How are M&E Tenders Scored? (Including MEAT, SFG20 Compliance & Technical Weighting)

M&E
Thea Phillips
November 17, 2025
A close-up shot of a person's hand using a bright yellow mechanical pencil to write or highlight text on a white sheet of paper

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.

Side profile of a technician in a yellow hard hat and safety glasses, wearing work gloves while carefully adjusting components inside an open electrical panel on a wall

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.

A close-up, ground-level view of black-rimmed eyeglasses resting on top of printed documents, with the background softly blurred

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.

You May Also Like

Explore more insights and success strategies from our experts.

What Our
Clients Say

See how we’ve helped SMEs across industries secure contracts and grow their success.

S

Syed Hasan

Accounts Manager

We engaged Bid Writing Service to support our submission for the GMC tender, aiming to drive potential growth for our business. While we are still awaiting the final outcome, we can confidently say the service has been excellent and well worth the investment. Special thanks to Jessica, Peter, and Francesca, whose professionalism, responsiveness, and attention to detail greatly contributed to the strength of our submission. Their collaborative approach and expertise made the entire process smooth and reassuring. Highly recommended for any organisation seeking expert bid support.

O

Office Staff

I recently had the pleasure of working with BWS on a bid, and I wanted to share my overwhelmingly positive experience. Their expertise and guidance were truly exceptional and instrumental in our success. Throughout the entire process, BWS provided unwavering support and demonstrated an impressive depth of industry knowledge. I genuinely believe their contributions were the key to our successful bid. Without hesitation, I would wholeheartedly recommend BWS and certainly plan to collaborate with them again in the future.

A

Andrew Hobbs

We engaged Bid Writing Service to support us in responding to a public tender opportunity. The service provided was simply exceptional. Well organised, proactive and responsive, accurate, punctual and of course very well written. This is a quality company with some really excellent client facing members of staff. Thank you Rhiannon, Francesca, Thea, Georgia and Lauren. Brilliant first impression and thoroughly recommended !!

J

Joseph Palmer

We've been working with Lauren and Rhiannon at Bid Writing Service for a few months now and they have been great! They are super responsive to emails and are always there to guide/support us through the process. As soon as a tender get released that matches our industry Lauren sends it straight over even if it's an evening or weekend so we have piece of mind knowing we won't miss any tenders! Thank you Lauren & Rhiannon

R

Ross Nicholson

Rhiannon was very switched on when it came to giving our company advice around bid writing. She produced drafts in a swift and professional manner which was important to us when the deadline was approaching fast.

V

Vanessa Varoujian

Incredibly professional, responsive and dedicated. Great to have a team who take the time to get to know the business and our ethos, and understand the pressures of tender and bid writing for a small organisation.

V

Vinceo Ferlita

Crown ices Ltd.

One of the best companies we have worked with. From our first conversation to the completed work. Always on hand for any questions we had, very knowledgeable and timely. Would use again and would highly recommend. Thank you for your hard work and such excellent service. Crown ices Ltd.

J

James Barber

I can not recommend BWS highly enough. Our first call with Luke was professional and built an immediate trust in the business. Lauren then took on our project at short notice with a 48 hour turn around time. She went above and beyond to ensure it was completed on time. We are now going to have a conversation about building a bid library and them becoming our exclusive supplier.

C

Chris C

Lauren from BWS went above and beyond to support us with our tender on extremely short notice. Her dedication, professionalism, and willingness to assist at all hours were second to none. Lauren's expertise and responsiveness made what could have been a stressful process smooth and efficient. I cannot recommend her highly enough for anyone needing reliable and high-quality support.

G

GMS SERVICES LTD

We have used BWS to assist with our bid writing services. Not only does this provide us with vital resources when there are multiple tenders we want to bid for, it also provides a quality bid which is written by engaging bid writers who are interested in our business and helping us succeed. They become a part of our business. We would highly recommend their services and many thanks to George Flower who has delivered a brilliant service for us.

A

Andrea Gascoigne

Recently won a nice project with the help of BWS, found them easy to work with and will use again.

B

Barry Chapman

We used this company as part of our growth strategy, in that they, and I mean Lauren Moorhouse as their lead, created from scratch a comprehensive Bid Library. This is an excellent process to begin this new phase of our development, to gain more work and raising our branding profile. The whole system, was great to see how it grew into the formidable tool that it is, which we now have at our disposal, with an increase in our confidence to bolster our turnover.

B

B&E Boys

We employed BWS to assist with our bid writing and knowledge management resources. The team were always very professional and flexible in working around our schedules whilst maintaining agreed deadlines. We would recommend BWS to others who are looking for a ‘fresh set of eyes’ on any business development material. We will be working with BWS in the future.

M

Matt Webb

We engaged with BWS to assist with a bid on a civils project and were very pleased with the work they delivered. There was always clear communication and documents were produced within the agreed timeframes and cost. Being the first time working with a bid writing company they immediately put as at ease and gave us confidence that our submission was as strong as possible which gave us the best chance. Thanks to all the team at BWS!

N

Nick Heath

Compass Fuel

We dived into the world of tenders, and Lauren made the process fairly simple for novices like ourselves. Wouldnt hesitate to use their services again. Nick Heath - Compass Fuel

J

Josh Lownsborough

Working with Kyle has been a pleasure , He has been working weekends and evenings to get the job ready in time, His responses are superb and he is a real professional at his job. I hope we win the contract and I will certainly use Kyle again in the future

M

Matt

My organisation has only recently started working with BWS and we have already seen a win! The team are always professional and work around my schedule. We will continue to work with BWS for future bids, thanks BWS team!

T

Tracey Gordon

Excellent, efficient and professional service from Lauren & Rhiannon. Would 100% recommend and will definitely use again.

J

James Bell

Great service. Quick turnaround and well written bid. Fingers crossed for a successful tender outcome.

C

Chris Davy

We used BWS and found them very quick and efficient, well worth using and will do again

A

Anele Griessel

Rhiannon was friendly, listened, and clarified our questions. Thank you very much

M

Mirela Stefan