Most Advantageous Tender: 5 Steps and a Scoring Example
The most advantageous tender (MAT) is the test UK public buyers now use to choose a winning bid under the Procurement Act 2023. Section 19 says the winner is the tender that "satisfies the contracting authority's requirements" and "best satisfies the award criteria" when marked against the published assessment methodology and weightings (Procurement Act 2023, s.19). So the way to win is to work out what each award criterion is worth, and then show evidence that scores against each one. Being the cheapest bid, or the one that sounds most impressive, is not enough on its own.
Which option is right for you?
Choose your starting point based on where you are now. In every case, the first thing to read is the award criteria in the tender notice.
| Your situation | What to pick first | First page to open |
|---|---|---|
| First public sector bid (beginner) | Learn how the award criteria and weightings are set out, then try one small open procedure | Find a Tender notice → "Award criteria" section |
| You bid every month (daily work use) | Build a reusable evidence library mapped to typical criteria such as quality, social value and price | Your last assessment summary |
| No budget for help | Use the free official GOV.UK knowledge drops and the buyer guidance on assessing tenders | GOV.UK official e-learning page |
| Charity or social enterprise bidding for central government | Make social value your strongest section, because it carries at least 10% | PPN 002 |
| Bidding into a framework advertised before | Prepare for the old MEAT rules, not MAT | The original contract notice and its date |
What Is Most Advantageous Tender (MAT)?
MAT replaced MEAT as the award test when the Procurement Act 2023 came into force. The buyer picks the tender that best satisfies the award criteria it published. Price and quality are no longer the only frame. The Public Contracts Regulations 2015 award rule (regulation 67) was revoked on (legislation.gov.uk, reg. 67).
The definition has two parts, and you need to pass both:
- Satisfies the requirements. If you miss a mandatory requirement or fail a pass/fail criterion, the buyer can disqualify you, however good the rest of the bid is.
- Best satisfies the award criteria. Your tender is scored against the criteria using the published assessment methodology and the "relative importance" of each criterion (s.19).
Section 23 controls what a buyer can publish. Award criteria must relate to the subject matter of the contract and be "sufficiently clear, measurable and specific". They must also be proportionate to the "nature, complexity and cost of the contract" (s.23). If there is more than one criterion, the buyer has to show how much each one counts. It can give a percentage weighting, rank the criteria in order of importance, or describe their importance in some other way. Welsh Government guidance points out that "there is no hierarchy in these options" (Welsh Government guidance on assessing competitive tenders).
For smaller suppliers this matters. A buyer can rank criteria without giving percentages, so you can't assume every tender pack will give you neat numbers. When it doesn't, the ranking is your guide to where you should put your writing time.
Take an example. Suppose a council cleaning contract lists "Quality – 50%, Social value – 10%, Price – 40%". Under MAT, the winner is whichever compliant tender gets the highest combined score on those three weights. It is not the lowest price, and it is not the longest quality answer.
Most notices with the "most advantageous tender" wording appear on Find a Tender. If you are still choosing which portal to watch, see Contracts Finder vs Find a Tender.
What Is Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT)?
MEAT was the award test under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. The buyer identified the best tender "on the basis of the price or cost, using a cost-effectiveness approach", which could include the "best price-quality ratio" (PCR 2015 reg. 67, as made).
Regulation 67(3) listed examples of criteria a buyer could use:
- quality, including technical merit, accessibility, and social, environmental and innovative characteristics
- organisation, qualification and experience of the staff who would deliver the contract
- after-sales service, delivery conditions and completion periods
Regulation 67(4) also let buyers fix the price and make suppliers compete only on quality.
Pitfall: MEAT still applies to some live opportunities. Contracts whose procurement started before stay under the 2015 Regulations. A framework or dynamic purchasing system that was advertised under the old rules keeps them for every call-off, even after that date (Capital Law on transition; Procurement Portal). Fix: check the date of the original contract notice before you start. A mini-competition under a 2023 framework is run under the old regime, so expect old-style documents and old remedies. If you are trying to get onto frameworks, Framework Agreement How to Get On explains which regime each one follows.
MAT vs MEAT: What Changed Under the Procurement Act
MAT removes the word "economically". That makes it clear that buyers don't have to award on lowest price, and that price doesn't automatically outrank non-price factors. In practice, though, what buyers can assess is mostly the same as before.
The Welsh Government guidance puts it plainly: the new wording clarifies that "tenders do not have to be awarded on the basis of lowest price/cost, or that price/cost must always take precedence over non price/cost factors" (gov.wales). The UK government describes the basis of award as "largely unchanged from the previous legislation in terms of what can be assessed" (GOV.UK guidance, Assessing Competitive Tenders).
