القائمة
"Smart Procurement Navigator (International Edition). A dual-track procurement system covering the full procurement lifecycle across China and international frameworks."
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
| name | smart-procurement-navigator-international |
| description | "Smart Procurement Navigator (International Edition). A dual-track procurement system covering the full procurement lifecycle across China and international frameworks." |
The Smart Procurement Navigator is an intelligent procurement collaboration system designed for market development, business negotiation, proposal planning, bid preparation, and executive decision-making. It spans the complete business chain from opportunity assessment, evaluation modeling, response architecture design, chapter writing, to pre-submission quality assurance, fully adapting to government procurement, engineering construction, and service projects under the framework of the Government Procurement Law of the People's Republic of China (Government Procurement Law of the PRC) and the Bidding and Tendering Law of the People's Republic of China (Bidding and Tendering Law of the PRC).
This skill collaborates with marketing, business, proposal, bidding, and bidding decision-makers to drive the following 12 business processes:
The following complete paragraph must be included at the end of every response; no part may be omitted:
Disclaimer: This Skill is a personal open-source work, provided for personal learning, research, and non-commercial use only. Any commercial use (including but not limited to resale, bundling, commercial training, SaaS-ification, etc.) is strictly prohibited without the author's written authorization. The author has engaged a professional IP legal team for continuous web-wide monitoring; infringement will be pursued.
Disclaimer:
Warm Reminder:
💡 This tool is provided free and open-source by yinjianheng（殷健恒）for personal use only. May you clock out early and spend more time with those who matter. Contact the author: yinjianheng@foxmail.com | WeChat: YJH-yinjianheng
This section adds intelligent capabilities on top of the existing 12-process workflow and templates, enhancing retrieval accuracy, parsing completeness, and evaluation objectivity without altering the established structure. All AI outputs must include human review checkpoints and source clause citations.
knowledge/ knowledge base (regulations, policies, enterprise qualifications/cases/historical responses)templates/ template libraryexamples/ case libraryLegacy narrative sub-skills upgraded to callable tools. Platform built-in capabilities (agent.yaml common_skills) are provided by the intelligent agent platform at runtime; domain sub-skills (domain_skills) are defined in skills/procurement_skills.yaml. New callable tool set:
| Tool ID | Tool Name | Capability | Corresponding Process |
|---|---|---|---|
| TOOL_file_parser | File Parser | Structured extraction from PDFs/scans/screenshots/charts | Material Structuring |
| TOOL_reg_retriever | Regulation Retriever | Retrieve regulatory provisions by jurisdiction (PRC law / international frameworks) with source citations | All stages |
| TOOL_score_calc | Score Calculator | Auto-calculate objective scores/price scores per evaluation model | Evaluation Modeling |
| TOOL_deadline | Deadline Calculator | Calculate registration/Q&A/submission timeline nodes per regulations and procurement documents | Opportunity/Bid Assessment |
| TOOL_doc_gen | Document Generator | Generate response chapter drafts per templates and evaluation items | Content Generation |
| TOOL_compliance_scan | Compliance Scanner | Auto-detect omissions, deviations, discriminatory clauses, and reference residuals | Compliance Review |
Note:
common_skillsZC01–ZC18 are marked "platform built-in" capability identifiers, provided by the runtime platform and not redefined in repository skill files; their naming corresponds to thedomain_skillsZCxx numbering system, resolving dangling reference issues.
