Fairness Monitor

A fairness monitor is an independent third party engaged to observe all or part of a public-sector procurement or real property transaction in real time and to attest — in a report — that the activity was conducted in a fair, open and transparent way. Federal departments, provinces, municipalities and P3 projects use fairness monitors on high-value or high-risk procurements to reduce disputes and strengthen public confidence.

What it is

Per Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC), its Fairness Monitoring Program retains independent fairness monitors who act as objective third parties, providing real-time monitoring during the procurement process, catching fairness-related issues early to avoid costly after-the-fact resolutions, and enhancing public trust. Under the program, an assessment for fairness monitoring coverage is mandatory for departmental activities subject to ministerial or Treasury Board approval — except non-competitive procurements and amendments to existing contracts — and for competitive procurements where the procurement complexity assessment is level 4 or 5 or the procurement risk assessment is medium-high or high. The assessment is optional for other activities where enhanced assurance is desired. Monitors’ reports contain their observations, impartial opinions and professional attestation of fairness.

What a monitor does and doesn’t decide

A fairness monitor observes — familiarizing with the documents, attending evaluation activities such as consensus meetings, flagging fairness matters to the contracting authority, and ensuring responses are reasonable and appropriate. The monitor does not make or veto the award decision; that remains with the contracting authority.

Common questions

Is a fairness monitor legally required?

Not by trade agreements. In Temprano and Young Architects Inc. v. National Capital Commission (2019), the Canadian International Trade Tribunal confirmed there is nothing in the solicitation or the trade treaties that requires the use of a fairness advisor, and the absence of one does not by itself show a failure of due diligence. Agencies use them as an assurance practice, not a legal obligation. If you believe a process you bid on was still unfair, the remedy is a complaint — see the CITT complaint process and the Office of the Procurement Ombud.

Does monitoring change how evaluations are scored?

No — the monitor checks that the process follows the published criteria and rules. The evaluation itself still runs on the solicitation’s criteria and weighting and evaluation matrix.

Related definitions

Two-envelope evaluation · Supplier debriefing · Responsive bid