Make bidders price the same information
Quotations cannot be compared fairly when each contractor has imagined a different house. Issue coordinated drawings, specifications, a bill or pricing schedule, programme expectations and a return form. Give bidders the same clarification information and enough time to inspect the site. Record whether the quotation includes tax, transport, testing, temporary works, security, external works and connections.
Ask for assumptions and exclusions explicitly. A one-page total may be attractive but reveals little about missing scope or cash flow. Confirm validity period, payment terms, completion proposal, key staff and proposed subcontracting. Price is important; evidence that the price covers the required result is equally important.
Normalise before ranking
Create a comparison table using the client's required scope. Bring omitted but required items into an adjustment column using a consistent, documented allowance; separate this analytical adjustment from the bidder's formal offer. Check arithmetic, provisional sums, daywork rates and unusually high or low unit rates. Ask written questions rather than guessing.
For illustration only, Quote A at UGX 205,000,000 excluding an estimated UGX 18,000,000 defined drainage package is compared at UGX 223,000,000 for analysis, while Quote B at UGX 218,000,000 includes that package. These invented values show normalisation, not a recommendation or August 2026 market pricing. Scope quality, programme and risk still need evaluation before selection.
Set the control budget at award
The approved control budget should include the contract, professional services, authority or utility items, owner purchases and transparent risk allowances. Keep contingency outside the contractor's spend unless authorised. Map the total to a cash-flow forecast and identify items subject to currency or price movement under the contract.
- Record every commitment when ordered, not only when paid.
- Price design changes before approval and record their time effect.
- Compare certified value, cash paid and physical progress.
- Forecast the final cost using pending risks as well as approved changes.
- Reconcile materials purchased directly by the owner.
- Review remaining contingency and unfunded scope monthly.
Treat overruns as decisions, not surprises
When the forecast rises, identify the cause: scope growth, quantity change, design correction, site condition, price movement, delay or original omission. Assign each item an owner and decision date. Value engineering should examine function, area, complexity, specification and lifecycle cost—not make late arbitrary cuts to structure, waterproofing or safety.
Beware of continuing work while calling known changes “to be agreed later.” Unpriced decisions accumulate and weaken the client's choices. A qualified quantity surveyor should verify the project-specific comparison and cost reports, while tax and contract questions go to the relevant advisers. Good cost control does not guarantee the cheapest building; it makes the chosen scope and financial consequences visible early enough to manage.
Keep the original tender comparison after award. It records exclusions and assumptions that can otherwise be forgotten when a claim arises. At each cost meeting, separate approved, submitted, estimated and potential changes; adding them into one undifferentiated figure hides decision status. Close rejected proposals formally so the design and site teams do not proceed with them accidentally.
When savings are required, ask for cost, programme, quality, maintenance and approval consequences together. A cheaper imported fitting may have a long replacement lead time; a local alternative may require a detail change. Choose with the complete effect visible and update the drawing, specification, budget and procurement schedule in the same decision cycle.
← Back to all construction insights