Use case
Debarment screening for procurement review
Use debarment screening to review a bidder’s name and listing details. Save the evidence and assess contract eligibility under the right procurement rules.
On this page
Keep bidder checks and review notes together
Run the sanctions checks your tender needs and save the evidence. Check current coverage for the lists you can use. If a required debarment source is not available, complete that check with the authority’s own records. A paid plan does not add a missing source.
Start free with 250 live screenings and try the sources your bidder review needs. Your first workspace gets one lifetime allowance across the API and dashboard. There is no monthly reset and no credit card is needed. Count each person or company you need to check when planning a tender. If you need more checks, Starter is $59/month for 5,000 checks each month. The API and review dashboard are included.
Define the contract question
A procurement review may ask if a bidder is barred under one institution’s rules. That is a question about whether it can take part in a contract. A check for financial sanctions asks a different question.
Keep the source category, dates, grounds, and notes with the record. Send it to the team that can assess the rules for this contract. A list match gives them evidence to review. It does not decide who wins a tender.
Use the institution’s own sources and rules
For a World Bank check, use the Bank’s original listing and notes. For another authority’s process, use its own sources. A similar name on another list is not a substitute for the check you need.
Select SanctionsKit sources from current coverage for the checks they support. If you carry out a separate procurement review, save it with the bidder record. Name the authority, date, and reviewer. A required check stays incomplete if its source cannot be checked.
Compare the bidder before deciding eligibility
Compare facts you can trust about the bidder with the original entry. Note which facts agree and which differ. Leave room to record what you still need to find out. A shared name alone cannot settle whether a bidder may receive a contract.
Keep the relevant dates and notes from the listing. Even after you confirm who the entry refers to, you still need to read its scope. A note may explain which contracts are affected. Assess that point under the rules for the tender.
Leave a record another reviewer can follow
Save the source reference, date, bidder facts, and reviewer’s reasons for the period your policy allows. Keep the identity finding separate from the decision about the contract. That shows which facts support each conclusion.
Review new facts when the evidence changes. A past false-positive decision is not a permanent exemption. A completed sanctions screen also cannot finish a separate procurement check that is still missing.
Sources and references
Authority and technical sources
Frequently asked questions
Is debarment the same as a financial-sanctions listing?
No. A procurement list and a financial-sanctions list may answer different questions. Use the source and rules needed for your contract, and keep those list categories clear.
What if the procurement source we need is unavailable?
Keep that part of the review incomplete. Use the responsible authority’s own resources for a separate check where appropriate. Another sanctions list cannot answer the missing contract question.
What evidence should we retain for a bidder decision?
Keep the original listing reference and dates, the bidder facts you compared, and the reviewer’s reasons. Save the contract decision on its own, so it is clear how a possible match led to that review.
Can a previous false-positive decision be reused forever?
No. A past review used the facts known at that time. New facts or source changes may call for another comparison. Keep the earlier reasons without treating them as a permanent exemption.