Tired of procurement pain? Our AI-powered platform automates the painful parts of identifying, qualifying, and responding to Canadian opportunities so you can focus on what you do best: delivering quality goods and services to government.
Rated Criteria
Evaluation factors in a competitive solicitation that are scored and weighted to determine which compliant bid offers the best value; typically includes technical capability, experience, methodology, and sometimes price as scored components.
Rated criteria are the scored evaluation factors that separate winning bids from the rest in competitive federal procurements. Unlike mandatory criteria that simply qualify or disqualify bidders, rated criteria let you differentiate between compliant proposals by assigning points to technical capability, experience, methodology, and sometimes price. When PSPC or any federal department runs a complex procurement, they're measuring relative merit through these scored factors.
How It Works
Section 4.35.5 of PSPC's Supply Manual lays out the framework: rated criteria assess various elements of technical bids so the relative merits of each proposal can distinguish one from another. The solicitation must specify the maximum points achievable for each criterion—no surprises allowed. You'll typically see technical proposals scored on factors like the bidder's approach to the statement of work, relevant project experience, team qualifications, and proposed methodology. Price may be scored separately or integrated into the overall point structure depending on the evaluation method.
Your criteria need to align directly with what you're actually buying. Treasury Board Contracting Policy subsection 10.7.25 requires that point-rated technical evaluation criteria stay consistent with the work described in your statement of work. If you're scoring vendors on their cybersecurity experience, your SOW better involve cybersecurity work. The weighting tells the real story—assign more points to factors that genuinely matter more to project success. A criterion worth 5 points out of 100 signals low importance; make it 30 points if it's actually critical.
The Procurement Ombudsman's reviews consistently examine whether agencies clearly communicate these criteria and their scoring methodologies in solicitation documents. Bidders need to understand not just what you're evaluating, but how much each factor counts. Vague criteria or unclear weighting schemes trigger complaints and can derail your entire procurement when vendors challenge the process.
Key Considerations
Maximum points must be explicit upfront. You cannot adjust scoring ranges after bid closing, even if all submissions cluster at one end of your scale. Build your point structure carefully before the solicitation goes live.
Overly restrictive criteria kill competition. TB Contracting Policy subsection 10.7.27 emphasizes clarity, but it also cautions against criteria that unnecessarily limit the vendor pool. If only two companies in Canada can possibly score well on your criteria, you've made them too narrow.
Evaluators need detailed scoring guidance. "Technical approach" worth 40 points means nothing without a scoring matrix. What gets 40/40 versus 20/40? Your evaluation team should reach consistent conclusions when reading the same proposal.
Documentation is everything. Every score assigned needs defensible justification tied back to the published criteria. The Ombudsman will review your evaluation records if a vendor complains, and "it felt right" won't hold up.
Related Terms
Mandatory Criteria, Technical Evaluation, Best Value
Sources
Well-designed rated criteria make your evaluation defensible and your vendor selection justifiable. Poor criteria invite protests and delays.
Share
Stop wasting time on RFPs — focus on what matters.
Start receiving relevant RFPs and comprehensive proposal support today.