Tender method statements: how to make yours score well

Know you can deliver the work, but struggling to explain how? A method statement is a written answer showing how you’ll deliver a contract, service or work package.

To score well, it needs to answer the buyer’s published criteria with a clear sequence, named people, realistic controls and relevant proof. From the evaluator’s side, confidence comes from delivery detail we can actually assess.

Start with the scoring instructions, then shape your method, evidence and final checks around what the buyer needs to know.

Key takeaways

• Start with the buyer’s question, specification and scoring guidance. Cover every requirement, and keep pass-or-fail checks separate from scored answers.
• Explain a practical method built for this contract. Set out what happens and when, who is responsible and how you’ll check each stage is complete.
• Back up important claims with evidence you can verify, and make sure your method, staffing and pricing all describe the same offer.
• Check which procurement rules and safety documents apply, follow all submission instructions, and review the draft against the evaluation criteria before submitting.

Read the scoring instructions before you write

Your team might know this service inside out, but the evaluator wasn’t in your planning meetings and can only score what’s on the page.

Read the question, specification and scoring guidance together as a set before anyone starts drafting.

Some requirements are pass or fail, such as the supplier selection checks in a selection questionnaire, while others attract marks. A tender can also set a minimum quality score you have to reach.

Keep a separate note of these so a strong narrative doesn’t distract you from a missing declaration or mandatory qualification.

The invitation to tender (ITT) sets out what the buyer wants you to submit and where this stage sits in the process. Check its attachment rules, response limits and any clarification updates. Clarifications are questions raised through the buyer’s stated process to clear up uncertainty before submission.

Underline each instruction word, such as describe, demonstrate, explain or evidence, because each one asks for something slightly different.

If the buyer asks about delivery, staffing and contingency arrangements, all three need to be easy to find in your answer. Using headings that mirror the question helps with that.

Read the score descriptors before you decide how to use your word count, because they show what moves an answer from adequate to strong.

The evaluator tick-box method is a useful way to make your evidence easy to assess while keeping your answer readable.

What to include in your tender method statement

Your structure should follow the question itself, with enough detail to show how delivery will actually work.

This table is a good way to gather input from your team before you start writing.

Part of the answer	What the evaluator needs to see
Contract understanding	The scope, constraints and outcomes your method addresses.
Mobilisation	Preparations, dependencies and checks before delivery starts.
Delivery sequence	What happens, in what order, and who does it.
People and resources	Responsibilities, capacity, equipment and subcontractor arrangements.
Risk and contingency	Credible risks, warning signs, controls and escalation.
Performance and evidence	How you’ll check results, with proof that supports your approach.

Mobilisation means getting ready to start the contract. That could involve recruitment, site surveys, system access, staff training or agreeing reporting arrangements.

Pick the ones that apply to you. A council repairs contract and a software support service will need very different preparations.

For each activity, name its owner, timing and completion check. Then explain how contract management will track delivery and reporting once the contract starts.

Ask your delivery lead what must be ready before the first job, visit or service request. Then check those commitments against the pricing and staffing assumptions.

If your method relies on resources you haven’t priced, you’ve built yourself a problem before the contract even starts.

Turn broad promises into practical delivery detail

Where I see bidders lose marks is the gap between a reassuring claim and an executable plan.

“We have robust processes” tells me little about what happens on this contract.

Take electrical work in an occupied school. “We will minimise disruption and work safely” doesn’t explain the proposed approach.

Useful detail would cover access and safeguarding, along with your health and safety controls and the working windows you’ve agreed. I’d also want to see your isolation arrangements, how you’ll coordinate with school staff and what testing happens before handover.

Ask the technical lead who agrees access, how isolation is verified and what happens if the work area becomes unavailable. Write the answers your team can stand behind.

Detail like this gives the evaluator something real to score. It also flushes out delivery assumptions while there’s still time to sort them.

If your answer describes an effective handover process, back it up with relevant records or verified experience.

Useful evidence could include completed handover documentation, audit findings or client feedback about comparable work. Explain what that evidence demonstrates and why it applies here.

Choose case studies for how closely they match this contract. A smaller job with the same constraints often says more than your biggest one.

Use the tender evidence gap test to check each claim has support, and take out any results your team can’t verify.