So the main thing that has changed is the process around scoring, more than the scoring itself.
| Point | MEAT (PCR 2015) | MAT (Procurement Act 2023) |
|---|---|---|
| Legal source | Reg. 67 PCR 2015 | s.19, s.23, s.24 of the Act |
| Wording | "Most economically advantageous" | "Most advantageous": meets requirements and best satisfies criteria |
| How importance is shown | Weightings (or descending order where weighting wasn't possible) | Percentage, ranking, or another description, with no hierarchy between them (gov.wales) |
| Pass/fail criteria | Possible | Allowed, but the methodology must say whether failing a criterion disqualifies a tender (s.23(3)) |
| Changing criteria mid-process | Very limited | Refinement allowed only in the competitive flexible procedure, by adding detail or sub-criteria under existing criteria (gov.wales) |
| Abnormally low tenders | Asking for an explanation was sometimes mandatory | Rejection is discretionary, but the supplier must get a chance to show it can perform (s.19) |
| SME duty | General | Buyers must have regard to barriers facing SMEs and avoid "prohibitive" criteria (gov.wales) |
| Feedback | Standstill letter | Assessment summary with scores and reasons, sent before the contract award notice (GOV.UK) |
Pitfall: reading "price no longer has to dominate" as "price doesn't matter". If a buyer weights price at 60%, MAT will still favour the cheaper compliant bid. Fix: go by the published weightings, not the headline wording of the Act.
How Is Most Economically Advantageous Tender Assessed? (With Example)
Most buyers combine a quality score and a price score using published weights, such as 60% quality and 40% price. MAT tenders are usually scored the same way. A cheaper bid with weaker answers can lose to a more expensive bid with stronger evidence.
The Act doesn't require a particular price formula. Buyers set it in their assessment methodology, so always use the formula in your own tender pack. A common approach, used here as an example only, gives full price marks to the lowest price and scores other bids in proportion:
Price score = (lowest price ÷ your price) × price weighting
Worked example (made-up figures). Weighting: Quality 60%, Price 40%. Quality is marked out of 60.
| Bidder A | Bidder B | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | £80,000 | £100,000 |
| Quality marks (out of 60) | 30 (mostly "adequate" answers) | 51 (evidenced, specific answers) |
| Price score | 80,000 ÷ 80,000 × 40 = 40 | 80,000 ÷ 100,000 × 40 = 32 |
| Total | 70 | 83 |
Bidder B costs 25% more and still wins by 13 points. The 21-mark lead on quality outweighs the 8 marks it loses on price.
Now give the same contract the MAT weights a central government buyer would use under PPN 002: Quality 50%, Social value 10%, Price 40%. Suppose Bidder A scores 4 out of 10 on social value because its commitments are generic, and Bidder B scores 8 because its commitments are local and measurable. The 10% that used to be quality marks is now fought over separately. A supplier who skims that section can lose on it alone.
How to run this calculation on any tender:
- Open the tender documents and find the evaluation or assessment methodology section.
- Write down each criterion, its weight, and the scoring scale (for example, 0–5 or 0–100).
- Put your expected price and two or three likely competitor prices into the buyer's price formula.
- Work out how many quality marks you need to make up any price gap.
- If you can't make up the gap, decide whether to bid at all.
Pitfall: pricing very low to "buy" price marks. Under s.19 the buyer may disregard an abnormally low tender, as long as it first notifies you and gives you a chance to show you can deliver (s.19). Fix: keep a costed breakdown with staff hours, wages and overheads, so you can answer that request within days.
How to Score and Evidence Your Bid Against MAT (5 Steps)
Link every award criterion to specific evidence, such as case studies, measurable social value commitments and a delivery plan. Then mark your own draft the way the buyer will, before you submit, so the weak sections show up while you can still fix them. These five steps work for a sole trader replying to a £30,000 council tender and for a charity bidding on a central government lot.
Step 1: Pull the criteria straight from the notice
On Find a Tender, open the UK4 tender notice. That is the notice buyers use to advertise open and competitive flexible procedures (Find a Tender notice types). Scroll to the Award criteria section and copy each criterion's name, type (quality, cost or price) and weighting into a spreadsheet. Then open the full tender pack from the buyer's e-tendering portal. Sub-criteria and question-level marks are usually only in that pack.
Check whether the buyer used percentages, a ranking or a description. If it only ranked the criteria, give your top-ranked criterion the most drafting time.
