What Got Shipped Today - 24/8/26 - Tender Sets built from your Document Register, subcontract SOV sections, bid scores that stick

24 August 2026 Three changes reached production today, and the through-line is proof. A tender set that can now be assembled from your approved register rather than a folder browser, a subcontract schedule of values that reads like the document it will be claimed against, and a bid evaluation screen that actually keeps what you typed into it. Features Build a Tender Set from your approved Document Register, across every document class User story As an Estimator, I built tender sets by browsing folders and hoping I had picked the current revision, so I can now pull straight from the approved register and know every document in the issue is the registered one. Before. Creating a Tender Set meant one path: browse the CDE Explorer and pick files out of folders. That is fast, and for some builders it is the right call. For anyone who has invested in a document register, it was the wrong one. The register held the controlled revisions, the register held the status, and the tender set ignored all of it. If a drawing had been superseded that morning, nothing in the flow told you. After. The create tender set modal now opens with two source tabs. CDE Explorer is unchanged, folder browsing exactly as before. Document Register is new, and it returns every registered document class, not just drawings: Scope of Works, specifications, schedules, drawings, clarifications, whatever your register holds. The register tab carries its own search plus discipline, status, set and document type filters, so you narrow the list yourself rather than having the platform narrow it for you. Register picks resolve to the latest registered revision and freeze into the same immutable snapshot the tender set has always used, with document number, title, revision, discipline and register status captured at the moment of issue. You can mix the two. Pick a spec section and a schedule off the register, add a late sketch from Explorer, and submit once. Where the same document appears on both sides, the Explorer pick wins, because it carries the real folder placement.Impact. An estimator can now assemble one Tender Set covering a Scope of Works, a specification, a schedule and a full drawing set in a single pass, every line of it register backed. That matters months later, not today: when a subcontractor claims a variation on a document they say they never priced, the tender set is the record that settles it, and now that record can point at the approved register rather than at whatever was in a folder that afternoon. Known limitations. The document type filter reads the type recorded against each register row. That field is free text and optional, so legacy rows registered without a type will not appear under a specific type and will only show under All Types. Setting types on those rows brings them into the filter. Improvements A subcontract Schedule of Values with real sections, imported from Excel User story As a Contract Administrator, I built subcontract schedules of values as a flat list of cost lines and rekeyed every figure by hand, so I can now group them under headings and import the whole schedule from a spreadsheet. Before. The head contract schedule of values could be structured and imported. The subcontract one could not. It took a flat run of cost lines, nothing else, and every value went in by hand. On a subcontract of any size that produced a schedule nobody could read at claim time, assembled through an hour of typing that had already been done once in the estimate. After. The Schedule of Values builder on a subcontract now takes group rows alongside cost lines, so a schedule reads with the same breakdown the parties negotiated: preliminaries, then structure, then services, with the lines sitting under their heading. Lines that belong nowhere in particular sit in an Ungrouped section rather than being forced into a heading. Import from Excel is there beside Import from Budget Register. Fill the template, upload it, and a Section column on the spreadsheet drives the headings, so the structure comes across with the values rather than being rebuilt afterwards. Cost codes and programme task links stay attached per line.Impact. A subcontractor claim now arrives against a schedule both sides can read, which is most of what a payment dispute turns on. And the schedule stops being a retyping exercise: the numbers move from the spreadsheet where they were priced into the contract where they will be claimed, once. Fixes Bid evaluation scoring, procurement numbers and CFO recommendations now save User story As a Commercial Manager, I set my scoring weightings and wrote a recommendation, saw a success message, came back and found it all gone, so I can now trust that what I entered is what is recorded. Before. On the Compare Bids screen, editing the scoring weightings returned a success message and then silently reverted to the default 50 / 25 / 25, including inside the edit form itself. Procurement number and the internal CFO recommendation behaved the same way: type, save, navigate away, come back to empty fields. The weighted score column would also sit on a dash until you re-saved one of the per criterion inputs. This was the worst kind of bug, because nothing told you it had happened. The platform reported success every time. A commercial decision recorded on a Friday was simply not there on the Monday, and there was no reason for anyone to check. After. All three fields persist and read back correctly. Set your weightings, hard reload, and they are still your weightings. Procurement number and CFO recommendation survive navigating away and returning. The weighted score computes from the saved criteria on load rather than waiting for a re-save. Anything entered before the fix and apparently lost was in most cases still recorded underneath and will reappear now that the read path returns it. Impact. Bid evaluation is a decision record, and a decision record you cannot trust is worse than no record at all. Scoring, adjustments and the written recommendation now hold, so the reasoning behind an award survives long enough to be defended. We build Deep Space around what you tell us. If something here is close but not quite right, or there is a gap you keep working around, raise it through the feedback portal in the platform. It goes straight to the team.