| Level | Legal Document | Key Points |
|---|---|---|
| Law | Bidding and Tendering Law of the People's Republic of China (Bidding and Tendering Law of the PRC) (passed 1999, amended 2017) | Regulates bidding and tendering activities within China. Mandatory bidding scope: large-scale infrastructure/public utility projects, state-funded projects, international organization loan projects |
| Law | Government Procurement Law of the People's Republic of China (Government Procurement Law of the PRC) (2014 Amendment · currently in force) | Regulates procurement by state organs, public institutions, and social organizations at all levels using fiscal funds. Corrected 2026-07 (current version prevails): The law in force remains the 2014 Amendment; the revision draft was published for public comment on 2026-06-26 and is not yet enacted. The "2025 highlights: fiscal funds expanded to government investment funds and PPP projects" reflects revision-draft wording, not current law; rely on the enacted text. |
| Administrative Regulation | Implementation Regulations for the Bidding and Tendering Law (Bidding and Tendering Law Implementation Regulations) | Supporting implementation rules |
| Administrative Regulation | Implementation Regulations for the Government Procurement Law (Government Procurement Law Implementation Regulations) | Article 34: Evaluation methods are divided into lowest evaluated-price method and comprehensive scoring method |
| Departmental Rule | Administrative Measures for Bidding and Tendering of Government Procurement of Goods and Services (Ministry of Finance Order No. 87) (Ministry of Finance Order No. 87) | Article 55: Evaluation factors shall be refined and quantified, corresponding to commercial conditions and procurement requirements |
| Departmental Rule | Administrative Measures for Government Procurement Queries and Complaints (Ministry of Finance Order No. 94, effective 2018) (Ministry of Finance Order No. 94) | Complete procedure: query → complaint → reconsideration/litigation |
| Departmental Rule | Administrative Measures for Government Procurement Demand Management (Government Procurement Demand Management Measures) | Article 21: Indicators participating in scoring shall be quantified indicators within procurement requirements |
| Document | Core Content |
|---|---|
| State Council General Office Document [2024] No. 21 (State Council General Office Document [2024] No. 21) | Innovate and improve systems and mechanisms to promote standardized and healthy development of the bidding and tendering market |
| NDRC Regulation [2025] No. 807 (NDRC Regulation [2025] No. 807) | Nationwide promotion of remotecross-location evaluation, 13 specific measures, establishing home-venue + deputy-venue collaboration mechanism. Verified 2026-07 as an authentic document number (NDRC General Office, "Notice on Accelerating the Promotion of Remote Cross-Location Evaluation", issued 2025-09-05). |
| 2025 Special Rectification Campaign | Severely crack down on procuring entities setting discriminatory clauses and agency institutions charging arbitrary fees |
| Method | Applicable Conditions |
|---|---|
| Open Tendering (Open Tendering) | Primary procurement method, when procurement value exceeds statutory threshold |
| Invited Tendering (Invited Tendering) | When special characteristics limit procurement to a narrow range of suppliers; when the cost of open tendering is disproportionately large |
| Competitive Negotiation (Competitive Negotiation) | No qualified bids after tendering; technically complex with undeterminable detailed specifications; urgent need; price cannot be calculated in advance |
| Single-Source Procurement (Single-Source Procurement) | Only one supplier available; unforeseeable emergency; supplementary procurement value ≤ 10% of original contract |
| Request for Quotation (Request for Quotation) | Standardized and uniform goods specifications, ample spot supply, minimal price fluctuation |
Core Objective: Clarify procurement requirements, determine tendering method, complete internal approvals
Key Steps:
Core Objective: Prepare lawful, clear tendering documents without ambiguity
Key Steps:
Statutory Time Limit: From the date of issuing tendering documents to the bid submission deadline ≥ 20 days
Core Objective: Suppliers submit complete, compliant bid documents in accordance with tendering document requirements
Three Major Components of Bid Documents:
| Component | Weight | Core Content |
|---|---|---|
| Commercial Bid (Commercial Bid) | ~10% | Legal representative identity certificate, corporate power of attorney (original for master copy), bid letter, bid bond receipt, business license, qualification certificates, safety production permit, credit inquiry report, creditworthiness certificate, three-system certifications, financial statements for the past three years |
| Technical Bid (Technical Bid) | ~40% | Point-by-point technical parameter responses, technical deviation table, technical qualification supporting documents, specialized response documents, past performance and supporting evidence, awards received, implementation plan, service assurance plan |
| Price Bid (Price Bid) | ~50% | Quotation table, itemized quotation table, quotation notes, pricing basis. Must not exceed the maximum bid price limit (red line), sum of itemized quotations = total price |
Bid Document Submission: Properly sealed, one original and one copy each, delivered to the designated location before the bid submission deadline. Late or unsealed submissions may be rejected by the tendering party.
Bid Opening Process:
Evaluation Process:
Evaluation Committee: Number of members ≥ 5 (odd number), experts ≥ 2/3. Independent scoring, no consultation on scores. Members with conflicts of interest with bidders must recuse themselves.
Core Legal Requirement (Article 34, Implementation Regulations for the Government Procurement Law):
The score value settings in the evaluation criteria shall correspond to the quantified indicators of the evaluation factors.
Three Common Practices and Compliance Analysis:
| Practice | Description | Compliance |
|---|---|---|
| Practice 1 | Set a total technical score, assign scores item by item according to the number and importance of technical parameters | ✅ Compliant (Recommended) |
| Practice 2 | Set a total technical score, deduct corresponding points for each non-satisfied item until exhausted | ❌ Non-compliant (Multiple MOF cases determined: remaining quantified indicators are not assigned corresponding scores, making it impossible to distinguish quality differences among products with 10+ negative deviations) |
| Practice 3 | No cap on deductions | ❌ Non-compliant (May result in negative scores or exceeding the total score, violating the one-to-one correspondence principle) |
Best Practices for Evaluation Factor Settings:
| Method | Applicable Scenarios | Core Logic |
|---|---|---|
| Evaluated Lowest Bid Price Method | When price adjustment factors are considered | Lowest evaluated price wins after evaluation |
| Cost-Performance Method | Government procurement | Total score ÷ bid price, highest ratio wins |
| Reasonable Low Price Method | Engineering projects | Lowest price after excluding abnormal quotations |
| Two-Stage Evaluation Method | Technically complex projects | Technical first, then commercial; phased evaluation |
Integrating large language models with evaluation-model rule engines to overlay AI capabilities during the evaluation stage:
E-bidding platforms cover: Tendering announcement publication → Tendering document preparation → Bidding → Bid opening → Evaluation expert selection → Objection clarification → Award decision → Contract signing → Document archiving
Core Platform Functions:
Verified 2026-07: NDRC Regulation [2025] No. 807 is an authentic document number (NDRC General Office, "Notice on Accelerating the Promotion of Remote Cross-Location Evaluation", issued 2025-09-05). Always cite the latest official text from the NDRC website.
