ProcureHQ
ProcureHQ shows you how your tender is likely to score against the published evaluation criteria — before you submit it. Built for Tier 2 and Tier 3 contractors, specialist subcontractors, and professional services firms tendering on Government projects from $250K–$50M+.
Your first evaluation is risk-free.
Every Single Evaluation is backed by a 14-day full refund guarantee — no questions asked. See terms
ProcureHQ
Tender Evaluation Report
Submission Draft — Version 3
Current Score
5.2/10
Needs work
Potential Score
8.4/10
Excellent
Assessment Confidence
91%
Very High Confidence
Criterion Scores
Executive Summary
The submission is compliant and shows credible delivery capability, but is not presenting enough evidence to build evaluator confidence. Marks are being lost on generic project descriptions, unquantified outcomes and thin Management Systems and Social Procurement commitments — targeted rewrites can lift the Current Score to a Potential Score of 8.4/10 before lodgement.
THE PROBLEM
By the time the debrief arrives, the contract is gone. And even then, as a rule the panel's scores are never released to tenderers. No organisation is told how its submission performed against each criterion — the feedback rarely goes beyond "competitive" or "not competitive." ProcureHQ simulates the evaluation while there's still time to fix what's costing you marks.
How it works
Upload your tender, receive a structured Tender Evaluation Report, implement the Recommended Response Improvements, and re-run before submission.
Upload your Request for Tender, Tender Response and supporting documents.
Current Evaluation Score
5.2/10
Potential Evaluation Score
8.4/10
Assessment Confidence
91%
The Digital Submission Evaluation Committee evaluates every published Evaluation Criterion and produces a structured Tender Evaluation Report.
Action the Recommended Response Improvements — using Tender Intelligence and the High-Scoring Templates Library where available.
Current Evaluation Score
5.27.8↑ 2.6
Assessment Confidence
91%96%↑ 5
Re-run the evaluation until your Current Evaluation Score and Assessment Confidence are ready for lodgement.
ProcureHQ
Tender Evaluation Report
Submission Draft — Version 3
Current Score
5.5/10
Needs work
Potential Score
8.5/10
Excellent
Assessment Confidence
91%
Very High Confidence
"The response demonstrates the tenderer is capable of delivering work of this type, and the three cited projects (Response - Experience.pdf pp. 3–5) are broadly relevant. However, the narrative reads as a general capability statement rather than project-specific evidence — outcomes are not quantified, relevance to the current Scope of Works is not explicitly mapped, and there is limited evidence of delivery in a comparable live environment. The score sits around the middle of the scale; a higher score would require quantified outcomes, an explicit relevance mapping and clearer evidence of comparable delivery."
Restructure this criterion around the three most comparable projects, each presented on a single A4 page under fixed headings: Client & Referee, Contract Value, Scope Match, Delivered Outcome (quantified), and Risks & Mitigation. Explicitly map each project against the Scope of Works items in the RFT, and include at least one project delivered in a live, occupied community environment. Keep the total response within the page limit stated in the RFT.
Your Tender Evaluation Report
Every evaluation follows the same structured methodology — from your overall scores and Submission Readiness rating down to a criterion-by-criterion recovery plan, with evidence-based findings throughout.
Current Score, Potential Score, Assessment Confidence and a Submission Readiness rating — with a plain-English verdict on how competitive the submission is today.
Your strongest criterion, the criterion needing most attention, and the number of priority improvements — the whole evaluation at a glance.
Your submission rated across ProcureHQ's proprietary Evaluation Intelligence Domains — the areas that most influence Evaluation Committee confidence.
Your ordered, prioritised checklist — priority-ranked improvements rated by Benefit and Effort, so you know exactly where rework lifts your score first and what to work through next.
For every criterion: the evidence that strengthens Evaluation Committee confidence and the gaps that may undermine it.
A one-line evidence position per criterion — status, strongest evidence, most important gap, and assessment confidence.
Committee-chair observations synthesised from the evaluation: the anchor of the response, where the committee would press hardest, likely moderation dynamics and overall competitiveness.
