Event procurement recommendation memo
The scoring is finished, and now the committee needs a short document it can approve and file.
The short answer
A procurement recommendation memo is a one to two page paper that states what was bought, how bidders were compared, which supplier you recommend, the main risks and the exact decision you are asking for.
It should let a committee member who read nothing else approve with confidence, and let an auditor see later how the decision was reached.
What the memo is for
The memo records the decision. It is not the evaluation file, which holds the scores and the log, and it is not a sales document. It summarises them and points to them.
Write it for the person who approves spending, often the chair, treasurer or a director, who has not seen the proposals.
Decision sequence
- Confirm the scoring is final: moderated scores from the weighted scoring matrix and the clarification log closed.
- State the recommendation first, then the reasons. Readers decide in the first five lines.
- Show the like-for-like price. If quotes differ in what they include, normalise them with the quote normaliser and show the adjusted figures.
- Name the real risks of the recommended supplier and the mitigation you propose, with an owner.
- Record declarations of interest and who stood aside from scoring.
- End with the decision requested, the approver's name, the date needed and the steps after approval, such as contract review and notification of unsuccessful bidders.
Sections of the memo
| Section | What it says |
|---|---|
| Recommendation | Supplier, scope, total cost and the decision requested, in three or four lines. |
| Background | What is being bought, for which event, and the budget line it falls under. |
| Process | Who was invited, how many passed eligibility, how scoring worked and when. |
| Comparison | Scores and like-for-like prices in one table. |
| Why this supplier | Two or three reasons tied to the criteria and the evidence. |
| Risks and conditions | What could go wrong and what is agreed to reduce it. |
| Conflicts and declarations | Interests declared and how they were handled. |
| Next steps | Contract review, notifications, deposits and dates. |
Where the recommendation is not the top score
Sometimes the highest total is not the right choice because of a risk the numbers did not capture. If you recommend a lower-scoring supplier, say so openly, explain the reason with evidence and ask the committee to decide with that information.
Check your own procurement policy on this. Some organisations require a documented justification or a second approver.
Common pitfalls
- Burying the recommendation after three pages of process.
- Comparing quotes that exclude different items and calling the cheapest the best value.
- Leaving out the risks of the winner because the scoring felt decisive.
- Omitting the next steps, so approval is followed by weeks of silence.
- Sending the memo to unsuccessful suppliers or sharing their scores with the winner.
Worked example · Fictional example
Memo for a catering appointment
Fictional organisation and figures, for illustration only.
A fictional association of professional trainers runs a two-day conference for about 300 delegates. Three caterers pass eligibility. Quotes are RM41,800, RM44,500 and RM38,200, but the lowest excludes service staff (RM4,600 to add).
After normalising, the like-for-like totals are RM41,800, RM44,500 and RM42,800. The weighted scores are 79, 74 and 81. The memo recommends the third caterer, notes that its score depends on staffing that must now be written into the contract, and lists one condition: written confirmation of the final headcount date. The memo asks the treasurer to approve a total of RM42,800 by a stated date. The figures are illustrations, not market prices.
Use this yourself
Recommendation memo template
Copy into a document. Keep it to two pages and attach the evaluation file rather than pasting it in.
- To / From / Date / Event / Budget line:
- Recommendation: appoint [supplier] for [scope] at [like-for-like total]. Decision requested from [approver] by [date].
- What is being bought and why:
- Process: invited [n], passed eligibility [n], scored by [names], moderated on [date]:
- Comparison table: supplier, weighted score, like-for-like price, key difference:
- Why this supplier (two or three reasons with evidence):
- Risks and conditions, each with an owner:
- If not the top score: why, and what the committee should weigh:
- Declarations of interest and who stood aside:
- Next steps: contract review by [who], notify unsuccessful bidders by [date], deposit and payment dates:
- Attachments: evaluation file, clarification log, eligibility sheet:
Handle it in-house, or bring in help?
Your team can usually handle this when
- The scoring is clear and one person can write a short paper.
- Your committee is used to approving supplier decisions in writing.
- The contract value is small and policy needs only one approver.
Outside planning help earns its fee when
- Quotes are hard to compare and nobody has normalised them.
- The committee is split and needs a neutral summary of the options.
- A funder or board expects documentation that will stand up to later review.
Want the memo prepared with the evaluation file?
An Event Blueprint can include the evaluation summary and a recommendation memo structure fitted to your approval route, with risks, conditions and next steps laid out. The decision and the contract remain with your committee and its advisers.
Questions organisers ask
How long should the memo be?
One to two pages. Put detail in attachments. If the approver cannot decide from the first page, the recommendation is not clear enough.
Who should sign or approve the memo?
The person or body your own policy names for that contract value, such as the chair, treasurer or board. Check the limit before you write, not after.
Do we tell unsuccessful bidders why?
Tell them the outcome promptly and politely. Decide in advance how much feedback you will give, and never share another bidder's price or scores.
Can the memo recommend two suppliers?
Yes, if you are splitting scope, for example venue and audiovisual. Present each as its own recommendation with its own comparison, so approval is clean.
Related resources
Content record: Draft. Written from the cited sources and checked by automated rules; not yet independently reviewed.