<aside> ⭐

Subbie performance tracked and rated, so the next tender decision is based on data, not memory.

</aside>

Client type: Builder running tenders through Procore with a regular subbie bench

The problem

Ask a builder why a package went to a particular subbie and the answer is usually memory and gut feel. Performance history lives in people's heads, walks out the door when staff leave, and never makes it into the next tender decision.

What I built

A two-phase system connecting Procore to a simple rating capture flow:

Phase 1 — Commitment + Vendor Match

1. Pulls commitment contracts and project vendors straight from the Procore API
2. Matches commitments to vendors in code, building a clean subcontractor list
3. Built to be called by other workflows — the vendor list stays a single source of truth

Phase 2 — Rating Capture

1. An n8n form kicks it off — and the form fields are built dynamically from the live Phase 1 vendor list, so there's no hardcoded subbie names to maintain
2. Supervisors rate subbie performance through a simple form
3. Submissions are normalised and stored in two places: an n8n data table and Google Sheets — queryable and exportable
4. A thank-you screen closes the loop

Tools used

n8n · Procore API · n8n Forms · Google Sheets · n8n Data Tables

The outcome

• Every rating captured against the actual Procore vendor record — no spreadsheet drift
• Tender decisions backed by accumulated performance data, not whoever's memory is sharpest