For every criterion: committee assessment, strengths, evaluation risks, missing evidence, a Recommended Response Improvements section with Benefit and Effort, simulated committee commentary, and the potential score after improvements.
Analysed across ProcureHQ's proprietary Evaluation Intelligence Domains.
A complete fictionalised example generated by the live engine — opens instantly when you submit your email.
The implementation layer
Your Tender Evaluation Report identifies exactly where marks are being lost. Tender Intelligence provides the practical implementation guidance, evaluation insights and professionally developed High-Scoring Templates Library that transform those recommendations into stronger future submissions.
The implementation guidance and templates that turn your report's recommendations into higher scores.
Understand how experienced Government evaluators assess each criterion, what separates average submissions from high-scoring responses, and how to systematically strengthen the areas identified within your Tender Evaluation Report.
Implement your Recommended Response Improvements using templates built on the same Evaluation Decision Signals that power the evaluation itself.
Unlimited access to the Tender Intelligence Framework and High-Scoring Templates Library.
Trust
ProcureHQ helps contractors understand how Government Evaluation Committees may assess their tender before submission.
Real-world assessment experience across infrastructure, rail, roads, professional services and maritime.
Recurring patterns that build — or erode — panel confidence, observed evaluation after evaluation.
Structured signals covering scope understanding, evidence quality, delivery confidence and uplift opportunity.
Every submission produces a structured Tender Evaluation Report — before lodgement, not after.
ProcureHQ is designed to protect your Tender Intelligence. Every evaluation uses only your uploaded Request for Tender, your Tender Response and ProcureHQ's proprietary Evaluation Intelligence — nothing from any other customer.
Every evaluation runs independently, using only your organisation's documents.
Your submissions never inform recommendations for any other organisation.
ProcureHQ's Evaluation Intelligence is developed independently of customer content.
Every recommendation is internally validated against your own uploaded documentation.
Unsupported recommendations are automatically suppressed.
Permanently delete evaluations and uploaded documents whenever you choose.
Most AI tools learn from everything they process. ProcureHQ was built differently: isolated evaluations, independently generated recommendations, validated before they’re presented. Your Tender Intelligence remains confidential.
Generated independently, validated against your uploaded documentation, and supported by ProcureHQ's proprietary Evaluation Intelligence.
See how the evaluation process worksRobust security, Australian hosting, encryption, access controls and compliance with Australian privacy principles.
Discover how we protect your dataYour data is securely hosted in Australia.
Industry-standard encryption protects your information.
Only authorised users can access your evaluations.
Governance, immutability and audit trails at every layer.
For full details on our security controls, data handling, AI practices and your rights, visit How ProcureHQ Protects Your Intellectual Property
The question everyone asks
Writing a tender and evaluating a tender are completely different tasks.
ProcureHQ is built to assess your submission the way a Government Evaluation Committee does.
Built to generate. Not to evaluate.
Generates content from prompts
Designed for conversation, not evaluation.
Doesn’t assess against your evaluation framework
It isn’t built to score against published criteria and assessment requirements.
Responses vary with prompts
Not a consistent, repeatable evaluation methodology.
Not purpose-built for Government evaluation
Lacks the structure, rigour and context of a real Evaluation Committee process.
Privacy depends on the platform you choose
Your data may be stored or used to train AI models outside your control.
Built to evaluate. Designed to improve your score.
Evaluates your submission
Scores directly against the published evaluation criteria and assessment requirements.
Methodology-driven and repeatable
Structured evaluation methodology that mirrors how Government Evaluation Committees assess.
Consistent, transparent and explainable
Every evaluation is consistent, structured and criterion-by-criterion — using the same rigorous methodology.
Built on real evaluation experience
Developed from ~15 years of procurement evaluation experience across 1,000+ tender responses.
Your data stays private
Your submissions remain isolated within ProcureHQ and are not used to train public AI models.
Generic AI can help you write a tender.
ProcureHQ helps you determine how it will be evaluated.
Consensus scoring has never been made public — it isn't in any AI's training data. It exists only in the experience of the people who sat on the panels.
Pricing
Start free, try one paid Evaluation, or subscribe annually.
One Government contract is often worth $500K+ — one stronger submission repays your plan many times over.