Step 2: Build an evidence map
Make a two-column table for each question. Put the exact wording from the buyer's question on the left and the evidence that proves your answer on the right. For example:
| Buyer wording (example) | Evidence to use |
|---|---|
| "Describe how you will mobilise the service within 4 weeks" | Week-by-week mobilisation plan with named roles |
| "Demonstrate relevant experience" | Two case studies with contract value, dates and a measured result |
| "Social value: tackling economic inequality" | Number of local hires, apprenticeship starts, and how you'll report them |
Under s.23, criteria have to be "clear, measurable and specific" (s.23). Answers that are measurable and specific in the same way are easier for an evaluator to give high marks.
Step 3: Write to the scoring descriptors, not to word count
Most packs include a marking scheme, such as "5 = Excellent: fully meets the requirement with robust evidence". Write each answer so it plainly meets the top descriptor. Answer the question in the order its sub-points are listed, and repeat the buyer's own terms. Evaluators score each question separately, so evidence in your answer to Q3 can't earn marks on Q5.
For social value questions in central government, PPN 002 requires in-scope buyers to "apply a minimum 10% weighting (or equivalent measurement) of the total score, for social value". It applies to procurements under the Act started on or after (PPN 002; Guide to using the social value model). For model answers, see Social Value in Tenders: PPN 002 Steps and Answer Examples.
Step 4: Self-score and do the maths
Ask someone who didn't write the bid to mark each answer against the buyer's descriptors. Multiply each mark by its weighting and add your price score from the buyer's formula. Any answer below the second-highest descriptor needs rewriting first, and the most heavily weighted ones come first. If the total still looks short against a realistic competitor price, you can still decide not to bid.
Step 5: Check compliance, then use the assessment summary
Go back through the pass/fail items: mandatory documents, insurance levels and word limits. Under s.19, failing a requirement can remove you before any quality marks are counted. Submit through the buyer's portal before the deadline. Above threshold, the usual minimum tendering period is 25 days when electronic submission and full documents are available (Find a Tender notice types), so plan your drafting backwards from the deadline.
You get an assessment summary whether you win or lose. It must include your scores for each criterion, the reasons for them, and, if you lost, information about the most advantageous tender. It must reach you before the contract award notice is published (GOV.UK assessment summaries guidance). Publishing the UK6 contract award notice starts a standstill period of at least 8 working days, which is the window for raising concerns (GOV.UK contract award notices and standstill). Add the reasons to your evidence library for the next bid.
If the same procurement also has a selection stage, deal with that first using Selection Questionnaire Procurement Act 2023: 7 SME Steps. Selection decides whether you can take part at all. MAT decides whether you win.
Most Advantageous Bid vs PPRA: What's the Difference?
"Most advantageous bid" with "PPRA" is a Pakistani term, not a UK one. In UK public procurement the correct term is "most advantageous tender", from section 19 of the Procurement Act 2023.
PPRA is Pakistan's Public Procurement Regulatory Authority. Its Public Procurement Rules 2004 define a "most advantageous bid" in Rule 2(1)(h). The definition is roughly a substantially responsive bid ranked highest on cost, quality, qualification or a combination of these. An S.R.O. dated replaced the earlier "lowest evaluated bid" wording with this term (PPRA Rules; PPRA downloads). The idea is similar to MAT, but the legal rules, notices and challenge routes are entirely different.
Pitfall: guidance, templates or AI summaries that mix the two can lead you to quote the wrong rule in a UK bid or clarification question. Fix: in UK documents, refer to "most advantageous tender", "award criteria" and "assessment methodology", and cite the Act's sections (19, 23 and 24) rather than any "rule 2(1)(h)" or "rule 38".
Common Pitfalls SMEs Face Meeting the MAT Test
Most lost marks under MAT come from three things: ignoring the published weightings, making social value claims without evidence, and answering a question that is close to the one asked but not the same. Each has a straightforward fix.
Spending effort out of proportion to the weights. For example, a bidder writes 2,000 polished words on company history (10%) and rushes the methodology question (40%). Fix: give drafting time roughly in line with the weightings from Step 1.
Generic social value. "We are committed to our community" is unlikely to score well against a model that asks for measurable outcomes. Fix: name a number, a place, a date and a reporting method, such as "2 apprenticeship starts in [district] within 12 months, reported quarterly". Only commit to what you can deliver, because social value commitments are often written into contract KPIs.
Missing a pass/fail element. The methodology has to say whether failing a criterion disqualifies a tender (s.23(3)). Fix: before you upload, tick off every "must" in the pack.
Treating criteria as fixed in a competitive flexible procedure. Buyers can refine award criteria between rounds by adding detail or sub-criteria (gov.wales). Fix: re-read the refined criteria at each stage and don't resubmit unchanged text.
