Tender Word Count Planner

The strategic allocation system that maximises marks

Common tender mistakes:

• Use 800 words on a 10% question
• Run out of words for the 30% question
• Waste 100 words on introductions
• Write 200 words that don’t score any marks

The cost: 10-15% of potential marks lost to poor allocation.

This calculator helps you allocate words based on scoring weightings, so every word is working toward a mark.

---

Why word count strategy matters

The evaluation reality

Scenario: 3,000 total words, 4 questions with different weights:

• Question 1: 40% weight → 1,200 words allocated
• Question 2: 30% weight → 900 words allocated
• Question 3: 20% weight → 600 words allocated
• Question 4: 10% weight → 300 words allocated

Poor allocation:

• Q1: 800 words (short by 400, marks left on the table)
• Q2: 1,000 words (overspent 100, short elsewhere)
• Q3: 700 words (overspent 100)
• Q4: 500 words (overspent 200, diminishing returns)

Strategic allocation:

• Q1: 1,200 words (fully developed, all marks captured)
• Q2: 900 words (balanced depth)
• Q3: 600 words (concise and focused)
• Q4: 300 words (efficient, meets requirements)

Result: 10-15% score improvement from better allocation alone.

---

The Word Count Calculator

Input your tender details

Total word count allowed: _ words

Number of questions: _

Question breakdown:

Question	Weight %	Calculation	Allocated Words
Q1	___%	Total × %	_
Q2	___%	Total × %	_
Q3	___%	Total × %	_
Q4	___%	Total × %	_
Q5	___%	Total × %	_
Total	100%		_

Example calculation

Tender: 2,500 words, 5 questions

Question	Weight	Allocated
Service Delivery	35%	875 words
Workforce	25%	625 words
Safeguarding	20%	500 words
Quality	15%	375 words
Innovation	5%	125 words
Total	100%	2,500

---

Advanced: Within-Question Allocation

Structure your response by marks

For each question, allocate words to scoring components:

Example: Service Delivery (875 words, 35% weight)

Component	Typical %	Words	Purpose
Understanding	15%	130	Show you “get it”
Approach/Method	45%	395	Core response
Evidence	30%	260	Prove your claims
Outcomes/QA	10%	90	Close strong

Total: 875 words

The 45-30-15-10 rule

For most quality questions:

• 45% — Approach/Methodology (what you’ll do, how)
• 30% — Evidence (proof, numbers, examples)
• 15% — Understanding (context, buyer needs)
• 10% — Outcomes/Assurance (measurement, improvement)

Why this works:

• Evaluators score primarily on approach
• Evidence validates approach credibility
• Understanding shows you’ve read the spec
• Outcomes prove results focus

---

High-Efficiency Writing Techniques

Technique 1: Cut non-scoring words

Before (wastes 45 words):

After (saves 40 words):

What to cut:

• “We are pleased to…”
• “Our organisation is committed to…”
• “We believe that…”
• Generic mission statements
• Thanking the commissioner

Technique 2: Convert adjectives to data

Before (wastes 15 words, scores nothing):

After (saves 10 words, scores marks):

Technique 3: Structure for scannability

Evaluators scan. They don’t read every word.

Before (dense paragraph, hard to score):

After (signposted, easy to score):

Technique 4: Use evidence density

Maximise marks per sentence:

Weak (20 words, 0 marks):

Strong (25 words, high marks):

---

Common Word Count Traps

Trap 1: The “Introduction” Waste

Wastes: 50-100 words
Scores: 0 marks

Before:

After:

Rule: Introductions don’t score. One sentence maximum.

Trap 2: The “How We Started” History Lesson

Wastes: 100-200 words Scores: 0 marks

Evaluators don’t care how you started. They care what you deliver today.

Trap 3: The Generic Capability Dump

Wastes: 200+ words
Scores: Minimal

Before: Listing every service you provide, even irrelevant ones.

After: Focus only on capabilities relevant to this specific tender.

Trap 4: The Empty Promise

Wastes: 30-50 words per occurrence
Scores: 0 marks

Before:

After:

Delete: “We are committed to excellence” — Prove it instead.

Trap 5: Over-answering Low-Weight Questions

Wastes: 200+ words
Scores: Diminishing returns

If a question is 10% weight, don’t write 800 words.

Rule: Allocate proportionally. Low weight = concise and sufficient.