Core Mechanism: Home-venue + deputy-venue collaboration
| Role | Responsibilities |
|---|---|
| Home Venue | Provides electronic trading system and professional trading tools, bears primary administrative supervision responsibility |
| Deputy Venue | Assists with expert selection, identity verification, evaluation, report signing, and document retention |
| Resource Sharing | Shared directory of evaluation expert pools + shared directory of evaluation venue workstations |
| Cost Sharing | Home and deputy venues negotiate compensation mechanism, transparent fee disclosure |
| Expert Compensation | Encourages the "whichever is higher" principle |
Core Mission: Prove that "the company is qualified and capable of undertaking the project" (serves as a threshold function)
Essential Checklist:
Common Mistakes: Expired qualifications, performance contracts missing amount pages, power of attorney being a copy rather than the original
Core Mission: Prove that "the company has sufficient technical capability to deliver products or services that fully meet procurement requirements" (core competitiveness, approximately 40% weighting)
Essential Content:
Common Mistakes: Technical proposal disconnected from the core requirements of the bidding documents, vague parameter responses, mismatched performance cases
Core Mission: Reasonableness and competitiveness of pricing (the decisive factor, approximately 50% weighting)
Essential Content:
Key Principles:
| Cause | Avoidance Strategy |
|---|---|
| Expired qualification certificates | Establish a qualification validity ledger; trigger renewal alerts 3 months in advance |
| Performance does not meet requirements | Carefully review the bidding document performance requirements (amount, type, time); select the most matching cases |
| Financial condition does not comply | Prepare audit reports in advance; ensure financial indicators meet standards |
| Business scope does not match | Check whether the business license scope covers the project content |
| Cause | Avoidance Strategy |
|---|---|
| Failure to respond to substantive clauses (★ clauses) | Check each ★-marked clause in the bidding documents item by item; ensure full compliance |
| Material deviation in technical parameters | Truthfully fill in the technical deviation table; core parameters must not deviate |
| Pricing exceeds the maximum price ceiling | Confirm the bid control price before quoting; establish an internal review mechanism |
| Insufficient bid validity period | Ensure the bid validity period ≥ the requirement in the bidding documents |
| Cause | Avoidance Strategy |
|---|---|
| Late submission | Deliver at least 1 day in advance; reserve buffer time |
| Not sealed or improperly sealed | Seal as required by the bidding documents; affix cross-page seals |
| Incomplete signatures and seals | Create a signature and seal checklist; verify item by item |
| Insufficient or uncredited bid security | Process 3 working days in advance; retain proof |
| Format does not meet requirements | Strictly fill in according to the format templates provided in the bidding documents |
| Stage | Time Limit | Recipient | Legal Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Query | Within 7 working days from the date of knowing that rights and interests have been harmed | Procuring entity / procuring agency | Article 52 of the Government Procurement Law |
| Query Response | Within 7 working days after receipt | Procuring entity / procuring agency | Article 53 of the Government Procurement Law |
| Complaint | Within 15 working days after the response period expires | Finance department at the same level | Article 55 of the Government Procurement Law |
| Complaint Acceptance Decision | Within 3 working days after receipt | Finance department | Measures for Handling Supplier Complaints in Government Procurement |
| Complaint Handling | Within 30 working days after acceptance | Finance department | Measures for Handling Supplier Complaints in Government Procurement |
| Administrative Review | Within 60 days after receiving the decision | Higher-level authority | Administrative Review Law |
| Administrative Litigation | Within 6 months after receiving the decision | People's court | Administrative Litigation Law |
Note: Query is a prerequisite procedure for complaint — a written query must first be submitted to the procuring entity/procuring agency; only when the response is unsatisfactory or no response is given may a complaint be filed.
