Financial close is a stage with a high degree of variation in market practice among jurisdictions. Financial close means not only that the financing documents have been signed, but also that the prior conditions for the availability of financing have been fulfilled.

It is good practice for the procuring authority to debrief both the successful and unsuccessful bidders after the contract has been executed. In each case, the debriefing should not focus on the relative merits of the bids. Rather, it should be directed at providing each bidder with general information on how it can better meet the government’s expectations in future projects.

Chapter 2.9.3 of the PPP Certification Guide explains the importance and significant benefits of transparency and proactive disclosure in PPP programs. It also provides examples of disclosure policies that are considered to be good practice. In some jurisdictions, it is compulsory to publicly release the contract as-signed.

During the course of this period, it is common for both the authority and private partner (still as preferred bidder or successful proposer) agree on certain minor changes in the contract to resolve mistakes or clarify ambiguities. It may also be necessary to incorporate specific features of the winning bidder's proposal into the contract according to some practices (while in others, the offer is directly considered a part of the contract).

Before the deadline expires, the successful bidder will have to meet certain prior conditions as established in the RFP. The following conditions are typically included.

Once the contract has been awarded, the necessary steps are taken to proceed to the signing of the contract by both parties.

Upon award, the successful bidder (called the ‘preferred bidder’ in some markets) will be required to sign the contract within the period prescribed in the RFP.

It is possible that no bidders will submit, which constitutes a clear process failure. This is best avoided by having a well-planned and well-structured tender process, consistent with the practices described in chapter 5 of this PPP Certification Guide. If it does eventuate that there are no bidders, it is not uncommon to grant additional time for bid submissions when there is evidence that time insufficiency was the cause of the failure.

As noted in section 3, the risk of a challenge to the tender or award process is considered higher in PPPs than in a conventional procurement. To mitigate this risk, the procuring authority must have sound preparation and procurement processes, and a legal team and relevant subject matter experts prepared to handle potential challenges — including the ability to resolve disputes in the interests of moving the process forward.

After the tender is evaluated according to the relevant criteria provided in the RFP and any negotiations are satisfactorily completed, the award decision is made by the relevant authority, usually based on the recommendation made by the evaluation team.

A major difference between procurement approaches in different countries is in the extent to which the government enters into negotiations with the “preferred” (but not yet successful) bidder following the evaluation process, but prior to the award of the contract.

The need for post-bid negotiation can arise for a range of reasons, including those listed below.