Mechanical and electrical (M&E) tenders play a vital role in the built environment and facilities management sector, especially for public sector clients who need safe, reliable, and efficient maintenance services. Whether you are bidding for planned preventive maintenance, reactive repairs, system replacements, or integrated facilities management, knowing how your M&E tender will be scored is key to improving your chances of success.
This blog will explain how examiners mark your M&E bids and will shed light on numerous variables, such as the MEAT method, the impact of SFG20 compliance, as well as provide further tips on how to maximise scores in M&E bids.
How SFG20 Compliance Influences Tender Scoring
SFG20 compliance is widely regarded as the benchmark for planned maintenance in the UK property sector. In M&E maintenance tenders, you will almost always find a question or requirement relating to SFG20 (or a client-specific adaptation of it). Evaluators want to see that you not only reference SFG20 but actively use it as the foundation for your maintenance planning and service delivery.
When M&E tender scoring is assessed, evaluators will look for:
- A clear link between your maintenance regime and the SFG20 task schedules, tailored to the asset mix and risk profile of the client’s portfolio.
- Evidence of your scheduling regime built around SFG20 tasks, including how you monitor, record, and report completion via a CAFM or ERP system.
- A clear audit trail showing that tasks are completed to schedule, remedial actions are logged and data is used to improve future performance.
- An understanding of the standard and how you add value – for example, meeting SFG20 tasks while identifying opportunities to extend asset life, reduce energy use, or minimise downtime.
If your response is simply “we follow SFG20”, you are unlikely to score highly. Instead, explain how you implement the tasks, how you record compliance, who is accountable, and what monitoring or continuous improvement processes you have in place.
What MEAT Means in M&E Procurement
MEAT is a structured and transparent evaluation method ensuring that bidders are not selected purely because they offer the lowest cost. Due to the risks of ineffecient maintenance or installations in the M&E industry, clients awarding M&E contracts place emphasis on reliability, safety, compliance and performance, not just the benefits of saving money with cheaper contractors.
Under MEAT, you will almost always see cost and quality (sometimes referred to as “non-price” criteria) given separate weightings. For example, a client might allocate 30 to 40% of total points to price and 60 to 70% to quality. The exact split will depend on the nature of the contract – is it primarily maintenance, or a design-and-install M&E contract with lifecycle responsibility?
Quality in this context covers all the non-price factors – your technical approach, workforce competence, compliance systems, environmental and sustainability credentials, social value, innovation, etc. Your pricing schedule remains important, but if your quality submission is weak, you may fail to secure the contract even with a competitive price.
Technical Weighting
In many M&E framework tenders, the technical (quality) component carries more influence than price. This is due to the major safety and reputational issues that can follow should mechanical or electrical operations fail.
A common scoring structure might be:
- Quality/Technical: 60%
- Price: 40%
However, this ratio can vary depending on the scope of work. For example, in a long-term maintenance framework or a complex mechanical replacement project, quality may carry an even higher weighting, as the client’s priority is reliability and technical expertise rather than short-term savings. In contrast, for more straightforward or one-off works, price may account for a larger share of the score.
Understanding where the emphasis lies in each tender allows you to tailor your bid accordingly. When quality carries more influence, you should focus on demonstrating strong technical knowledge, clear processes, and evidence of measurable outcomes from similar contracts, ensuring evaluators can see the tangible value of choosing your organisation over competitors.
How Quality is Scored in M&E Tenders
The questions included in the quality section will differ depending on the contract type, the contracting authority’s objectives and priorities and the scope of works included. However, M&E bids will typically include the following sections:
- Service delivery and technical competence (workforce, accreditations, previous performance)
- Compliance, health and safety, statutory checks, and SFG20 alignment
- Environmental management, sustainability, and innovation
- Social value, community benefit, and value-added services
Under the quality section, each question will typically be scored according to a matrix, often from 0 = Unacceptable to 5 = Excellent. A response rated “5” must show full compliance, clear added value, and evidence of successful delivery. Many M&E contracting authorities will include a scoring matrix in the tender documents, so it is vital to tailor your responses according to this information to maximise points.
It is important to remember that evaluators are looking for assurance and evidence. This means including documented processes, named roles, verifiable results and continuous improvement initiatives. Generic statements such as “we have skilled operatives” are not enough – provide facts, examples, references and measurable outcomes wherever possible.
How Price is Scored in M&E Bids
Although price may carry fewer points than quality in many M&E service tenders, it remains essential. In most public sector procurements, the lowest compliant bid gets full marks for cost (100% of the price weighting) and other bidders’ scores are proportionally reduced. For example, if pricing is weighted at 40% and your bid is 20% higher than the lowest, your price score will reflect that difference.
However, submitting an implausibly low price can raise concerns with evaluators about service delivery quality or long-term viability. In mechanical and electrical maintenance contracts, underpricing often signals risk, which can result in lost marks or disqualification.
In addition to base pricing, you should consider the whole-life cost analysis. Contracting authorities increasingly value bids that show how optimisation and energy reduction can reduce expenditure throughout the contract’s term. Including any cost-saving details in your technical response will improve your quality score and position your pricing as a more sustainable option.
Where M&E Bidders Commonly Lose Marks
Many capable M&E contractors lose marks because of how they present their tender. Common issues include:
- Failing to link responses to the client’s specific asset register or operational context.
- Not showing how SFG20 is applied, monitored and reported.
- Not including measurable KPIs or performance data.
- Making vague statements about training and compliance without naming personnel or roles.
- Neglecting social value, sustainability or environmental impact statements.
Should you find yourself losing marks in M&E bids, our expert writers can take a look at your feedback and implement the necessary changes to maximise your chances of success in future tenders.
Final Thoughts
Scoring in M&E tenders is more complex than simply being the cheapest option – clients want assurance that the chosen supplier can deliver safe, efficient, compliant and optimised services.
By understanding the MEAT framework, demonstrating strong SFG20-based maintenance planning and submitting detailed technical responses backed by measurable evidence, you significantly increase your chances of winning M&E tenders.
If you are preparing an M&E tender and need writing support or guidance, fill out the form below or reach out to james.wignall@bidwritingservice.com, matt.burton@bidwritingservice.com or michael.baron@bidwritingservice.com for further details.
Request a Callback
"*" indicates required fields