REQVERA
Ask the Buyer · Decision note 09

You have alternative evidence. Will the buyer accept it?

Illustrative situation · Not a customer case
The buyer’s question

The tender asks for a named certificate or customer reference. We have different evidence. Can we use it?

Separate meeting the requirement from proving it in an accepted way. Describe the evidence you actually hold, ask a precise admissibility question, and keep the gap visible until the buyer's procedure permits the alternative.

A clarification to adapt

For [procurement reference], [document/version/section] requests [exact certificate, report or reference] to demonstrate [stated capability or condition]. We currently hold [actual alternative evidence, issuer, date and scope], which documents [specific relevant facts], but is not [requested evidence]. Please confirm whether this form of evidence may be submitted for this requirement and, if so, the scope, assessment criteria, timing and any additional supporting information required. If it is not admissible, please confirm the requirement and applicable stage for providing the specified evidence. We are not requesting that a mandatory condition be treated as met without support.

Replace every bracketed field with verified facts. Remove any optional sentence you cannot substantiate. Do not submit this wording unchanged.

Evidence-admissibility check

Do not collapse four different decisions into 'equivalent'. A usable alternative must clear each applicable step.

Capability
Does the supplier actually meet the underlying requirement? Different paperwork cannot repair an absent capability.
Proof
What exact facts does the alternative establish, for which entity, service and period? Leave uncovered facts explicit.
Admissibility
Do tender instructions or an authorised clarification permit this evidence type and timing? Unanswered is not accepted.
Assessment
Who decides whether the permitted evidence is sufficient? Record conditions and the resulting bid decision without predicting a pass.

What makes the wording defensible

Ask whether a different certificate, assessment or reference is admissible without claiming equivalence or hiding a mandatory gap.

  • Classify the requirement before drafting the question

    Is this evidence of supplier eligibility, a technical specification, an award-scoring input or a contractual delivery obligation? Read the tender's definitions and assessment rules. A missing mandatory certificate and a lower-scoring reference are not the same commercial decision. State the actual gap plainly. A policy, penetration test and independent assurance report address different questions; do not rename one as the other or imply that possessing evidence automatically demonstrates the requested capability.

  • Ask about a route to assessment, not automatic acceptance

    UK Procurement Act technical-specifications guidance discusses equivalent standards and certification or other evidence, with the authority assessing equivalence. It does not make every alternative certificate acceptable. Conditions of participation have their own assessment framework. For an applicable US FAR Part 15 procurement, past-performance evaluation is distinct from proving every technical or eligibility requirement. A reference substitution remains a question about this solicitation, not a universal permission to supply a partner's experience.

  • Use the channel without disclosing the entire evidence pack

    Submit the question before the authorised deadline. Describe the evidence type, scope and relevant facts; avoid uploading confidential reports or naming a customer without permission. If a protected document is necessary, ask how the buyer permits it to be provided securely. Do not promise future certification dates, customer availability or disclosure rights that their owners have not approved. Treat silence as unresolved, not as a waiver.

The evidence to obtain

  • Requested proof and assessment purpose

    Keep the precise requirement, procurement stage, accepted evidence instructions and pass/fail or scoring treatment. Record whether the buyer names a standard, a certification body, a document type, a date range or a particular contracting entity. These distinctions determine what your evidence would need to demonstrate. They are more informative than a blanket 'equivalent' label.

  • An honest comparison of the evidence

    For each alternative, record issuer, independence, covered entity, service scope, review period, limitations and permission to disclose. Map only the facts it substantiates to the buyer's stated purpose. For references, establish whose work it was, their contractual role and the reference provider's consent. A parent company's certificate or a team member's prior experience is not automatically your company's evidence.

  • Buyer decision and internal authority

    Retain the submitted question and authorised response. Check whether the instruction changes the tender or merely explains how existing rules apply. Capture the scope of acceptance and any remaining conditions. The evidence owner approves accuracy and release; the bid authority approves how the unresolved gap is represented. The final answer must not broaden a limited acceptance into a general compliance claim.

The decision to approve

Decision owners
The Bid Manager owns clarification and classification. Security, quality or the relevant delivery owner verifies the evidence; legal or commercial review is needed for confidentiality, contractual reliance or a proposed exception.
Proceed
Use the alternative only where the applicable tender rules or an authoritative buyer clarification permit that route, and only for the facts and scope it supports. Complete any required assessment or additional evidence; admissible evidence is not an automatic pass.
Do not proceed
Do not mark a mandatory requirement as satisfied while the specified proof is missing and no permitted alternative applies. Do not present an internal control statement as an independent certificate or relabel another organisation's reference as your own.
Escalate
If admissibility is unresolved at the decision cutoff, keep the gap visible for a bid/no-bid or permitted-exception decision. An exception needs the right authority and process; persuasive wording does not change eligibility. Seek jurisdiction-specific advice where the requirement or remedy is disputed.

Keep the decision in the final files

After acceptance of an alternative, the final bid must retain its limits: which requirement, which entity, which scope and which approved evidence. REQVERA's final-control workflow is relevant to checking that alignment in the submission files. The software does not grant equivalence, waive certification requirements or obtain buyer approval.

See the authentic final-control workflow

Scope & primary references

Illustrative evidence-admissibility guidance, not a certification or legal opinion. UK Procurement Act references concern procurements within that regime; transitional and devolved rules must be checked separately. US FAR 15.305 is a Part 15 example, subject to applicable agency deviations, not a rule for private security questionnaires or every federal solicitation. Actual buyer instructions, permitted channels and deadlines remain controlling.