Skip to main content

Buying hospital equipment through e-GP: writing a specification that survives evaluation

A tender that attracts one responsive bidder has failed. How to write technical specifications that are demanding without being accidentally single-vendor, evaluate on lifecycle cost, and assemble a submission that does not get rejected on paperwork.

A tender that attracts one responsive bidder has failed, whatever the file says. Either the specification was written so tightly that only one product could answer it, or the qualification requirements excluded everybody who could have competed. Both outcomes cost the procuring entity money, and both are avoidable at the drafting stage rather than at the evaluation meeting.

Public procurement in Bangladesh runs under the Public Procurement Act 2006 and the Public Procurement Rules 2008, with most goods tenders now issued and submitted through the national e-GP system. The mechanics are well documented. What is less well documented is how to write the technical part so that the process produces a machine your department can still use in year four.

The two ways a specification fails

Too tight. Someone takes a favoured brochure, copies its specification table into the tender document, and changes nothing. Every dimension, every stated angle, every count of preset positions now matches exactly one product. The tender is legally open and commercially closed. It draws one bid at a price that reflects the absence of competition, or it draws a complaint and is cancelled, and the department waits another six months.

Too loose. The specification says electric operating table with standard accessories, and the lowest evaluated price wins. What arrives is technically compliant and clinically unusable: a column that drifts under load, a hand control that fails within the warranty, no service presence in the country. The evaluation committee did nothing wrong. The document gave them nothing to work with.

The three manufacturer test

Read your draft line by line and ask, for each line, whether you can name at least three manufacturers whose products would meet it. If you cannot, either the requirement is genuinely necessary and you can write down the clinical reason in one sentence, or it is an artefact of a copied datasheet and should be relaxed. The Rules require specifications to be written around characteristics and performance rather than brand names, with the words or equivalent where a brand reference is unavoidable. Adding those two words to a copied table does not fix anything, because the evaluation still has no defined test of equivalence.

Write requirements and test methods, not numbers you copied

A good specification line has three parts: what the equipment must do, the measurable threshold, and how the committee will verify it. The third part is the one that is almost always missing, and it is the reason evaluations turn into arguments.

Weak line as commonly writtenWhy it causes troubleBetter wording
Table top length 2050 mmLocks to one product and tells you nothing clinicallyTable top to accommodate an adult of at least 190 cm with head and leg sections fitted. Tenderer to state the dimension and mark the catalogue page.
Imported from Europe or USAOrigin is not quality, and it excludes strong manufacturers elsewhereManufacturer to hold a current quality system certificate for medical devices, with the certificate naming the production site of the offered model.
Should have all standard accessoriesEvery bidder interprets this differently, so no two prices compareAn itemised accessory schedule in the tender document, quantities stated, priced line by line.
Latest modelCannot be evaluated, and invites disputes after awardModel in current production at date of tender, with the manufacturer confirming a stated minimum parts support period from date of supply.
Warranty 1 yearAmbiguous start date is the most common post-award dispute in this countryWarranty of the stated period beginning on the date of the signed acceptance certificate after installation and testing, not on the date of shipment or delivery.

Two habits are worth adopting. Group requirements into mandatory and desirable, and say plainly that failure on any mandatory line makes the offer non-responsive. And if you intend to score anything, publish the scoring in the tender document: criteria that are not in the document cannot be applied afterwards, and a committee that improvises a scoring sheet on the day is inviting a successful complaint.

Evaluate on lifecycle cost, not on the quoted price

The tender price of a hospital machine is often the smaller part of what you will pay for it. Evaluation on price alone reliably selects the product with the most expensive consumables, and everyone involved knows this before the envelope is opened.

The remedy is to define, in advance and in the document, the elements that will be added to the offered price to produce an evaluated price. Typical components:

State the formula. If a bidder cannot reproduce your evaluated price from the published method and their own submission, the method is not transparent enough.

Manufacturer authorisation, and what it is worth

The Manufacturer's Authorisation Form is a standard requirement in goods tenders here and one of the most frequently accepted worthless documents. A properly issued authorisation does four things at once, and a letter that does not do all four is a dealership announcement with a stamp on it.

  1. It is issued by the manufacturer that actually makes the goods, on the manufacturer's letterhead, signed by a person with authority to bind that company. A letter from a regional trading office that does not manufacture is not the same instrument.
  2. It names this tender by its reference number and this tenderer by legal name. A general letter of appointment addressed to whom it may concern does not qualify the bidder for anything.
  3. It is dated after the tender was published. A letter predating the tender cannot have authorised a bid for it.
  4. It commits the manufacturer to something: continued supply of spare parts for a stated period, and an undertaking to meet the warranty and service obligations directly if the local agent fails to. Without that undertaking the form protects nobody.

Verify it independently. Find the manufacturer's contact details on their own published website, not on the letter, and write to them quoting the tender number. Manufacturers answer these questions, and the reply arrives well within the evaluation period. A forged authorisation is one of the few things in a tender file that can be checked with certainty.

Certification requirements that mean something

Asking for internationally certified is asking for nothing. Ask for identifiable documents, and say that you will verify them.

The documents a responsive submission needs

Most rejections in goods tenders are not technical. They happen because something was missing, unsigned, expired or attached in the wrong envelope. Whether you are bidding or evaluating, work from a checklist rather than from memory.

If you are the procuring entity

Back to all Insights