Veterinary equipment procurement resource
Veterinary Equipment Comparison Worksheet
A neutral scorecard for comparing veterinary equipment configurations by mandatory fit, evidence quality, lifecycle support and total quoted scope.
Published and maintained by HQS Medical · Revision 1.0 · 30 August 2026
Reject any configuration that fails a mandatory requirement. Score only the remaining candidates so an attractive optional feature cannot compensate for a missing essential function.
Recommended scoring structure
| Criterion | Weight | What to compare | Supplier A | Supplier B | Supplier C |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mandatory use-case fit | Pass / fail first | Species, procedures, workload and required functions | |||
| Delivered configuration | 20 | Exact model, accessories, software and quantities | |||
| Installation fit | 15 | Power, gases, water, space, network and environment | |||
| Evidence quality | 20 | Current model-specific manual, data and applicable documents | |||
| Consumables and parts | 15 | Compatibility, price basis, minimum order and lead time | |||
| Service and training | 15 | Warranty, response, calibration, maintenance and training | |||
| Commercial and logistics | 15 | Quoted scope, Incoterms, delivery, acceptance and exclusions |
Score evidence, not adjectives
“Premium”, “medical grade” and “advanced” receive no points unless the supplier identifies the model-level property or document that supports the statement.
Document assumptions
Record missing values as unknown. If the answer could change the decision, make it a written condition of the quotation instead of estimating it.