Deliver
Deliver: vendor selection, implementation oversight and governance that keeps execution honest
Once the blueprint is approved, we stay in the room through execution — running competitive vendor selection, chairing technical and commercial evaluations, and providing independent oversight on-site and in factory. Our role is to protect the business case agreed at design stage by catching scope creep, quality slippage and schedule drift before they become claims.
Typical duration · 6–18 months depending on project scale (typically spans tendering through commissioning)
Samples generated 05 Sept 2026, 11:26 pm ISTWhat happens in this step
- 01Draft and issue technical specifications, RFP/RFQ documents and evaluation criteria aligned to the approved blueprint
- 02Run vendor technical and commercial evaluation, including factory visits, reference checks and bid clarification rounds
- 03Support contract negotiation on performance guarantees, LDs, warranty terms and payment milestones
- 04Set up a program governance framework — steering committee cadence, RAID log, escalation matrix and reporting templates
- 05Conduct factory acceptance tests (FAT), stage-gate design reviews and site quality/safety audits during construction
- 06Monitor commissioning milestones against the master schedule and verify performance test results independently
- 07Issue monthly independent progress and risk reports to the client's investment or leadership committee
What we need from you
- Approved technical blueprint and equipment specifications from design stage
- Budget envelope and financing conditions/covenants relevant to procurement
- List of pre-qualified or preferred vendors, if any, plus past performance history
- Client's internal approval and governance structure (who signs off what)
- Site access and local liaison contact for site visits and audits
- Any existing EPC/OEM contracts or MOUs already in place
Worked example (anonymised, illustrative)
Standalone BESS Program Oversight · 400 MW / 800 MWh · Western India, DISCOM ancillary services tender
Independent vendor selection and construction-phase oversight for a grid-scale standalone battery storage project following DISCOM tender award, from LOA through commissioning.
Sample deliverables from this step
Every sample below is analyst-written and anonymised for illustration — structure and depth mirror our real deliverables; figures and names are not from any client engagement.
Illustrative · Growthifye-preparedVendor Evaluation & Selection Report
Structured scoring of BESS OEM and EPC bids across technical, commercial and bankability criteria, with a recommended shortlist and negotiation levers.
Sample excerpt · Vendor scoring summary (illustrative, weighted 100) — illustrative figures
| Criterion | Weight | Vendor A | Vendor B | Vendor C |
| Cell chemistry & warranty (10yr degradation) | 20% | 17 | 15 | 18 |
| Round-trip efficiency guarantee | 15% | 13 | 12 | 14 |
| Price per MWh (delivered, installed) | 25% | 20 | 23 | 19 |
| Track record - operating MW installed | 15% | 14 | 10 | 13 |
| Local service & O&M presence | 10% | 8 | 6 | 9 |
| Financial strength / bank guarantees | 15% | 13 | 11 | 12 |
| Total (out of 100) | 100% | 85 | 77 | 85 |
- Scoring calibrated jointly with client procurement and technical teams before bid opening
- Reference site visits conducted for top two vendors prior to final award
Illustrative · Growthifye-preparedProgram Governance Dashboard
Monthly steering-committee dashboard tracking schedule, cost, quality and risk across the vendor and EPC scope, flagging deviations from the blueprint baseline.
Sample excerpt · Monthly program status (illustrative snapshot) — illustrative figures
| Workstream | Baseline date | Current status | Variance | RAG |
| PCS & battery container delivery | Month 8 | On track | 0 days | Green |
| Civil & foundation works | Month 5 | Delayed | +18 days | Amber |
| Grid interconnection approval | Month 6 | Pending DISCOM sign-off | +10 days | Amber |
| FAT completion - Phase 1 units | Month 7 | Completed | -3 days | Green |
| SCADA/EMS integration testing | Month 10 | Not started | On track | Green |
- RAG status and variance reviewed jointly with client PMO every four weeks
- Escalation triggers defined for any workstream exceeding 15-day variance
Site Quality & FAT Audit Reports
Independent factory acceptance test and site audit findings against contracted specifications, with non-conformance tracking through to closure.
Sample excerpt · FAT non-conformance log (illustrative extract) — illustrative figures
| NCR ID | Component | Description | Severity | Status |
| NCR-014 | Battery rack busbar torque | Torque values below spec on 3 racks | Major | Closed |
| NCR-021 | PCS enclosure IP rating | Gasket seal deviation from IP54 | Minor | Closed |
| NCR-027 | Fire suppression system | Aerosol trigger delay beyond spec | Major | Open |
| NCR-033 | Cable routing | Insufficient bend radius on DC cables | Minor | Open |
- All major NCRs require re-inspection sign-off before shipment release
- Findings shared with vendor within 48 hours of audit
Commissioning Milestone Schedule
Independently verified master schedule tracking mechanical completion, energisation, and performance testing against contracted milestones and LD triggers.
Sample excerpt · Commissioning milestone tracker (illustrative) — illustrative figures
| Milestone | Contracted date | Actual/forecast | LD trigger |
| Mechanical completion - Phase 1 | Month 9 | Month 9 (on track) | No |
| First energisation | Month 10 | Month 10.5 | No (within grace) |
| Reliability run (72 hrs) | Month 11 | Forecast Month 11.5 | Monitor |
| Commercial operation date (COD) | Month 12 | Forecast Month 12.5 | Monitor |
- LD triggers calculated per contract clause 14.3 on cumulative delay beyond grace period
- Forecast dates updated weekly during commissioning window
Outcomes
- Vendor selection completed on transparent, defensible criteria that withstand board and lender scrutiny
- Cost and schedule variances surfaced early enough to negotiate remedies rather than absorb claims
- Quality issues caught at factory or site stage rather than post-commissioning
- Client leadership has a single, independent source of truth on program status throughout execution
Questions clients ask
Do you replace our EPC or project management contractor?
No. We sit alongside your PMO or EPC as an independent technical and governance layer, focused on protecting the business case — we don't take on execution responsibility or contractual liability for delivery.
Can you step in mid-way if a project is already delayed or over budget?
Yes. We frequently run a rapid diagnostic on in-flight projects, benchmark actual progress against the original blueprint, and re-baseline the governance framework before continuing oversight.
How do you handle situations where a vendor disputes our findings?
All audit and FAT findings are documented against the contracted specification with photographic and test evidence, and shared through the client's formal escalation channel — this keeps disputes fact-based and speeds resolution.