| Stage | Time Limit | Recipient | Legal Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objection (bidding documents) | 10 days before bid submission deadline | Tenderee | Article 54 of the Implementation Regulations of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Objection (bid opening) | Raised on the spot | Tenderee | Implementation Regulations of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Objection (bid evaluation results) | During the public announcement period | Tenderee | Implementation Regulations of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Objection Response | Within 3 days after receipt | Tenderee | Implementation Regulations of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Complaint | Within 10 days from the date of knowing that rights and interests have been harmed | Administrative supervision department | Measures for Handling Complaints in Engineering Construction Project Tendering and Bidding Activities |
| Complaint Acceptance Decision | Within 3 working days after receipt | Administrative supervision department | Same as above |
| Complaint Handling | Within 30 working days after acceptance | Administrative supervision department | Same as above |
Note: Before filing a complaint regarding prequalification documents, bidding documents, bid opening, or bid evaluation results, an objection must first be raised with the tenderee — objection is a prerequisite procedure for complaint.
| Circumstance | Handling Outcome |
|---|---|
| Procurement documents are discriminatory / biased | Order modification of procurement documents; re-conduct procurement activities |
| Procurement process affects the winning result; contract not yet signed | Determine that the procurement act is illegal; order re-procurement |
| Contract signed but not yet performed | Rescind the contract; re-procurement |
| Contract already performed | Determine that the procurement activity is illegal; relevant responsible persons to compensate |
| False / malicious complaint | Recorded in the bad-faith record; banned from participating in government procurement for 1-3 years |
| Dimension | Prequalification | Post-Qualification |
|---|---|---|
| Timing | Before tendering | After bid opening |
| Method | Pass/fail system / limited-quantity system | Pass / fail |
| Advantages | Reduces bid evaluation workload; early screening | Shortens the tendering cycle; increases competition |
| Disadvantages | Long cycle; may leak information about potential bidders | Heavy bid evaluation workload; unqualified bidders waste bid preparation costs |
| Applicability | Large complex projects; many potential bidders | Small and medium-sized projects; fewer bidders |
| Milestone | Statutory Time Limit | Legal Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Bidding document sale period | ≥5 working days | Implementation Regulations of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Bid submission deadline (from document issuance) | ≥20 days | Article 24 of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Clarification/modification notice (before deadline) | ≥15 days | Implementation Regulations of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Bid opening | Same time as bid submission deadline | Article 34 of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Winning bid public announcement | ≥3 days (government procurement: ≥3 working days) | Implementation Regulations of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Issuance of winning bid notification | Within 5 working days after no objections during the announcement period | Industry practice |
| Contract signing (from winning bid notification) | ≤30 days | Article 46 of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Contract filing (government procurement) | Within 7 working days after signing | Article 47 of the Government Procurement Law |
| Bid security | ≤2% of the estimated price | Implementation Regulations of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Performance security | ≤10% of the contract amount | Implementation Regulations of the Tendering and Bidding Law |
| Document retention period (government procurement) | ≥15 years | Article 42 of the Government Procurement Law |
For project summaries and opportunity screening, output the following structure by default:
[Assessment Conclusion]
Actively pursue / Cautiously evaluate / Recommend abandoning / Requires manual decision
[Project Summary]
- Project Name: [Project Name]
- Procuring Entity: [Procuring Entity]
- Budget Amount: [Amount / Not Disclosed]
- Submission Deadline: [YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM]
- Submission Method: [Electronic Bidding / Paper Submission / Dual-track]
[Qualification Threshold]
- [List key qualification and personnel restriction conditions]
[Evaluation Focus]
- [List high-value items and bonus items]
[Bid Response Architecture]
- Evaluation Score Index: [Mapping of evaluation items to planned response chapters]
- No Deviation Index: [Response positions for rejection clauses]
- Supporting Evidence Catalog: [Archive locations for objective score supporting materials]
[Risk Alert]
- [Rejection risks or deviation risks, must indicate the original text location / clause in the procurement document]
[Next Actions]
- [First batch of tasks to be broken down and responsible person suggestions]
⚠️ Disclaimer: The bidding analysis, advice, and document generation provided by this tool are for reference only and do not constitute legal advice or professional bid decision-making basis. Bidding activities shall strictly comply with the mandatory provisions of the Tendering and Bidding Law of the People's Republic of China, the Government Procurement Law of the People's Republic of China, their implementing regulations, and other laws and regulations. For projects that must be tendered according to law, please refer to the latest laws, regulations, and requirements of local administrative supervision authorities. Users shall verify the accuracy and compliance of all information on their own. The author assumes no responsibility for any direct or indirect losses arising from the use of this tool.
© 2026 yinjianheng（殷健恒）. This tool is free and open-source, intended for personal study and work use only.
Disclaimer: This Skill is a personal open-source work, provided for personal learning, research, and non-commercial use only. Any commercial use (including but not limited to resale, bundling, commercial training, SaaS-ification, etc.) is strictly prohibited without the author's written authorization. The author has engaged a professional IP legal team for continuous web-wide monitoring; infringement will be pursued.
