In order to achieve the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT) you can select from several costing models to support your procurement exercise. This ensures that the evaluation is more than simply a “price for price” comparison.

It is important to differentiate between whole life costing and lifecycle costing.

Whole Life Costing: 

Focuses solely on the cost (£) of a product or service from cradle to grave. It takes into account acquisition, operation, ownership and disposal costs.  It does not take into consideration any environmental or social costs.

Life-cycle Costing: 

Life-cycle costing covers part or all of the following costs over the life cycle of a product or service:

a) costs produced by the Organisation or other users, such as:

 (i) costs relating to acquisition;

(ii) costs of use, such as consumption of energy and other resources;

(iii) maintenance costs;

(iv) end of life costs, such as collection and recycling costs; and

(b) costs attributed to environmental factors linked to the product or service during its life cycle.  The monetary value of these factors must be  able to be determined and verified. This may include the cost of emissions of greenhouse gases and of other pollutant emissions and other climate change mitigation costs.

The use of life-cycle costing can support your organisation in meeting the requirements of the Sustainable Procurement Duty. 

Lifecycle Impact Mapping: 

Focuses on social and environmental impact rather than cost.

Life cycle impacts help the user identify and assess impacts. For example, it may help to focus attention on the disposal phase before the procurement is carried out. This would allow your organisation to build end-of-life management requirements into its performance clauses for successful contractors and its own internal management procedures

Every product and service has a ‘life cycle’ or number of stages it goes through from:

• the extraction and sourcing of raw materials, such as mining
• to the transportation of sub-assemblies and parts, often through a global supply chain
• to the use of products or works
• to the delivery of services
• to the re-use, recycling, remanufacture and
• to the final disposal of materials.

You should consider a 'whole life costing' approach. This takes account of all costs from cradle to grave (acquisition, operation, ownership and disposal).

Higher value or complex procurements may require the use of investment appraisal techniques (such as discounted cash flow calculations) and the use of life-cycle costing is deemed best practice for the majority of goods and services procurement exercises. In all cases the data to be provided by tenderers and the method for price evaluation should be defined within the Invitation to Tender (ITT) documentation.

Where life-cycle costing or whole life costing has been detailed in the specification; the evaluation should take into account all of the identifiable costs attributable to a product or service from:

• its acquisition
• through use,
• maintenance and
• end of life (recycling / disposal). 

These could be direct costs like scheduled maintenance and the energy used through the life of a road sweeping vehicle. This also includes less apparent external environmental costs such as the cost of emissions of greenhouse gases based on the energy use of the road sweeping vehicle.

The use of life cycle costing can support your Organisation in meeting the requirements of the Sustainable Procurement Duty.

You may find the Supplier Cost Drivers Checklist useful when developing a pricing schedule.

Price/financial evaluation criteria should include:

•Whole life cost comparisons

•Quantifiable financial benefits arising from the technical evaluation (e.g. speed, fuel or electricity consumption, coverage, shelf life etc.)

•Fixed or variable pricing

•Cost of components, spare parts, consumables and servicing

•Risk analysis and financial appraisal (for major contracts of strategic importance, especially those of an innovative nature