Score one tender end-to-end — scores, executive summary, key findings.
One live tender with full Professional-level analysis. No subscription.
$999 credited if you upgrade within 14 days.
3 evaluations a year with detailed response improvements, evidence gaps and benchmarking.
Unlimited evaluations† plus full Tender Intelligence access.
All prices AUD excl. GST · † Unlimited subject to acceptable use · Cancel anytime — keep full access to end of term
About Lewis
Lewis has approximately 15 years of real-world Government evaluation experience across Infrastructure, Rail, Roads, Maritime and Professional Services, including Design, Environmental and Technical Services. Most of them came from firms exactly like yours — Tier 2 and 3 contractors and consultants competing for Government work.
Over that time, the same recurring evaluation characteristics kept appearing submission after submission — the patterns that erode panel confidence, and the patterns that build it. Those recurring characteristics were documented into a structured set of Evaluation Decision Signals.
Those Evaluation Decision Signals now power ProcureHQ. The Digital Submission Evaluation Committee, the Tender Intelligence Framework and the High-Scoring Templates Library all draw from the same first-hand panel experience.
FAQ
The Digital Submission Evaluation Committee applies the recurring Evaluation Decision Signals observed across hundreds of competitive Government tender evaluations to assess your submission. While it won't replicate any individual Evaluation Committee's exact score or reasoning, it is designed to identify many of the same weaknesses, missing evidence and evaluator confidence issues commonly raised during real tender evaluations.
No. ProcureHQ produces a simulated, AI-assisted evaluation for guidance only — it does not predict or guarantee the outcome of any actual procurement process. Evaluation is inherently subjective and price-competitive. ProcureHQ helps you understand how your submission may be assessed and identify strengths and gaps against the published criteria, so the version you lodge is materially stronger than the version you started with.
As a rule, no. Government evaluation panels do not release consensus scores to tenderers — no organisation is told how its submission performed against each criterion, and debrief feedback typically extends no further than whether a submission was 'competitive.' ProcureHQ was built to close that gap: an independent, criterion-by-criterion evaluation showing how your tender is likely to score, informed by the founder's experience chairing hundreds of evaluation panels — delivered before you lodge, while you can still act on it.
Yes. Uploaded documents remain your intellectual property, stored in isolated, access-controlled storage visible only to your organisation. You can permanently delete evaluation data at any time.
No. Your submissions are never used to train, tune or improve any AI model, and are never used to benefit any other customer or competitor. AI processing is performed solely to produce your Tender Evaluation Report.
Every extracted criterion is scored 0–10 against the recurring Evaluation Signals — covering scope understanding, evidence quality, delivery confidence, coverage and uplift opportunity. Each score is accompanied by committee comments, weaknesses, missing evidence and Recommended Response Improvements.
General-purpose AI can help write a tender. ProcureHQ was purpose-built to evaluate one. Built on approximately 15 years of Government procurement evaluation experience, ProcureHQ's Digital Submission Evaluation Committee is powered by proprietary Evaluation Decision Signals developed from recurring patterns observed across more than 1,000 tender responses and hundreds of competitive Government tender evaluations. It is designed to emulate how experienced Government Evaluation Committees build confidence in tender submissions.
Re-run allowances are set per plan: Free includes 1 re-run on your single tender; Professional includes up to 5 re-runs per tender across up to 3 tenders per subscription year; Premium includes unlimited re-runs per tender on unlimited tenders, subject to our acceptable use policy set out in the Digital Product Terms. The intended workflow is: evaluate, improve, re-evaluate, repeat — until your Current Evaluation Score and Assessment Confidence match the standard you want to submit.
Multi-user collaboration and organisation management are on the roadmap. Today the platform supports a single evaluator account per organisation — team invites are being added in a subsequent release.
No. ProcureHQ is for organisations bidding on Government work — it evaluates your tender submission against the published criteria before you lodge it. It is not a tool for agencies running procurements.
Start with one free Tender Evaluation. Upgrade at any time to unlock your full Tender Evaluation Report, Tender Intelligence and the High-Scoring Templates Library—helping you identify weaknesses, strengthen evaluator confidence and improve your submission before lodgement.