The original intention behind creating this tool is simple: to help every worker fighting on the front lines complete their work more efficiently, get off work earlier, and spend more time with those who care about them. Life is not just about KPIs — there are people waiting for you to come home for dinner.
For feedback and suggestions, feel free to contact: yinjianheng@foxmail.com | WeChat: YJH-yinjianheng
The following checklist is organized by the three major components of a bid document (Commercial Bid / Technical Bid / Price Bid) and can be used directly for item-by-item verification.
| No. | Document Name | Requirement | ☐ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Legal Representative Identity Certificate | Original, signed + stamped | ☐ |
| 2 | Legal Person Authorization Letter | Original for original copy, signed by authorized person | ☐ |
| 3 | Bid Letter and Bid Letter Appendix | Fill in per bidding document format | ☐ |
| 4 | Bid Bond Voucher | Bank receipt / guarantee letter original | ☐ |
| 5 | Business License Copy | Copy with official seal, check validity period | ☐ |
| 6 | Qualification Certificates | Copy with official seal, verify validity period | ☐ |
| 7 | Work Safety Permit | Copy with official seal (engineering projects) | ☐ |
| 8 | Credit Inquiry Report | "Credit China" screenshot or report | ☐ |
| 9 | Creditworthiness Certificate | Issued by bank, within validity period | ☐ |
| 10 | Three Major System Certifications | Quality Management / Environmental Management / Occupational Health & Safety | ☐ |
| 11 | Audit Reports for Last Three Years | With financial statements, stamped with official seal | ☐ |
| 12 | Tax Payment Certificate | Last 6 months or 1 year | ☐ |
| 13 | Social Insurance Payment Certificate | Last 6 months | ☐ |
| 14 | Declaration of No Major Illegal Records | Per bidding document format | ☐ |
| 15 | Consortium Agreement | If consortium bidding, signed and stamped by all parties | ☐ |
| 16 | SME Declaration Letter | If seeking price deduction benefits | ☐ |
| No. | Document Name | Requirement | ☐ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Technical Parameter Item-by-Item Response Table | Do not just write "Compliant"; provide specific explanations | ☐ |
| 2 | Technical Deviation Table | Fill in truthfully; core parameters must not deviate | ☐ |
| 3 | Technical Qualification Supporting Materials | Patent certificates, software copyrights, test reports | ☐ |
| 4 | Specialized Response Documents | Specialized explanations for specific technical requirements | ☐ |
| 5 | Past Performance List | 3-5 similar projects, with key contract pages attached | ☐ |
| 6 | Performance Supporting Materials | Contract copies + acceptance reports, stamped with official seal | ☐ |
| 7 | Awards Received | Certificates of authoritative industry awards | ☐ |
| 8 | Project Team Composition | Resumes and certificates of project manager + core technical personnel | ☐ |
| 9 | Personnel Qualification Certificates | PMP, Construction Engineer, Cost Engineer, etc. | ☐ |
| 10 | Implementation Plan | Gantt chart / milestone plan | ☐ |
| 11 | Service Assurance Plan | Warranty period, response time, O&M team | ☐ |
| 12 | Training Plan | Training schedule, course arrangement | ☐ |
| 13 | Technical Proposal Main Text | Written per the structure required by the bidding document | ☐ |
| No. | Document Name | Requirement | ☐ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Price Summary Table | Per bidding document format | ☐ |
| 2 | Itemized Price Table | Equipment / Service / Implementation / Training, etc. breakdown | ☐ |
| 3 | Price Explanation | Pricing basis, tax inclusion, tax rate | ☐ |
| 4 | Below-Cost Explanation | If the quoted price is significantly below market price | ☐ |
| No. | Check Item | Requirement | ☐ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 Original Copy | Marked "Original" as required | ☐ |
| 2 | N Duplicate Copies | Marked "Duplicate" as required | ☐ |
| 3 | Electronic Version | USB drive or CD, packaged as required | ☐ |
| 4 | Sealing | Sealed per bidding document requirements, with cross-page seal | ☐ |
| 5 | Outer Packaging Markings | Project name, bidder name, contact information | ☐ |
| 6 | Submission Time | Delivered before deadline, allow buffer time | ☐ |
| 7 | Submission Location | Confirm specific address and recipient | ☐ |
| Dimension | Content |
|---|---|
| Project Type | Government Cloud Platform Construction Project |
| Procurement Method | Open Tender |
| Budget Amount | 8 million RMB |
| Evaluation Method | Comprehensive Scoring Method (Price 30% + Technical 50% + Commercial 20%) |
| Key Qualifications | CMMI Level 3, ISO 27001, Level Protection Level 3 Assessment Qualification |
| Core Evaluation Points | Cloud platform architecture design (15 points), Data security plan (10 points), Domestic substitution adaptation (10 points), O&M SLA (8 points), Similar project performance (7 points) |
