How to use this example
Illustrative only: this is not a real client file, verified supplier assessment, quotation, award or project outcome. The example deliberately leaves product, site, capacity, budget, suppliers and schedule open. A buyer must substantiate each entry before issuing an RFQ or making a decision.
Global B2B Group supports commercial and industrial projects from USD 250,000 upward. This is an intake threshold, not a sample budget or quoted price. The buyer controls the tender and award; the group is not the manufacturer, EPC contractor, lender or approval authority.
Read the industrial procurement services guide for the complete buyer-side process. This report focuses on the documentation produced at its decision gates.
1. Scope and package register
First define what is being purchased and where one party's responsibility ends. A scope gap left out of an RFQ becomes an unpriced interface during delivery.
| Review area | Illustrative report entry | Evidence to attach | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Process equipment | Define required output, product range and process interfaces; leave capacity unfilled until the buyer supplies a measured basis. | Buyer-approved performance specification, layout and process flow. | Open — confirm design basis |
| Utilities and site | Record electricity, water, drainage, compressed air and available footprint separately from equipment supply. | Site survey, utility schedules and interface drawings. | Open — verify site data |
| Controls and integration | Document how equipment interfaces with existing controls and who owns software, signals and integration testing. | Controls architecture, interface list and acceptance protocol. | Open — assign interface owner |
| Installation and commissioning | State who handles unloading, foundations, installation, training and startup; do not assume turnkey delivery. | Responsibility matrix and commissioning plan. | Open — agree split |
| Acceptance and aftercare | Define factory and site acceptance tests, spares, warranty exclusions and local service expectations. | Draft FAT/SAT criteria and warranty schedule. | Open — approve test basis |
2. Tender sequence and control points
Approve the design basis and responsibility matrix before approaching suppliers. Issue the same revision of the RFQ and response template to each invited bidder, record distribution, and keep clarifications in one log. After responses arrive, ask for missing evidence before comparing prices; record any exception to the common scope.
Financing documentation can be prepared in parallel where relevant, but a financing route is not a commitment. Eligibility, terms and approval belong to the independent finance provider, while the purchase decision belongs to the buyer.
3. Evaluation and decision register
This second table is a model of a tender review, not an evaluation of actual suppliers. No score, ranking or winning bid is implied.
| Review area | Illustrative report entry | Evidence to attach | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope baseline | One revision-controlled specification and package boundary issued to every invited bidder. | Signed scope matrix and RFQ issue register. | Pending buyer sign-off |
| Supplier qualification | Check entity, relevant capabilities and service coverage without claiming a supplier has passed. | Buyer-approved qualification criteria and supporting documents. | Open — evidence not supplied |
| Clarifications | Log each question and circulate the same approved answer to all participating bidders. | Dated clarification log and revised RFQ addenda. | Open — before tender issue |
| Commercial comparison | Compare one currency and delivery basis; isolate freight, installation, spares, taxes and exclusions instead of ranking headline prices. | Comparable bid schedule, exchange-rate basis and deviation log. | Open — no bids received |
| Technical comparison | Compare guarantees, capacity basis, utilities, testing and integration against the same specification. | Compliance matrix and evidence for each claimed performance item. | Open — no bids received |
| Risk and decision | List unpriced interfaces and unresolved assumptions; return material gaps for clarification before any award. | Risk register, owners and buyer decision record. | Pending buyer decision |
4. Closing the report
A defensible decision record identifies the approved requirement, supplier responses on the same basis, deviations, unanswered questions and the person authorised to decide. If the baseline, site interfaces or bid exclusions remain unresolved, the illustrative next action is clarification — not an award recommendation.
For the next step, use the RFQ builder to prepare a request for human review. For investment approval documentation, see the CAPEX approval report example.