Tendering cleaning services: what the public sector should watch for
Public institutions awarding cleaning services face a delicate task: the offers must be comparable and the award must be fair and justifiable. The key lies in an objective basis, long before the first offer arrives.
This guide walks through the process of a tender, shows the structure of a specification, gives an example of award criteria with weightings and closes with a checklist.
The problem of unclear tenders
If the tender is vaguely worded, every bidder calculates differently. One calculates tightly, another generously. The prices are hardly comparable. In the end, perhaps the most unrealistic offer wins. Subsequent discussions, quality problems and extra costs are inevitable.
The most common triggers are always the same: the area figures come from old plans and are no longer correct. The floor coverings are not differentiated, even though a textile floor and a sanitary covering cause completely different effort. The intervals are not defined, so every provider assumes whatever suits them. And the special work is not delimited, which is why window cleaning is included in one offer and not in the other.
The process in seven steps
1. Calculate the requirement objectively
Before every tender comes the question of how much cleaning the building actually needs. The answer comes from a calculation: area per room, covering, type of use, cleaning type, interval, plus a Performance value in square metres per hour. This gives annual hours and thus a target value against which you can measure every offer. The basis for this is clean area recording for the cleaning calculation.
2. Draw up the specification
The specification translates the calculation into a document on which all providers calculate. It describes areas, coverings, cleaning types, intervals, operating times and delimitations. It does not state the calculated hours as a requirement, but the service to be delivered and the quality target.
3. Choose the procedure
Depending on the contract value and cantonal law, direct award, invitation procedure or open procedure may be options. The applicable thresholds and the regulations to be applied differ from canton to canton and from municipality to municipality and change periodically. For that reason, clarify the relevant threshold and the procedure before publication with the responsible cantonal office or with your municipality's legal advisers. The contract duration is also important: it affects the contract value, which determines the procedure.
4. Define the award criteria
The criteria and their weighting must be defined before the offers are received and announced in the tender. Subsequent adjustments are not permitted and make an award open to challenge. Every criterion also needs a described evaluation method so that the award of points remains transparent.
5. Compare the offers
First check completeness, then plausibility: which hours lie behind the price? What hourly rate does that give? If the calculated effort is far below your calculated requirement, the offer is either organised more efficiently or it will not deliver the service. This question belongs in the assessment, not in the appeal proceedings afterwards.
6. Justify the award
Document the evaluation per criterion and provider, the weighting, the points and the resulting decision. This documentation is the basis for notifying the providers and your safeguard towards committees and supervisory bodies.
7. Contract and quality control
The contract adopts the specification as an annex and governs contacts, key management, the complaints procedure, proof of performance and adjustments when areas change. In addition, a simple but regular inspection procedure is worthwhile: periodic site visits with a record, documented complaints and an annual review.
An objective specification
The basis of a good tender is a precise specification: which areas, which coverings, which cleaning type at which interval? If these details are based on a transparent calculation, all bidders calculate on the same basis. This makes the offers comparable.
- Areas and coverings per room, cleanly recorded.
- Cleaning types and intervals clearly defined (maintenance, interim, deep cleaning).
- Special work such as window cleaning shown separately.
The following overview shows which items a robust specification contains and why they are necessary.
| Item | Content | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Property and use | Buildings, floors, type of use, number of users | Determines the degree of soiling and the time windows |
| Room list with areas | Room number, name, square metres | Prevents providers from assuming different areas |
| Floor coverings | Type of covering per room, special requirements | The covering determines the performance value and the care products |
| Cleaning types | Routine cleaning, Interim cleaning, Deep cleaning and Special cleaning | Separates ongoing from periodic services |
| Intervals | Frequency per room group and cleaning type | The biggest lever on the price |
| Operating weeks and time windows | Operating days, holidays, permitted working hours | Determines staff deployment and surcharges |
| Quality targets | Description of the target condition per room group | Makes complaints verifiable |
| Special work | Windows, blinds, deep cleaning, events | Shown separately so that it is comparable |
| Materials and machines | Who provides consumables, equipment, rooms | Often the largest hidden price difference |
| Organisation and documentation | Contact person, reporting, complaints procedure | Secures day-to-day operations |
| Price form | Uniform structure, hours and unit prices | Only then are offers comparable in calculation terms |
Indicative values for orientation, as at October 2026.
Why there are no comparable offers without a specification
Without a common basis, you are not comparing prices but assumptions. The following example shows how far apart two offers for the same building can be when every provider estimates for itself.
Worked example: two quotes for the same administration building
An administration building with 1,500 m2 of cleaning area is put out to tender without a specification. The objectively calculated requirement is 1,088 hours per year. The two providers make different assumptions about office cleaning.
| Variant | Office cleaning | Hours | CHF per hour | CHF per year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Own calculation | 3× per week | 1'088 | 50 | 54'400 |
| Provider A | daily | 1'250 | 48 | 60'000 |
| Provider B | 2× per week | 950 | 47 | 44'650 |
The difference of 15,350 CHF corresponds to around 26 percent of the lower offer. It arises not from efficiency but from different assumptions about the interval.
With a specification that defines the intervals per room group, both calculate around 1,100 hours. The offers then differ only in the hourly rate and in the organisation. That is exactly what an award procedure is supposed to compare.
In practice, offers without an objective basis are often 20 to 30 percent apart. General benchmarks are of little help in checking them, because use, coverings and intervals vary greatly from building to building. Because of their hygiene requirements, kindergartens, day-care centres as well as retirement and care homes are well above administration buildings and school buildings. The most reliable yardstick is therefore your own calculated requirement. If an offer is well below it, a query is appropriate.