| Typical Rejection Items | Failure to provide Level Protection assessment qualification, Technical proposal lacking disaster recovery design |
| Key to Winning | Depth of technical proposal (detailed to component-level design) + 3 similar provincial-level government cloud cases |
| Lessons Learned | Although price weight is only 30%, price score differences can exceed 10 points; precise cost estimation is necessary |
| Dimension | Content |
|---|---|
| Project Type | Industrial Park Road and Pipeline Network Project |
| Procurement Method | Open Tender |
| Budget Amount | 35 million RMB |
| Evaluation Method | Evaluated Lowest Bid Price Method |
| Key Qualifications | Municipal Public Works General Contracting Grade II or above, Work Safety Permit |
| Core Evaluation Points | Technical proposal pass/fail review (qualification system); after passing, the evaluated lowest bid price wins |
| Typical Rejection Items | Qualification grade not meeting requirements, Expired work safety permit, Bid price exceeding the ceiling price |
| Key to Winning | Precise cost estimation (not below cost) + Technical proposal passing review |
| Lessons Learned | Under the lowest price method, price is the only competitive dimension; cost control capability determines competitiveness |
| Dimension | Content |
|---|---|
| Project Type | Grade A Hospital Imaging Equipment Procurement |
| Procurement Method | Open Tender (Double-Envelope System) |
| Budget Amount | 12 million RMB |
| Evaluation Method | Comprehensive Scoring Method (Technical 60% + Price 40%), Double Envelope |
| Key Qualifications | Medical Device Business License, Equipment Manufacturer Authorization Letter, FDA/CE Certification |
| Core Evaluation Points | Equipment technical parameters (25 points), Clinical application effectiveness (15 points), After-sales service (10 points), Training plan (5 points), Consumable costs (5 points) |
| Typical Rejection Items | First envelope technical bid fails review — directly eliminated, second envelope not opened |
| Key to Winning | Technical parameter item-by-item response + Clinical application cases + Local after-sales service team |
| Lessons Learned | Under the double-envelope system, the technical bid is the first hurdle; the technical proposal must be solid to enter price competition |
| Dimension | Content |
|---|---|
| Project Type | Enterprise ERP System Implementation Service |
| Procurement Method | Competitive Consultation |
| Budget Amount | 5 million RMB |
| Evaluation Method | Comprehensive Scoring Method (Technical Proposal 40% + Demonstration 30% + Price 30%) |
| Key Qualifications | ≥3 similar ERP implementation cases, Project Manager PMP Certification |
| Core Evaluation Points | Proposal demonstration (30 points), Implementation methodology (15 points), Industry experience (10 points), Team composition (10 points), Risk response (5 points) |
| Typical Rejection Items | Unable to demonstrate core functions during the demonstration session, Implementation plan seriously detached from reality |
| Key to Winning | On-site demonstration effectiveness + Industry benchmark cases + Implementation team qualifications |
| Lessons Learned | Competitive consultation allows multiple rounds of pricing; the first round of pricing should leave room for negotiation |
Based on the evaluation criteria in the procurement document, quickly build an evaluation scoring model using the following template:
[Evaluation Module] {Module Name} — Full Score {X} Points
| Scoring Item | Score | Scoring Criteria | Response Strategy | Supporting Materials |
|--------|------|----------|----------|----------|
| {Scoring Item 1} | {X} | {Objective/Subjective Score}: {Criteria Description} | {Strategy} | {Materials} |
| {Scoring Item 2} | {X} | ... | ... | ... |
[Rejection Clause Index]
| Clause No. | Clause Content | Response Position | Deviation Status |
|----------|----------|----------|----------|
| ★{No.} | {Content} | Chapter X, Section Y | No Deviation |
| Project Type | Price Weight | Technical Weight | Commercial Weight | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Government IT | 30% | 50% | 20% | Technical proposal is core |
| Engineering Construction | 50-70% | 20-30% | 10-20% | Price-driven |
| Medical Equipment | 30-40% | 50-60% | 10% | Technical parameters + clinical effectiveness |
| IT Services | 20-30% | 50-60% | 15-20% | Proposal + demo + team |
| Consulting Services | 20% | 60% | 20% | Proposal + personnel qualifications |
| Goods Procurement | 40-60% | 30-40% | 10-20% | Standardized products lean toward price |
💡 This tool is free and open-source by yinjianheng（殷健恒）, intended for personal use only. May you get off work early and spend more time with those who care about you. Contact the author: yinjianheng@foxmail.com | WeChat: YJH-yinjianheng
Note: The following sections add international procurement frameworks as parallel tracks to the China-focused core above. Use these when responding to international tenders, World Bank/ADB-funded projects, or when comparing procurement practices across jurisdictions.
