Contractor ratings

This article has multiple issues. Please help or discuss these issues on the . (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. Please to make it understandable to non-experts, without removing the technical details. (June 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) This article does not cite any sources. Please help by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources:  –  ·  ·  · scholar · JSTOR (December 2009) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may , discuss the issue on the , or create a new article, as appropriate. (September 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Contractor rating systems, also known as contractor prequalifications, are one of the larger cost saving practices available and more routinely applied by governmental organizations as a means of avoiding the high cost and inflated pricing that results from reduced competition on public work by using bonding and surety to guarantee performance of public work.

Years ago began applying prequalification and short-listing of pre-selected contractors for bidding on public procurement contracts. A subjective process are in many places the exclusive means of getting on a bidders list for public contract work.

These ratings and processes now make the whole issue of bonding and surety, (that has been around since the late 19th century to guarantee of performance and paying large premiums), obsolete and redundant since the public officials have already reduced risks and are paying premiums associated with reducing competition by using the prequalification process and rating systems.