Award readiness

Award readiness is the point where procurement, commercial, technical, and owner-side stakeholders can defend the recommendation without reconstructing emails, spreadsheets, and meeting notes. In most construction procurement processes, the award recommendation is the document that gets audited: by an unsuccessful bidder, a funder, or your own committee months later. The goal is a decision record that stands on its own. In TruBuild, a package award rests on the latest reviewed technical and commercial rounds, the tender query record, and a written decision rationale. This page covers what to check before awarding, what to put in the committee pack, how to record the award in the app, and what a defensible award comment looks like.

Before you can award

TruBuild enforces two conditions before a package can be awarded:

The contractor must be ranked in both the technical and commercial evaluations. A contractor with a technical score but no priced submission (or the reverse) is not eligible and will not appear in the contractor dropdown.
The technical score review on the latest technical round must be complete. Until it is, the award page shows “Complete technical score review on the latest round before awarding” and the Award package button stays disabled.

Only users with full package access can submit an award. Viewers can open the award page and review the evaluation summary, but the Award package button stays disabled with a Read-only access tooltip. Commercial-only users cannot award either.

This mirrors good procurement practice: you should not award against a technical ranking that evaluators have not signed off, and you should not award a bidder whose commercial position was never compared against the others.

TruBuild does not blend the two evaluations into a single award score. The award page shows the technical position and the commercial position side by side and leaves the trade-off to you. Whether your governance follows lowest evaluated price or a most economically advantageous tender (MEAT) approach, the reasoning belongs in your award comments.

The award record

Everything the committee needs should already exist in the package before the award step:

Record	Source in TruBuild	Owner
Package metadata	Package setup	Procurement manager
Contractor list	Package contractors	Package lead
Commercial result	Latest reviewed commercial round	Commercial lead
Technical result	Latest technical round with score review complete	Technical lead
Clarifications	Tender queries and PTC records	Procurement manager
Selected contractor	Award package flow	Procurement manager
Award comments	Award package flow	Procurement manager and committee secretary

Committee checklist

Confirm package scope

Package name, currency, contractor list, and evaluation basis should match the tender strategy approved before evaluation. If the basis changed mid-evaluation, that change needs its own justification.

Confirm commercial evidence

Review the latest commercial comparison: total bid position, exclusions, unpriced items, and pricing anomalies. State whether committee figures are Received (as submitted) or Normalized (after overrides), and confirm every material override carries a note.

Confirm technical evidence

Review the latest technical ranking and criterion-level scores, including evaluator overrides and any clarification-driven reruns. The score review on the latest round must be marked complete.

Confirm queries

Review the tender query register. Material queries that have not reached Closed (still Pending, Assigned, Draft Response, Pending Approval, or Sent without a response) should be resolved or explicitly accepted as residual risk before award.

Record the decision

Select the awarded contractor and add award comments that explain the decision, not just the result.

Assemble the committee pack

Export a fixed snapshot of the evidence before the committee sits, so reviewers work from documents rather than a live screen. TruBuild produces four deliverables that together cover the award recommendation:

Deliverable	Format	What it gives the committee
Commercial comparison workbook	`.xlsx`, one per asset and round	Vendor totals, PTE benchmark, lowest bidder, the full line-by-line comparison per division, and a warnings sheet listing detected anomalies
Technical evaluation results workbook	`.xlsx`	Contractor ranking, scores by round, and detailed weighted section scores with evidence references
PTC questions export	`.xlsx`, per asset and round	Clarification questions, vendor responses, and status per item, so open items are visible
Evaluation report	`.docx`	Cover page, executive summary, key metrics, and detailed per-round scores in a document format for circulation

Export the commercial comparison with Export Comparison from the asset’s commercial detail page, choosing the vendors, price display, and bid mode the committee should see. See Commercial evaluation for the export options.

Exports are logged with the exporting user, timestamp, and scope, so you can later establish exactly which version of the comparison the committee reviewed. Retain the exported files alongside the committee minutes.

Award the package in the app

Open the award page

From the package overview, click Award package.

Select the contractor

Use the Select contractor dropdown. It lists only eligible contractors (ranked in both evaluations), with the top technically ranked contractor pre-selected. If you are awarding to a different contractor, your award comments should explain why.

Review the evaluation summary

The summary card shows the selected contractor’s position on both sides:

Technical: rank and score
Commercial: rank and total bid

This is your last sense check that the selection matches the evidence. Confirm both figures come from the latest reviewed rounds.

Add award comments

Fill in Award comments (optional). Optional in the app, but treat it as mandatory for any committee-governed award. See the examples below.

Submit

Click Award package. TruBuild confirms with “Package awarded successfully” and returns you to the package overview.

After the award

The package status badge changes from Pending Award to Awarded.
The awarded contractor’s name and the award date appear on the package.
Award comments remain accessible in the package details panel.
The award action is recorded in the audit trail, including who awarded, when, and the comments entered.

Submitting the award writes the awarded contractor and comments to the package record. Confirm the selected contractor and the round evidence before clicking Award package.

Good award comments

Good comments explain the reasoning a future auditor or committee member would need:

Award recommended to Contractor B. Contractor B ranked second technically but first
commercially after Round 2 clarifications. Contractor A held the highest technical
score, but its price remained 14.8% above the package average and included unresolved
exclusions on commissioning support. Contractor B's PTC responses resolved the
material HSE and programme concerns, and no high-priority commercial queries remain open.

Weak comments are labels, not rationale:

Approved as discussed.

A useful test: could someone who never attended the evaluation meetings reconstruct why this contractor won, and why the nearest alternative did not, from the comment plus the round evidence?

Residual risk register

Before award, capture any residual items that remain unresolved:

Risk	Example	Where to record
Open technical clarification	Missing commissioning method statement	Tender query or technical PTC
Open commercial clarification	Provisional sum excluded or qualified	Commercial PTC
Qualification or exception	Contractor qualifies programme, warranty, scope, or compliance requirement	Tender query, PTC note, or award comment
Extraction uncertainty	Imputed values remain on high-value lines that were never verified against the source document	Line-item notes on the commercial round
Committee exception	Awarding to a contractor other than the lowest bidder or technical leader	Award comments

When not to award yet

Delay award or escalate if:

A material query has not reached Closed and its answer could change the ranking.
The selected contractor has unresolved unpriced scope or unaccepted exclusions.
The technical score review on the latest round is not complete. TruBuild blocks the award in this case.
A technical score depends on a criterion that was not revisited after a material clarification.
The commercial result relies on a manual override without an explanatory note.
The committee pack was exported from a different round than the one on screen.
The award comment does not explain why the selected contractor is preferred over the nearest alternative.

Evaluation governance

Access levels, audit trail, and the controls behind the award gate.

Commercial evaluation

Build and export the commercial evidence that supports the award.

Technical evaluation

Complete the technical score review required before awarding.

Tender queries

Manage clarification status and response evidence.

Get started

Platform features

Before you can award

The award record

Committee checklist

Assemble the committee pack

Award the package in the app

After the award

Good award comments

Residual risk register

When not to award yet

Evaluation governance

Commercial evaluation

Technical evaluation

Tender queries

​Before you can award

​The award record

​Committee checklist

​Assemble the committee pack

​Award the package in the app

​After the award

​Good award comments

​Residual risk register

​When not to award yet

​Related

Evaluation governance

Commercial evaluation

Technical evaluation

Tender queries

Before you can award

The award record

Committee checklist

Assemble the committee pack

Award the package in the app

After the award

Good award comments

Residual risk register

When not to award yet

Related