---

The Excel Calculator Features

Basic calculator

• Enter total word count
• Enter number of questions
• Input weightings
• See automatic allocation

Advanced planner

• Within-question structure allocation
• Component breakdown (45-30-15-10)
• Actual vs planned tracking
• Revision history

Efficiency tracker

• Word count before/after editing
• Words saved through efficiency techniques
• Marks-per-word estimation

Tender comparison

• Compare allocation across multiple tenders
• Identify your typical patterns
• Spot over/under-allocation habits

Reporting

• Generate allocation rationale
• Export for team review
• Print-friendly planning sheets

---

Real Tender Examples

Example 1: Supported Living Tender (3,000 words)

Original poor allocation:

Question	Weight	Words Used	Result
Q1 Outcomes	30%	500	Under-developed
Q2 Safeguarding	25%	800	Over-written
Q3 Workforce	25%	900	Over-written
Q4 Quality	15%	500	Adequate
Q5 Mobilisation	5%	300	Wasted
Total	100%	3,000	Missed shortlist

Problem: High-weight question (30%) under-developed. Low-weight question (5%) over-written.

---

Strategic reallocation:

Question	Weight	Allocated	Result
Q1 Outcomes	30%	900	Fully developed
Q2 Safeguarding	25%	750	Strong
Q3 Workforce	25%	750	Strong
Q4 Quality	15%	450	Adequate
Q5 Mobilisation	5%	150	Efficient
Total	100%	3,000	Won contract

Improvement: 15% score increase from reallocation alone.

---

Example 2: Domiciliary Care (2,000 words)

Weighting:

• Service delivery: 35%
• Workforce: 25%
• Continuity: 20%
• Quality monitoring: 15%
• Safeguarding: 5%

Strategic allocation:

• Service delivery: 700 words (35% × 2,000)
• Workforce: 500 words (25% × 2,000)
• Continuity: 400 words (20% × 2,000)
• Quality: 300 words (15% × 2,000)
• Safeguarding: 100 words (5% × 2,000)

Within-question breakdown (Service delivery example):

• Understanding: 105 words (15% of 700)
• Approach: 315 words (45% of 700)
• Evidence: 210 words (30% of 700)
• Outcomes: 70 words (10% of 700)

---

Word Count Planning Checklist

Before writing:

• Extract all word counts from tender
• Note weightings for each question
• Calculate allocated words per question
• Plan within-question allocation
• Identify character limits (if portal)

During writing:

• Check word count after each section
• Stay within allocation (±10%)
• Track actual vs planned
• Flag if overrunning

During editing:

• Cut non-scoring words first
• Replace adjectives with data
• Tighten sentences (remove “that”, “which”, “in order to”)
• Check if high-weight questions fully developed
• Ensure low-weight questions not over-written

Before submission:

• Final word count check
• Verify within limits
• Confirm high-weight sections strongest
• Validate allocation rationale

---

Efficiency Target: Words to Cut

Aim to remove 20% through editing:

Original draft: 3,000 words
Target final: 2,400 words
Buffer for: Additional evidence, stronger examples, scoring detail

Where to find cuts:

• Introductions: -100 words
• Generic claims: -200 words
• Adjectives without proof: -150 words
• Repetition: -150 words
• History/background: -100 words

Total cuts: 700 words
Reinvested: Stronger evidence, more specifics, higher marks

---

The 90% Rule

Always aim for 90% of word limit:

Why not 100%?

• Different tools count differently
• Portal may count differently than Word
• Risk of accidental overshoot
• Buffer for last-minute additions

Target:

• Limit: 2,000 words
• Draft: 1,800 words
• Final: 1,850-1,900 words
• Buffer: 100-200 words

Safety margin: Prevents disqualification from technical overrun.

---

Tool Setup and Usage

Included files:

1. Word_Count_Calculator.xlsx — Excel tool with auto-calculation
2. Allocation_Guide.pdf — Strategy and techniques
3. Before_After_Examples.pdf — 10 real efficiency transformations
4. Quick_Reference.pdf — One-page allocation formula

Installation:

1. Download files
2. Open Excel calculator
3. Review allocation guide
4. Try with current/past tender

First use:

1. Enter tender word limits
2. Input question weightings
3. Review automatic allocation
4. Adjust if specific needs
5. Plan within-question structure
6. Write to allocation
7. Track actual vs planned

---

Results to Expect

Before word count planning:

• Random allocation
• High-weight questions under-developed
• Low-weight questions over-written
• 10-15% marks lost to poor structure
• Last-minute panic cuts

After word count planning:

• Strategic allocation by weight
• Every question proportionately developed
• Marks-per-word maximised
• 10-15% score improvement
• Calm, planned writing process

Win rate impact:

• Before: Close but miss (68% vs 72% shortlist threshold)
• After: Cross threshold and win (78% vs 72%)
• Improvement: Marginal gains = contract wins

---

Support and Next Steps

DIY approach

Use this tool to plan word allocation before you write. Most teams see an immediate improvement in structure.

Expert support

We offer:

• Tender Writing Service — We allocate and write strategically
• Response Review — Audit your allocation and suggest improvements
• Team Training — Word count strategy workshop

Results:

• 10-15% score improvement typical
• Better time management
• Reduced last-minute stress
• More wins from the same capability

---

Tool version 1.0 — February 2026. Updated with latest procurement best practices.