Recorded historic win rate
TenderLab’s confirmed historic management figure for supported submissions. It is reported separately from the 200+ submission count and is not a forecast or guarantee.
TenderLab results and proof
Performance figures you can examine properly.
TenderLab reports four confirmed measures from past work. This page keeps them separate, explains what each one represents and shows the limits that should shape a responsible buying decision.
Recorded measures
Four figures, with four different meanings.
The definitions are part of the evidence. They prevent a strong headline from being mistaken for a promise about the next procurement.
Submissions supported
TenderLab’s confirmed count of tender and framework submissions supported. It measures work completed and is not presented as the published denominator for the 92% figure.
Combined contract value
TenderLab’s confirmed aggregate contract value linked to successful supported submissions. It is contract value, not TenderLab revenue, client profit or cash received.
Question scores recorded
Supported responses have received 5/5 where a five-point scale was used. The measure does not mean that every question or every submission received 5/5.
How stronger submissions are built
The quality of the decision comes before the confidence of the prose.
TenderLab tests whether the opportunity fits, whether the provider can evidence the promised service and whether the complete submission answers the published criteria.
Fit and conditions
Participation rules, service scope, geography, deadline and commercial exposure are reviewed before substantial writing begins.
Operational evidence
Claims are connected to responsible people, controls, records, frequencies and outcomes that the provider can stand behind.
Evaluator access
The response structure makes the commitment, delivery method, evidence and intended outcome easy to find within the word count.
Complete-bid control
Responses, attachments, portal requirements and provider approvals are checked against one requirement map before handover.
Use more than one form of evidence.
- Defined performance measures
- Procurement-specific case studies
- Client experience and reviews
- A visible working process
- Legal and editorial accountability
- Clear limitations and corrections
Choosing responsibly
Questions to ask before relying on any success claim.
Read the evidence in context.
A clear limitation makes a result more useful, not less credible.
Does TenderLab guarantee that a tender will win?
No. A procurement outcome depends on the provider, eligibility, evidence, delivery model, price, competition and the buyer’s evaluation. TenderLab can improve the structure, relevance and clarity of a submission but cannot control the award decision.
Can I see procurement-specific examples?
Yes. The case-study library explains the commissioning context, the provider’s starting point, the work TenderLab completed and the recorded outcome where publication is appropriate.
How should I compare tender-writing providers?
Use historic results as one part of the decision. Also examine sector knowledge, who will do the work, how evidence is gathered, how quality is controlled and whether the adviser will identify when an opportunity is not suitable.
Why are the four figures not combined?
They describe different measures: a historic win-rate figure, a count of supported submissions, aggregate contract value and individual question scores. Combining them would suggest one reporting cohort that has not been established.
Evidence for your decision
Compare the record with the support your tender actually needs.
Share the opportunity, deadline and documents. TenderLab will use the published requirements and your current evidence to explain the responsible next step.