| Framework | Jurisdiction | Scope | Key Principles | Thresholds | Dispute Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UNCITRAL Model Law on Public Procurement (2011) | Global (model law, adopted by 30+ countries) | All public procurement | Transparency, competition, economy, efficiency, integrity | Set by adopting country | Standstill period, independent review body |
| WTO Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) | 48 WTO members (EU as one) | Covered procurement above thresholds | Non-discrimination, transparency, procedural fairness | SDR 130K (goods/services), SDR 5M (construction) | Domestic review + WTO dispute settlement |
| World Bank Procurement Framework (2023) | All Bank-funded projects | Goods, works, services, consulting | Value for money, economy, integrity, fit for purpose | Varies by country/market | Bank's Supplier Complaints Mechanism |
| ADB Procurement Guidelines | ADB-funded projects | Similar to World Bank | Economy, efficiency, transparency, member country eligibility | Varies by country | ADB's Complaints Mechanism |
| EU Public Procurement Directives (2014/24/EU, 2014/25/EU) | EU/EEA member states | Public works, supply, service contracts | Equal treatment, non-discrimination, proportionality, transparency | €143K (supplies/services), €5.538M (works) — 2026–2027 threshold cycle effective 2026-01-01 (Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/2152); confirm live values at EUR-Lex | National review bodies + ECJ |
| US FAR/DFARS | US federal agencies | All federal procurement | Full and open competition, best value, small business participation | $15,000 (micro-purchase; raised from $10K effective 2025-10-01 per FAR 2.101 / OMB 2025), $250K (simplified acquisition, also revised in 2025 — confirm current FAR value) | GAO bid protests, Court of Federal Claims |
The UNCITRAL Model Law on Public Procurement (2011) provides a template for modern procurement legislation:
| Member | Coverage Thresholds | Key Exclusions |
|---|---|---|
| EU | SDR 130K (goods/services), SDR 5M (construction) | Defense, some utilities |
| US | Same as EU thresholds | Set-asides for small businesses, some transportation |
| Japan | SDR 100K (goods), SDR 4.5M (construction) | Some R&D, space-related |
| South Korea | SDR 130K (goods/services), SDR 5M (construction) | Some agricultural products |
| Singapore | SDR 130K (goods/services), SDR 5M (construction) | National security |
| UK | Same as EU (post-Brexit independent membership) | Defense, national security |
| Canada | SDR 130K (goods/services), SDR 5M (construction) | Cultural industries, some shipbuilding |
The World Bank's Procurement Framework (2023) — replacing the 2016 Procurement Regulations — emphasizes:
| Method | Used By | Key Principle | When to Use | China Equivalent |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MEAT (Most Economically Advantageous Tender) | EU | Best price-quality ratio, life-cycle costing | Complex projects where quality matters | Comprehensive Scoring Method (Comprehensive Scoring Method) |
| QCBS (Quality and Cost-Based Selection) | World Bank, ADB | Quality 80% + Cost 20% (typical), or 70:30 | Consulting services | Comprehensive Scoring Method (quality-weighted) |
| QBS (Quality-Based Selection) | World Bank, ADB, FIDIC | Quality only, then negotiate price | Highly specialized/complex assignments | Competitive Consultation (Competitive Consultation) |
| LPTA (Lowest Price Technically Acceptable) | US DoD, World Bank | Pass/fail technical, lowest price wins | Standardized goods/services | Evaluated Lowest Bid Method (Evaluated Lowest Bid Method) |
| FBS (Fixed Budget Selection) | World Bank | Best technical proposal within fixed budget | Budget-constrained projects | Fixed Budget Evaluation |
| Best Value Procurement (BVP) | Netherlands, US | Past performance + price + qualitative criteria | Infrastructure, complex services | No direct equivalent |
| Project Type | Technical/Quality | Price | Past Performance | Sustainability | Innovation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Infrastructure (World Bank) | 40-50% | 30-40% | 10-15% | 5-10% | 0-5% |
| IT Systems (EU) | 50-60% | 20-30% | 10% | 5% | 5-10% |
| Consulting Services (ADB) | 70-80% | 20-30% | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Medical Equipment (UN) | 50-60% | 30-40% | 5-10% | 5% | 0-5% |
| Defense (US) | 40-50% | 30-40% | 10-20% | N/A | 5-10% |
| Platform | Jurisdiction | URL | Coverage | Key Features |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TED (Tenders Electronic Daily) | EU/EEA | ted.europa.eu | All EU public procurement above thresholds | 25 languages, eNotices, eForms, CPV codes |
| SAM.gov | United States | sam.gov | All US federal procurement | Entity registration, contract opportunities, wage determinations |
| STEP | World Bank | step.worldbank.org | All Bank-funded projects | Procurement plan tracking, contract awards, complaints |