Award criteria and weighting
Price is one criterion, but not the only one. A weighting that relies exclusively on the price rewards offers that later cut back on the service. The following example shows a distribution that is easy to handle in practice.
| Award criterion | Example weighting | Evidence in the offer |
|---|---|---|
| Price | 40 % | Price form with hours and hourly rate |
| Quality assurance and organisation | 20 % | Concept, inspections, contact person, cover |
| References for comparable properties | 15 % | Details of property type, area, contract duration |
| Training and onboarding of staff | 10 % | Training concept, qualifications, staff turnover |
| Environment and use of materials | 8 % | Product list, dosing, machines, disposal |
| Working conditions | 7 % | Confirmation of the applicable collective labour agreement |
| Total | 100 % |
Indicative values for orientation, as at October 2026.
Two notes on this. First: compliance with the working conditions, equal pay and contribution obligations is usually a condition of participation and not just a scoring point. Check how your cantonal law regulates this. Second: the price evaluation needs a described formula. It is customary for the lowest offer to receive full marks and for higher offers to be graded according to a curve announced in advance.
Comparability creates fairness
If the tender is based on objective figures, offers can be compared factually, not only on price but also on scope. This protects against dumping offers that later cut corners on quality. In addition, the award decision becomes justifiable towards committees and supervisory bodies.
This is an advantage for the provider side too. A cleaning company that calculates properly loses out to an optimistic estimate as long as nobody checks the assumptions. With a uniform specification, organisation and efficiency compete instead of a willingness to cut corners. How providers build up their offers transparently is shown on the page for Cleaning companies.
In-house or outsourced?
Before putting work out to tender, the question of principle is worth asking. Both options have their place. The answer depends less on the hourly rate than on the organisation.
| Aspect | In-house staff | External award |
|---|---|---|
| Hourly rate | around 45 CHF full costs | 40 to 60 CHF |
| Included in the rate | Wages, social security contributions, share of management | Management, cover for absences, materials, machines, margin |
| Cover for absences | has to be organised yourself | Provider's obligation |
| Day-to-day controllability | high, direct instruction | via contract and contact person |
| Flexibility for events | high, often possible at short notice | usually charged as an additional service |
| Effort for the administration | Staff management, planning, materials | Tender, contract, quality control |
Indicative values for orientation, as at October 2026.
The external rate is not higher without reason: it includes services that with in-house staff arise as administrative effort but are rarely attributed to the cleaning. An honest comparison therefore uses full costs on both sides. Many institutions do best with a mixed model: their own caretaking for operation, inspections and events, external contracting for the area-intensive routine cleaning or for deep and window cleaning. The basis for both options is the same Cleaning calculation. The distribution of the hours across people and properties is organised by the workload and allocation planning.
Transparency towards the public
Public funds must be justified. A tender based on an objective calculation provides exactly this justification: every item is documentable, the award is transparently documented.
In practice this means: when the question comes up in the municipal council of why cleaning a school building costs so much, the answer is not an opinion but a calculation. 3,000 m2 of cleaning area, 39 school weeks, 2,091 hours of routine cleaning and around 210 hours of deep and special cleaning give around 2,300 hours, i.e. about 125 FTE percent. These figures can be traced back to the individual room. Correspondingly prepared quotes and reports turn the calculation into a document that a committee without specialist knowledge can read.
Transparency also means informing the unsuccessful providers objectively and keeping the evaluation. Both reduce follow-up questions and protect you in the event of an appeal.
Checklist for a clean tender
- A complete, up-to-date asset inventory as the basis.
- Objective calculation of the cleaning requirement using standard values.
- Clearly separated cleaning types and intervals.
- A uniform specification for all bidders.
- Transparent, documented award criteria.
- Procedure and relevant threshold clarified in advance with the canton.
- Scope defined: who provides materials, machines and rooms.
- Operating times, holiday arrangements and access to the building described.
- Uniform price form with hours, hourly rate and unit prices.
- Award criteria including weighting and evaluation method published.
- Question round with written answers to all providers.
- Plausibility check of the offers against the calculated requirement.
- Evaluation per criterion documented and archived.
- Contract with the specification as an annex and a rule for changes in area.
- Dates set for site visits and the annual review.
FAQ
Do we have to disclose our calculated hours in the tender?
That is not necessary and often not sensible. Specify areas, coverings, intervals and quality targets, but leave the calculation of the hours to the provider. Your own calculation serves you internally as a yardstick for the plausibility check.
How long should the contract duration be?
In cleaning, terms of three to five years are common, sometimes with an extension option. Shorter contracts increase the procedural effort, longer ones tie you to one provider. Note that the term influences the contract value and therefore also determines which procedure applies.
What should you do if an offer is strikingly low?
Do not exclude it automatically, but ask for justification. Have the calculated hours, the hourly rate and the planned staff deployment explained to you. If the explanation gives a coherent picture, the offer is admissible. If it remains vague, you have a documented basis for proceeding further under your cantonal procurement law.
How often should the areas be updated?
At least before every tender and with every structural change. A pavilion, a change of use or a new floor covering changes the requirement immediately. Which areas and types of covering count and how is explained in the articles on area types and floor coverings and on the differences between the cleaning types.
Conclusion
A fair, legally sound award starts with an objective calculation. Anyone who specifies areas, coverings and intervals receives offers that really can be compared. The decision can then also stand up before a committee and the auditors. easyCAFM provides the transparent basis for a robust specification, so that offers become comparable and decisions justifiable.
Back to the blog