Tender Evaluation AI

Two-envelope approach: technical envelope evaluated first against pre-disclosed criteria; commercial envelope only opened for technically compliant bidders. This protects evaluation integrity and aligns with نظام المنافسات م/128.

Make bids comparable by adjusting for: scope exclusions, qualifications, arithmetic errors, alternative pricing, currency assumptions, provisional sums, and programme assumptions. Document every adjustment and reason, this is the spine of an audit-ready evaluation.

Typical weightings on Saudi projects: Price 40–60%, Technical capability 15–25%, Programme 10–15%, Experience 10–15%, Saudi content 5–10%. Adjust per package complexity and client priorities. Always disclose weightings before tender issue.

Government tenders must follow lowest-priced compliant bid principle unless best-value evaluation is pre-authorised. For PIF and private projects, best-value (combined technical + commercial) is standard. All evaluation criteria, weightings, and methodology must be declared in tender documents.

Failing to normalize properly • Ignoring qualifications and exclusions • Hidden scope assumptions • No documented audit trail • Scoring bias and inconsistency between evaluators • Confusing lowest price with best value • Missing Saudi content compliance check.

A defensible report must contain: tender summary, normalization adjustments, ranked evaluation results, recommended awardee with justification, conditions of award, risk flags, and compliance statement. Must be signed by evaluator(s) and reviewed by independent commercial advisor.