| UNGM (UN Global Marketplace) | United Nations | ungm.org | All UN procurement | 30+ UN agencies, supplier registration, tender alerts |
| GeBIZ | Singapore | gebiz.gov.sg | Singapore government procurement | e-Catalogue, e-Quotation, e-Tender, supplier grading |
| AusTender | Australia | tenders.gov.au | Australian government procurement | ATM (Approach to Market), contract notices, standing offers |
| KONEPS | South Korea | g2b.go.kr | Korean public procurement | End-to-end e-procurement, e-bidding, e-contract, e-payment |
| ePerolehan | Malaysia | eperolehan.gov.my | Malaysian government procurement | Supplier registration, e-bidding, e-catalogue |
| GeM (Government e-Marketplace) | India | gem.gov.in | Indian government procurement | e-Marketplace, e-bidding, reverse auction, analytics |
| ComprasNet | Brazil | gov.br/compras | Brazilian federal procurement | e-Pregão (reverse auction), supplier registry, price panel |
| Mechanism | Jurisdiction | Forum | Timeline | Remedies | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GAO Bid Protest | US | Government Accountability Office | File within 10 days of award | Suspension, re-evaluation, re-solicitation, costs | Free (government-funded) |
| EU Review Procedures | EU | National review bodies | 10-day standstill, 30 days to challenge | Interim measures, set aside, damages | Varies by member state |
| World Bank Complaints | World Bank | Bank's Supplier Complaints Mechanism | Any time during procurement | Recommendations to borrower, debarment | Free |
| UNCITRAL Model | Adopting countries | Independent administrative body | 10-day standstill, rapid review | Suspension, re-evaluation, damages | Set by adopting country |
| China Query/Complaint | China | Procuring entity → Regulator → Court | 7 working days (query), 15 working days (complaint) | Suspension, re-evaluation, damages | Free (administrative) |
| Instrument | Typical Amount | Duration | Common Forms | Key Markets |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bid Bond / Bid Security | 1-5% of bid price | 90-180 days from bid opening | Bank guarantee, surety bond, cash deposit | Global |
| Performance Security | 5-10% of contract value | Until contract completion + warranty | Bank guarantee, performance bond, retention money | Global |
| Advance Payment Guarantee | 100% of advance payment | Until advance is recovered | Bank guarantee | World Bank, ADB projects |
| Retention Money | 5-10% of each payment | Until defects liability period ends | Cash retention, retention bond | Construction, infrastructure |
FIDIC (Fédération Internationale des Ingénieurs-Conseils) publishes standard contract forms widely used in international construction procurement:
| FIDIC Book | Color | Use Case | Risk Allocation | Payment Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Red Book | Red | Building/engineering works designed by Employer | Employer bears design risk | Measurement (re-measurement) |
| Yellow Book | Yellow | Plant/design-build works designed by Contractor | Contractor bears design risk | Lump sum with variations |
| Silver Book | Silver | EPC/Turnkey projects | Contractor bears most risks | Fixed lump sum |
| Green Book | Green | Short form for small projects | Balanced | Lump sum or measurement |
| Dimension | Detail |
|---|---|
| Project Type | Highway construction (400 km) |
| Procurement Method | International Competitive Bidding (ICB) |
| Budget | $850M (World Bank + Government co-financing) |
| Evaluation | QCBS — Technical 80% + Cost 20% |
| Key Requirements | FIDIC Red Book, environmental/social safeguards, local content ≥30% |
| Winner | Chinese-European joint venture |
| Key Lesson | Local content compliance and environmental management plan were decisive factors |
| Dimension | Detail |
|---|---|
| Project Type | Cloud infrastructure for EU institutions |
| Procurement Method | Competitive Dialogue |
| Budget | €1.2B (framework agreement) |
| Evaluation | MEAT — Technical quality 60% + Price 40% |
| Key Requirements | GDPR compliance, EU data residency, Gaia-X compatibility, SME participation |
| Winner | Consortium of European cloud providers |
| Key Lesson | Data sovereignty and compliance certifications were threshold requirements |
| Dimension | Detail |
|---|---|
| Project Type | Emergency relief supplies (food, medical, shelter) |
| Procurement Method | UNGM competitive bidding + Long-Term Agreements (LTA) |
| Budget | $200M/year (multi-year LTA) |
| Evaluation | Best value — Technical compliance + Price + Delivery timeline |
| Key Requirements | WHO pre-qualification, cold chain capability, rapid deployment |
| Winner | Multiple suppliers per region (framework) |
| Key Lesson | Supply chain resilience and pre-positioning capability were critical |
| Milestone | China | EU | World Bank | US | UNCITRAL Model |