Staying quiet when criteria look disproportionate. Buyers must have regard to barriers facing SMEs (gov.wales). Fix: if a criterion seems to demand something out of scale with a small contract, such as an accreditation that only large firms hold, ask about it politely through the portal's clarification function while the tender is still open. Don't wait until after the award.
Ignoring the assessment summary. Fix: compare your scores with the winner's information in the summary and add one improvement to your template library per criterion.
For the wider bidding routine around this, including finding opportunities and choosing which to bid for, see How to Win Government Contracts UK: 7 Steps for SMEs.
Next steps
You can start on your next bid today. Choose one or two of these:
- Open one live UK4 notice on Find a Tender in your sector, copy its Award criteria into a spreadsheet, and run the Step 4 maths using a realistic price.
- Write one evidence-backed case study using contract value, dates and one measured result. You can reuse it for most "experience" questions.
- Watch the supplier and SME/VCSE knowledge drops linked from the official Procurement Act e-learning page. They are free. The full set of 10 one-hour modules needs registration with the Government Commercial College and is designed mainly for buyers.
If you would rather learn formal bid technique from a trainer: APMP Foundation is the widely recognised entry-level bid and proposal certification. For example, Strategic Proposals lists its online APMP Foundation course at £460 + VAT (Strategic Proposals) (as of October 2026; check the official page). The exam requires APMP membership, which isn't included in course fees. It suits people who will write bids regularly, for example a bid lead in a growing SME or a charity's contracts officer. It is probably not worth it for a sole trader who bids once or twice a year. The main limitation is that it teaches general bid process, so it won't tell you how a particular buyer marks a particular question. The free GOV.UK material plus your own assessment summaries cover more of that.
Related guides on this site:
- Selection Questionnaire Procurement Act 2023: 7 SME Steps
- Social Value in Tenders: PPN 002 Steps and Answer Examples
- Contracts Finder vs Find a Tender: 2026 Table and Steps
- Framework Agreement How to Get On: 6 SME Steps (2026)
- How to Win Government Contracts UK: 7 Steps for SMEs (2026)
FAQ
What is most advantageous tender (MAT)?
MAT is the award test in section 19 of the Procurement Act 2023. The winning tender is the one that meets the buyer's requirements and best satisfies the published award criteria, assessed by the stated methodology and relative importance. It has applied to procurements started on or after .
What is most economically advantageous tender (MEAT)?
MEAT was the award test in regulation 67 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Buyers identified it on price or cost, often using a best price-quality ratio. It still applies to procurements, frameworks and DPSs that started before .
Most advantageous tender under the Procurement Act 2023: how does it affect my bid?
Very little changes in what is scored, but the process is more transparent. Expect clearer pass/fail rules, weightings shown as percentages or rankings, at least 10% for social value in in-scope central government contracts, and a detailed assessment summary afterwards. Write to each criterion's weight and descriptors.
Can you give a most economically advantageous tender example?
Using a 60% quality and 40% price split with made-up figures, a £80,000 bid scoring 30/60 on quality totals 70. A £100,000 bid scoring 51/60 totals 83 and wins, even though it is 25% more expensive. Your buyer's own price formula may give different figures.
What is the difference between most advantageous bid and PPRA?
"Most advantageous bid" is defined in Rule 2(1)(h) of Pakistan's Public Procurement Rules 2004, which the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA) administers. It has no legal effect in UK tenders. Under UK law, use "most advantageous tender".
Sources
- Procurement Act 2023, section 19 – legislation.gov.uk
- Procurement Act 2023, section 23 – legislation.gov.uk
- Public Contracts Regulations 2015, regulation 67 (current status) – legislation.gov.uk
- Public Contracts Regulations 2015, regulation 67 (as made) – legislation.gov.uk
- Guidance: Assessing Competitive Tenders – GOV.UK (PDF)
- Procurement Act 2023 guidance: assessing competitive tenders – Welsh Government
- Guidance: Assessment Summaries – GOV.UK
- Guidance: Contract Award Notices and Standstill – GOV.UK (PDF)
- PPN 002: Taking account of social value in the award of central government contracts – GOV.UK (PDF)
- PPN 002 Guide to using the social value model – GOV.UK (PDF)
- Notice types and sequences – Find a Tender
- Find a Tender service
- The Official Procurement Act 2023 e-Learning – GOV.UK
- Transition to the new Procurement Act – Capital Law
- Which legal regime applies to my procurement? – Procurement Portal
- Public Procurement Rules – PPRA Pakistan
- Downloads (SROs, manuals, forms) – PPRA Pakistan
- APMP Foundation course – Strategic Proposals
Spotted something out of date or wrong? Tell us at shigoto.ai.note@gmail.com. Guides are re-checked against official sources on a rolling schedule.