How RAMS and health and safety evidence fit

The phrase “method statement” can mean two things in construction work. It might be a scored delivery answer, or it might be a document explaining how the work will be carried out safely.

Read the requirement carefully, because the buyer may want both.

RAMS means risk assessments and method statements. The risk assessment identifies hazards and controls; the method statement explains the working sequence.

At tender stage, show how your proposed approach addresses the available information. Identify assumptions that need confirmation through surveys, access discussions or further design information.

Under CDM 2015, a Construction Phase Plan has to be in place before the construction phase begins. HSE’s construction planning guidance explains who is responsible for what.

Subcontractor RAMS help the principal contractor coordinate activities and shared risks on site, and they sit alongside the Construction Phase Plan. Any final safety documents need a competent technical review.

PAS 91, the old construction pre-qualification standard, has been withdrawn and the Common Assessment Standard has taken its place. SSIP accreditation covers health and safety assessment, and CHAS and SMAS are two of the familiar providers.

It’s worth understanding the differences between PAS 91, SSIP and CAS when you’re checking selection requirements.

Confirm exactly what the buyer will accept, including the scope and validity of your certificates. Accreditation strengthens your evidence pack, and the evaluator still needs to see the controls you’ll use on this contract.

No certificate can show how you’ll manage shared access or overlapping trades on this particular site, so that has to come from your method.

Check the public procurement rules that apply

The Procurement Act 2023 came into force on 24 February 2025 and covers most new public sector procurement in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Scotland has its own rules.

Procurements that started earlier can stay under the old legislation, so check which route the tender documents say you’re on.

For covered contracts above the relevant threshold, buyers normally have to run a competition unless a lawful direct award or another permitted route applies, such as calling off from an existing framework.

The government publishes the 2026 procurement threshold amounts, and below-threshold contracts come with their own requirements.

Under the Act, buyers can use an open procedure or a competitive flexible procedure, and the government guidance on competitive tendering explains how they differ. The flexible route can include extra stages such as dialogue or negotiation, which affects how and when your method gets tested.

Check the tender notice, the submission route and the supplier information you’ll need on the Central Digital Platform for supplier selection.

Then read the specification, evaluation model, pricing schedule and contract terms together. The notice tells you the opportunity exists, and the tender documents tell you what your method has to cover.

Common mistakes that cost tender marks

The most familiar mistake is writing about the general subject when the buyer has asked something specific. An excellent description of your quality system won’t answer a request for contingency arrangements on this contract.

Reused material causes problems when it includes old client names, unsuitable processes or assumptions about access and staffing.

Another issue is hiding the answer in an attachment. If attachments are allowed, explain what each one proves. Evaluators don’t have time to dig through a policy to piece your method together.

Watch for contradictions between answers too. A staffing commitment needs to match across your responses, your organisation chart, the mobilisation plan and the price.

Treat compliance risk and weak scoring as two separate checks. A late submission, a missing mandatory health and safety document or a breached word limit can get your bid rejected under the stated rules. Unsupported claims tend to cost you marks, and fixing them takes a different kind of work.

Before you submit: the evaluator check

Give your reviewer the question, the evaluation criteria and the draft together, and ask them to test it against the criteria as well as how it reads.

Use these questions:

• Can we find an answer to every requirement?
• Is it clear who does what, when, who owns each commitment for contract management, and how completion is checked?
• Does each important claim have relevant, verifiable support?
• Are risks, dependencies and fallback arrangements credible?
• Do the method, staffing and price agree?
• Have we followed every response and submission instruction?

Our tender response checklist covers the wider checks across the full set of tender documents.

Leave time to act on the feedback. Where the timetable allows, aim to have the review done three working days before submission.

Give each correction an owner, or a helpful review can easily turn into another document nobody has time to finish.

Frequently asked questions

Give the evaluator a method they can believe

A good method statement makes your delivery easy to understand, believe and score. That depends on keeping your commitments, evidence and resources lined up.

At Bidsmithery™, I help teams review their answers through an evaluator’s eyes, so the delivery knowledge stays inside your business and your team gets sharper with every bid.

If you’d like to build that judgement in-house, take a look at our bid and tender training. Your team already knows the work, and we’ll help you get that knowledge onto the page.