- 20+
- Years in government procurement
- 80%+
- Shortlisting or preferred provider rate*
- Fixed fee
- 50% deposit, no discounting, ever
*Defined as shortlisting or preferred provider nomination, the point where our direct influence on the outcome ends.
Construction tenders are marked down on the program, not the price
Evaluators check your program of works against the scope before they check anything else. A schedule that doesn't reconcile with the trades, the site access or the defects liability period gets marked down, whatever the method statement says.
Most construction businesses answer the capability and experience questions well and still lose marks. The response reads fine. The program behind it doesn't survive someone tracing it against the actual scope of works.
A specialist builds the program and the safety management plan around the site, not the tender template. A generalist writer can only give the document a coat of paint.
The program is not usually what loses the tender
Buyers who ask for a detailed program of works are checking whether your sequencing and site logistics are real, not whether the Gantt chart looks impressive.
That's the difference between a shortlist and a mark-down before the price is even opened.
We know what a buyer is looking for, because we've been one
Evaluation experience, not theory
Sue Findlay scored government building and infrastructure contracts as a procurement officer, years before she wrote a construction tender response. She still reads every submission the way a panel does: program first, method statement second.
A program that survives scrutiny
We build the program of works around the real scope and site access, not a generic construction schedule dropped in from another job. If it can't be traced against the drawings, it doesn't go in.
Live inside procurement, not a manual
Our sister company, Procurement Associates, keeps us inside live government procurement processes year-round, so a new WHS circular or local content requirement in construction isn't theory to us.
Safety systems evaluators actually check
We know where a safety management plan gets tested against the real site, and where a generic one falls apart under questioning. Compliance evidence goes where the panel looks for it, not where it's easiest to write.
A process built around a program that holds up
Every construction tender goes through the same four-step build, whether it's a single trade package or a head contract.
-
Site and scope
The site conditions, the trade packages and the defects liability period, before anything gets scheduled.
-
Program
A sequencing and program of works a panel can trace against the drawings, not a template with your dates typed in.
-
Write
The safety, quality and capability response built around that program, not the other way round.
-
Verify
One final pass against the selection criteria before anything goes out the door.
What you get
A program of works that survives being traced against your drawings
A construction capability library, built once and redeployed every tender
Safety and quality evidence filed where panels actually look for it
A pre-submission check run with the same eye a buyer would use
What if we don't win the tender?
The fee isn't a wager on a single result. You come away with a fully built construction tender exemplar and a library of reusable material (program templates, safety documentation, method statements) ready for the next one.
You also see, first-hand, how a government-ready construction response actually gets built, instead of learning it the hard way over a few losses.
Win or lose this one, your business is better equipped for the next tender than it was before you started.
Ready to talk about your next construction tender?
Tell us about the tender that's coming up, or send through the documents. We'll give you a straight answer on whether it's a fit. Quotes are provided on request.