Tender Compliance
Functionality Scoring Integrity
Reviews functionality evaluation scores for clustering, outliers and unexplained score overrides.
Why evaluation scores must withstand review
Functionality scoring is where evaluator judgement enters the tender, and it is the point most exposed to bias, collusion and manipulation that can predetermine an award. The PPPFA regulations require functionality to be objective and consistently applied, and the AGSA tests scores for integrity. AuditPro Core reviews functionality scores for clustering, outliers and unexplained overrides so a contested award can be defended on its evaluation record.
The Numbers
AuditPro Core renders this view from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records. The figures below are illustrative sample data.
Evaluations Reviewed
214
this year
Score Overrides
31
▲ 8
Low Evaluator Agreement
18
tenders
Threshold-Edge Passes
22
just above cut
Distribution of Final Functionality Scores
Tenders with Scoring Concerns
| Tender | Concern | Winner Score | Value (R'000) |
|---|---|---|---|
| TND-5012 | Override after eval | 72 | 24600 |
| TND-5088 | Edge pass (70) | 70 | 18200 |
| TND-5140 | Evaluator outlier | 81 | 13900 |
| TND-5203 | Edge pass (70) | 70 | 9400 |
| TND-5266 | Override after eval | 75 | 6700 |
Figures shown are illustrative sample data for demonstration. AuditPro Core renders these views from your own tenant's live, tamper-evident records.
Functionality as a qualifying gate
Functionality thresholds screen bidders before price is considered. Manipulating these scores can eliminate competitors or admit a favoured bidder, shaping the outcome early.
Score clustering and outliers
Scores tightly clustered to push a chosen bidder over a threshold, or a single evaluator scoring against the panel, are statistical signs that judgement may not be independent.
Unexplained overrides
Where a final score differs from the panel's consensus without a documented rationale, the override is a serious integrity gap that can void the award.
Consistency across evaluators
Objective scoring should show reasonable agreement against the published criteria. Wide, unexplained divergence suggests criteria were applied inconsistently.
How AuditPro Core Bridges the Gap
- Pattern detection: AuditPro Core analyses score distributions for clustering, evaluator outliers and threshold-edge results.
- Reconciliation: Final scores reconcile to panel sheets to expose undocumented overrides.
- Exception workflow: Anomalous scoring raises review cases for the adjudication committee.
- Traceability to source: Each flag links to individual scoresheets, evaluators and criteria.
Key Takeaways
- Functionality scoring is the most judgement-exposed point of a tender.
- Watch for clustering at thresholds and lone-evaluator outliers.
- Require a documented rationale for any override of the panel score.
- Keep individual scoresheets to defend a contested award.
See This on Your Own Data
AuditPro Core renders this dashboard from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records — every figure traceable to source.