Blog

Suitability and self-declaration

📐 Article5 min read

What you will learn What suitability means and why it must be kept strictly apart from tender evaluation, how evidencing it was simplified in 2026, what role prequalification plays, and what applies to smaller firms.

Assessing suitability concerns the firm, not its tender. It answers whether a tenderer can perform the contract at all.

Keeping it apart from evaluation is a principle of procurement law and is regularly breached in practice. The result is a challengeable procedure.

What suitability means

Suitability comprises three elements.

Element Subject
Technical competence professional ability, experience, references
Capacity personnel, technical and financial capacity
Reliability law-abiding conduct, no grounds for exclusion

To these is added the absence of grounds for exclusion, such as serious misconduct or unpaid taxes and social contributions. It is a separate stage of the check and not part of the three features.

The requirements must be proportionate to the contract. A reference requirement pitched at a project scale the contract does not reach narrows the field without objective justification and is open to challenge.

Keeping it apart from evaluation

The principle is that suitability criteria concern the firm and award criteria concern the tender. Mixing them is impermissible.

In practice that means references, staff qualifications or certificates may not simultaneously serve as award criteria. They qualify the tenderer to take part, not their tender for the award.

The line is not always clear, particularly for personnel-driven services. In case of doubt the classification should be justified and recorded.

Evidencing was simplified in 2026

This is the most significant change of the year for tenderers. It concerns the moment of submission and not the extent of the requirements.

Position What had to be submitted with the tender
Previously extensive evidence: reference lists, accounts, certificates, clearance confirmations
Since the procurement acceleration act at the first stage generally only a self-declaration; the full documents only at award

The relief is real but it only shifts the effort. The award still goes only to a firm that can actually produce the evidence. Making a self-declaration one cannot substantiate risks exclusion and further consequences.

A recommendation follows that runs against the appearance of simplification: the evidence file still needs maintaining and keeping current. Only the moment of its production has moved.

Prequalification

One way to reduce the burden lastingly is prequalification. It is a prior, contract-independent assessment of suitability whose outcome is entered in a register.

The advantage is that evidence is assembled once and then used across a period. For firms regularly taking part in public procurement the one-off effort is worthwhile.

Note that prequalification does not in every case wholly replace contract-specific assessment. Contract-specific requirements may need separate evidence.

What applies to smaller firms

The procurement acceleration act provides that small and medium-sized enterprises and young firms are to be given greater consideration in suitability and reference requirements. The effect of that provision is not, however, unambiguous.

The practical effect cuts both ways, because the same reform pulls in two directions. One change relieves, the other burdens.

Direction Effect
In favour of smaller firms evidence duties fall at the first stage, and references may not be pitched disproportionately high
Against smaller firms procurement by lot remains formally in place but is pressed by eased whole-project awards; larger lots exclude smaller firms in practice

Whether the reform benefits smaller firms on balance therefore depends on how clients use the new latitude. The statutory evaluation due by 2027 is meant to answer that.

What to note on legal protection

One change in the reform concerns the ability to challenge an award decision. It shortens the time available to an unsuccessful tenderer.

The immediate appeal no longer has suspensive effect. For unsuccessful tenderers that means a remedy no longer automatically halts the award.

Procedures thereby become faster and legal protection weaker. Anyone intending to challenge an award must act earlier and more decisively than before. The detail should be assessed legally.

What to record

For the client three points govern the legal soundness of the suitability assessment. All three are formal requirements rather than substantive ones.

# To be documented Where or how
1 Publish the suitability criteria in advance in the notice or the tender documents
2 Justify proportionality particularly for reference requirements
3 Record the assessment traceably for every tenderer

For the tenderer a single point governs: the self-declaration must be substantiable. It is a simplification of form, not a lowering of requirements.

This article reflects the position of the rules at the date of checking and serves professional orientation. It does not constitute legal advice and does not replace assessment of the individual case.

Frequently asked questions

The bidder's ability to perform the contract, assessed on expertise, capacity and reliability. It is separate from the evaluation.

Because one concerns the bidder and the other the bid. Mixing them is a procurement error.

Evidence was simplified and staged, as the article describes. Self-declarations gain weight.

A procedure establishing suitability in advance and bundling the evidence. Smaller firms benefit from easements.

Tendering and procurement under the VOB: a guide