Evaluation of Technical Data

When you're assessing technical bids in federal procurement, you're not just checking boxes. You're conducting a formal evaluation process that determines which supplier gets the contract—and that evaluation better be defensible. According to Supply Manual Section 5.5, the main purpose is to determine the best responsive bid in accordance with the evaluation methodology you specified upfront in your solicitation document.

How It Works

The process starts with checking each bid for responsiveness to three key areas: contractual, technical, and financial requirements laid out in your solicitation. This isn't subjective. Supply Manual Section 5.35 makes clear that evaluations must follow the procedures you stipulated in the bid solicitation document. No improvising allowed.

Here's where it gets specific: if you're using rated criteria to assess technical bids, Section 4.35.5 of the Supply Manual requires you to specify the maximum points achievable for each criterion right in your solicitation document. These rated criteria let you distinguish the relative merits of each bid, assessing various elements so you can differentiate between a good proposal and a great one. The scoring reflects the relative importance of each technical requirement to your project needs.

Documentation matters more than you might think. According to PSPC's Assessor Guidance, you need evaluation reports on file covering your review of every supplier, all resources they proposed, and whether they meet the minimum requirements for each category and level. The 2023 Procurement Practice Review by the Office of the Procurement Ombudsman emphasized this point: without proper technical evaluation reports, there's no way to verify whether all resources were actually evaluated according to your bid solicitation terms. These reports form the basis for the contracts you issue.

Key Considerations

• Your evaluation criteria are locked in: Once your solicitation goes out, you're bound by those evaluation procedures. You can't change your scoring or add new technical requirements mid-stream just because you didn't like the bids you received.

• Fair and transparent isn't optional: The Procurement Ombudsman's review identified fair, accurate, and transparent evaluation as a mandatory aspect of the process. Your evaluation reports need to show your work—document clarifications requested, notes from the evaluation, and how you applied the rated criteria.

• The basis of selection report closes the loop: After technical evaluation, you need a basis of selection report summarizing the results. This document justifies your choice of winning supplier and must be on file before contract award.

• Technical data completeness can trip you up: If a bidder's technical documentation is incomplete or unclear, you need to determine whether that's grounds for non-responsiveness or whether clarification is appropriate under your procurement risk assessment.

Related Terms

Statement of Work, Mandatory Requirements, Rated Requirements

Sources

• Supply Manual - Sections 5.5, 5.35, and 4.35.5, Public Services and Procurement Canada

• Procurement Practice Review of Public Services and Procurement Canada (2023), Office of the Procurement Ombudsman

• Assessor Guidance Document—Supply Arrangement Requirements, PSPC

In practice, thorough technical evaluation protects both you and the integrity of the procurement process. Document everything, stick to your stated criteria, and make sure your evaluation reports can withstand scrutiny.