Prepared for
Thornbury Mechanical & Electrical Ltd fictional
Sample tender analysis · NHS estates
M&E backlog-maintenance framework — NHS acute trust, 3 sites
1Opportunity summary
The trust is letting a two-lot framework to work down its high-risk backlog-maintenance list: Lot 1 covers mechanical & electrical remedial works, Lot 2 covers fabric/building repairs. Award is 55% quality / 35% price / 10% social value. The specification ties directly to the trust's own Estates Returns (ERIC) high-risk register, so buyers are scoring on evidenced ability to prioritise and close out clinically-significant defects fast, not just general M&E competence.
Thornbury's turnover (£2.3m) clears the financial-standing gate for Lot 1 (requirement: £900k, twice annual lot value), and the firm holds live NICEIC enrolment and a documented healthcare-sites working method from two prior housing-association contracts — but no direct NHS-site reference yet.
2Deadline register
| Date | Time | Event | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 21 Aug 2026 | 17:00 | Site visit (mandatory for Lot 1 bidders) | Escorted access only — book via the portal, DBS check required to attend (see M2) |
| Fri 4 Sep 2026 | 17:00 | Clarification questions close | Ask about accepted evidence format for HTM-series competency (see gap report) |
| Wed 30 Sep 2026 | 12:00 | Submission deadline | Portal upload — no site-visit attendance record, no eligibility for Lot 1 |
| Jan 2027 | — | Framework start | Mobilisation plan due 3 weeks before start |
3Compliance matrix — mandatory requirements
| Ref | Mandatory requirement | Source | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| M1 | Turnover ≥ £900k (2× annual Lot 1 value), 2 years' accounts | SQ 3.2 | Met — £2.3m filed |
| M2 | Enhanced DBS check for site-attending staff (role-based, per trust policy) | Spec 2.3 | Partial — held for 2 of 4 named operatives; 2 renewals in progress |
| M3 | NICEIC (or equivalent) enrolment | Spec 4.1 | Evidence supplied |
| M4 | Documented competency against the relevant HTM series for the works scope | SQ 5.4 | Confirmation required — operative training records exist but not mapped to specific HTM references; needs a formal statement |
| M5 | SSIP H&S accreditation | SQ 5.1 | Evidence supplied — CHAS Elite, current |
| M6 | Cyber Essentials certification | SQ 6.2 | Evidence supplied — renewed May 2026 |
| M7 | 2 comparable contracts, healthcare or equivalent-risk sites preferred | SQ 7.1 | 0 direct — 2 comparable — two housing-association occupied-site M&E contracts, no NHS reference; buyer's "or equivalent-risk" wording likely accepts these, confirm in clarifications |
4Evidence-gap report
DBS renewals (M2) Gap — fixable, but time-critical
Two of the four named site operatives need DBS renewal before the mandatory site visit on 21 Aug. Standard DBS turnaround is 2–4 weeks; starting this in the last week of August risks missing the visit and being excluded from Lot 1 entirely. Start immediately.
HTM-series competency statement (M4) Buildable this week
Thornbury's operatives hold relevant manufacturer and City & Guilds training, but it has never been formally mapped against the specific HTM series named in the spec. This is a writing task, not a training gap — a one-page competency-mapping statement, reviewed against the spec's own HTM references before submission.
NHS-specific reference (M7) Confirmation required
The SQ says "healthcare or equivalent-risk sites" — the two housing-association occupied-site contracts are a defensible read of "equivalent-risk" (vulnerable occupants, live-environment working), but this is a judgement call, not a certainty. Raise it explicitly in the clarification window rather than assuming the buyer will read it generously.
Prioritisation methodology Genuinely strong
Thornbury's existing defect-triage process (risk-scored, 4-tier response SLA, evidenced from the housing-association contracts' own KPI reports) maps closely onto what this spec is actually testing — the ability to work a backlog list by risk, not just complete jobs. This is the strongest part of the bid and should lead the quality answers, not be buried in an appendix.
5Bid / no-bid assessment
| Factor | Weight | Score | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eligibility (mandatories met/fixable) | 30 | 23 | All gaps closeable in the window; DBS timing is the one hard dependency |
| Deliverability (capacity, geography) | 25 | 19 | Lot 1 volume ≈ 3 FTE M&E technicians; all 3 sites within normal operating radius |
| Competitiveness (quality scoring) | 25 | 17 | Strong triage/prioritisation story; NHS-specific track record is the one real weak point vs likely incumbent bidders |
| Commercial attractiveness | 20 | 13 | Measured-term framework; margin depends on remedials-mix — model against the trust's published high-risk backlog volume |
| Total | 100 | 72 | BID — Lot 1, conditional on DBS renewals landing before the site visit |
Recommendation
Bid Lot 1 — start the DBS renewals today, not after the go/no-go meeting.
Every other gap in this bid is a writing task. The DBS renewal is the only one with a clock that doesn't wait for your internal sign-off process — treat it as day-one, not week-two.
6Red-team notes — where this bid would lose marks
Q2 (prioritisation methodology): don't describe the triage process in the abstract — quote real response-time data from the existing KPI reports; specific numbers score higher than described process.
Q4 (healthcare-environment working): a generic "we work carefully around vulnerable people" answer scores poorly against a spec this specific — name the infection-control and noise/vibration protocols that would actually apply on an occupied clinical site, and flag clearly which of these are supplier-standard practice versus a commitment being made for this contract.
M4 competency statement: don't overstate this — claiming full formal HTM certification the firm doesn't hold would fail evidence-lock review and risks exclusion on verification; a truthful, well-mapped "trained and experienced, formally cross-referenced here" statement is both accurate and sufficient for what the spec actually asks.
7Submission plan (work-back)
| This week | Start DBS renewals for the 2 outstanding operatives · book the mandatory site visit · draft the HTM competency-mapping statement |
| Week of 24 Aug | Attend site visit · submit clarification question on M7's "equivalent-risk" wording · draft Q1–Q2 |
| Week of 31 Aug – 14 Sep | Draft remaining quality questions using real KPI data · price both remedials-mix scenarios · internal red-team review |
| Week of 21 Sep | Final assembly · director sign-off · confirm DBS renewals landed · upload complete pack by Fri 25 Sep (5 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. "Thornbury Mechanical & Electrical Ltd", the trust and all dates, values and documents are fictional; the structure mirrors requirements commonly seen in UK NHS estates backlog-maintenance frameworks. Not legal or procurement advice; no output guarantees any contract award.