptions |
| w/c 5 Oct 2026 | — | Award decision expected | Standstill period follows |
| 1 Dec 2026 | — | Framework start | Mobilisation evidence due 2 weeks prior |
3Compliance matrix — mandatory requirements
| Ref | Mandatory requirement | Source | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| M1 | Public liability insurance ≥ £10m | SQ 4.1 | Evidence supplied — policy doc, expires Mar 2027 |
| M2 | Employer's liability ≥ £10m | SQ 4.1 | Evidence supplied |
| M3 | ISO 9001 or equivalent quality management | SQ 5.2 | Confirmation required — documented QMS held, not certified; "equivalent" route viable, clarify format |
| M4 | SSIP H&S accreditation | SQ 5.1 | Evidence supplied — CHAS Elite, expires Jan 2027 |
| M5 | NICEIC (or equivalent) enrolment | Spec 2.4 | Evidence supplied |
| M6 | Cyber Essentials certification | SQ 6.3 | Gap — not held; certifiable before deadline (see 4) |
| M7 | 3 comparable contracts, last 3 years | SQ 7.1 | 2 of 3 ready — third exists but not written up |
| M8 | Turnover ≥ 2× annual lot value | SQ 3.2 | Met for Lot 2 — £680k vs £300k required. Not met for Lots 1/3 — do not bid those |
4Evidence-gap report
Cyber Essentials (M6) Gap — fixable in time
Mandatory pass/fail. Self-assessed certification is typically achievable in 1–2 weeks. Start immediately; the certificate must be dated on or before submission day. Estimated cost: low hundreds of pounds.
Third case study (M7) Customer confirmation required
The Meadowbank sheltered-scheme rewire (2024) fits the comparability test, but exists only as invoices and a completion certificate. Needs writing up: scope, value, KPIs met, and a named referee — confirm the referee is willing before naming them.
QMS equivalence statement (M3) Customer confirmation required
The SQ accepts "or equivalent". Calder's documented procedures cover inspection, calibration and non-conformance — a two-page equivalence mapping against ISO 9001 clauses should be prepared and submitted with the QMS index. Use the clarification window to confirm the buyer accepts this format.
Social value (10% of score) Derived from evidence
Calder employs one apprentice (enrolment letter on file) and sources materials from two local wholesalers (supplier statements). This supports a modest but true social-value answer. Do not pledge new commitments that can't be delivered — unmet social-value promises become contract breaches.
5Bid / no-bid assessment
| Factor | Weight | Score | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eligibility (mandatories met/fixable) | 30 | 24 | All pass or fixable in window; CE certification is the single hard dependency |
| Deliverability (capacity, geography) | 25 | 21 | Lot 2 volume ≈ 2.1 FTE electricians; depot 35 min from patch centre |
| Competitiveness (quality scoring) | 25 | 15 | 60% quality weighting favours evidence-rich SME answers, but expect 6–10 bidders incl. 2 incumbents |
| Commercial attractiveness | 20 | 12 | Measured-term rates; margin depends on remedials mix — model both volume scenarios before pricing |
| Total | 100 | 72 | BID — Lot 2 only, conditional on starting Cyber Essentials this week |
Recommendation
Bid Lot 2. Skip Lots 1, 3 and 4.
Lots 1 and 3 fail the turnover test today — bidding them wastes the buyer's goodwill and your writing time. Winning Lot 2 and delivering well is also the strongest possible evidence for the re-let in 2030.
6Red-team notes — where this bid would lose marks
Q3 (resourcing): "We will recruit if successful" scores poorly. Name the two qualified electricians and the apprentice; include the subcontractor agreement for peak cover.
Q4 (access & vulnerable residents): the spec mentions sheltered schemes — a generic access process will score 2/5; a specific vulnerable-resident procedure with the Meadowbank example should score 4+.
Pricing schedule: the remedials rate card has 40+ line items; three obviously loss-leading rates invite a "abnormally low" clarification and erode trust. Price honestly, win on quality.
7Submission plan (work-back)
| Week of 10 Aug | Register on portal · start Cyber Essentials · brief referee for third case study |
| Week of 17 Aug | Draft method statements Q1–Q3 · submit clarification on QMS equivalence · write up Meadowbank case study |
| Week of 24 Aug | Draft Q4–Q5 · price both remedials scenarios · internal red-team review against evaluation criteria |
| Week of 31 Aug | Final assembly · director sign-off · upload complete pack by Fri 4 Sep (4 days early) |
This is what £99 buys — for a real tender
Send us a live tender and get this exact analysis for your business — evidence-checked and prepared from the information you provide — within two working days of us receiving your documents. If the honest answer is "don't bid", we'll say so.
Request your founding analysis →Illustrative sample. "Calder Electrical Services Ltd", the buyer and all dates, values and documents are fictional; the structure mirrors requirements commonly seen in UK housing-sector electrical frameworks. Not legal or procurement advice; no output guarantees any contract award.