Greenhouse Gas Inventory Improvement Programme - 2  Energy, Waste, and Industrial Processes and Product Use

What the buyer is asking for

DESNZ is seeking to procure a supplier(s) to deliver and lead the second UK Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory Improvement Programme of research (IIP-2). The research programme will involve an organisation with expert technical understanding of inventory issues as they relate to issues across the UK economy leading a consortium to develop methodologies, deliver sector-specific original research and engage relevant stakeholder, generating new or updated emission factors and activity data. This will continue to ensure that the UK GHG inventory is in alignment with Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change guidelines and reflects government decarbonisation efforts. This programme is being published as two procurements. This one is the  Energy, Waste, and Industrial Processes and Product Use (IPPU) emissions reporting sectors. Refer to Page 55 of the ITT Document Both programmes will require a multidisciplinary teams with expertise spanning but not limited to climate science, mathematical emissions modelling, IPCC guidelines, UNFCCC accredited experts and international emissions reporting standards, specifically as applied to sectoral processes (excluding the agriculture sector but a knowledge of the agriculture sector is essential). In addition, a dedicated programme management office will be essential to coordinate and oversee delivery. To ensure comprehensive and high-quality outcomes, the programme will employ a blend of qualitative, quantitative, modelling, and collaborative research approaches. These will include desk-based analysis, stakeholder engagement, laboratory testing, model and methodology development, fieldwork, and rigorous QA/QC procedures. The intended outcome is a scientifically robust and transparently enhanced UK GHG inventory. The inventory will be more resilient to future changes and capable of quantifying emissions uncertainty in a reproducible and interpretable manner. It will also improve the representation of emissions from diffuse sources, using open and transparent models and methods that allow for the identification and correction of risks and weaknesses.

How this is scored

Published by the buyer. A winning response is written to these weightings, not to the question.

• 80%qualityTechical DeliveryThe technical envelope contains the qualitative tender evaluation questions, which assess the Supplier’s proposal to deliver the Authority’s requirements. The information provided by Suppliers, enables the Authority to carry out a qualitative evaluation of the Tender against the pre-determined quality element of the Award Criteria. 121. Suppliers must submit responses to the questions on the Portal which directly correspond with the quality element of the Award Criteria. The quality element of the Award Criteria is made up of the main criteria and sub-criteria by which the Tender will be evaluated.
• 10%qualitySocial ValueSuppliers should demonstrate how additional social value commitments will be delivered through SME participation, academic and research institution supply chain involvement, diverse supply chains, and timebound measurable outcomes that support the contract. A strong response will set out clear additional social value commitments, explain how SMEs, academic and research partners and diverse suppliers will be involved, and provide measurable KPIs and reporting arrangements that demonstrate delivery, progress and impact.
• 10%qualityValue for MoneyThis criterion assesses the quality of the bidder’s approach to delivering value for money through efficient delivery, proportionate resourcing, cost control and risk reduction. It does not score the tender price itself and does not replace or duplicate the Price per Quality Point (PQP) assessment, which will be applied separately using the commercial information submitted in the Pricing Schedule. Suppliers should explain how their proposed resources, staff grades, day rates, use of digital tools, existing evidence and partnerships are proportionate to the tasks and will support high-quality delivery within the available budget.

How contested is this?

Buyers publish how many bids they received. Across 13 comparable procurements we can tell you the typical field size, how often one of these goes uncontested, and whether the buyer awards on price or on quality.

Timeline

4 published dates · Europe/London

1. Tender notice published50 days ago

   3 Aug 2026, 10:57 BST
2. Clarification questions by38 days ago

   14 Aug 2026, 17:00 BST
3. Submission deadlinein 6 days

   27 Sept 2026, 16:00 BST
4. Award decision expected byin 36 days

   27 Oct 2026, 23:59 GMT

Commercial outcome and contract awards

Nothing awarded yet

Notice history

2 events · 2 releases on Find a Tender

1. Notice published29 Apr 2026, 11:37 BST039077-2026
2. Tender notice3 Aug 2026, 10:57 BST073063-2026

Documents

• Tender notice on Find a Tender