Managing agent comparison scorecard

Each criterion is scored Green, Amber, or Red. Green is worth 2 points, Amber 1, and Red 0. Add the points across all criteria for each candidate and compare the totals. The companion workbook does the arithmetic for you.

Treat the total as a starting point for a conversation. A candidate with a lower total but strong scores on the criteria your building most depends on can still be the right appointment. Use the totals to shortlist, then re-read every Amber and Red row before you decide.

So that every signal traces back to a recognised professional standard rather than to opinion. Section 26 of the RICS Service Charge Residential Management Code and the TPI Consumer Charter and Standards Edition 4 set out what reasonable management looks like; First-tier Tribunal decisions show what the Tribunal treats as evidence of unreasonable management. A candidate can disagree with a score, but the standard behind it is not in dispute.

The scorecard is also available as an Excel workbook and as this PDF reference guide. The Excel file has the same nine criteria, scoring, and conditional formatting; the PDF is for reading and printing. Score candidates in whichever format you prefer.

Criterion 9, Cash and financial stability, is optional. It is most useful when the cost of an agent failing mid-year would be high, for example a higher-risk building with a heavy compliance calendar. For a straightforward block, the reference checks in criterion 8 usually cover financial reliability. Leave row 9 blank if you are not scoring it.