When you're bidding on a federal contract that evaluates technical merit alongside price, you'll encounter a rated requirements evaluation grid—the scoring matrix that determines who wins. This is the formal document, referenced in Supply Manual Section 4.45.1, that lists each evaluation criterion, the maximum points available, and sometimes minimum thresholds you must meet. Get the math wrong on how evaluators will score your proposal, and you'll lose even if you submit excellent work.
How It Works
The grid breaks your bid into discrete scored components. Technical criteria might include your team's qualifications, your methodology, past performance, or your project plan. Each criterion gets a maximum point value—say, 20 points for methodology, 15 for experience. Price gets scored separately, usually as a ratio formula. According to the Supply Manual (Section 4.45.5), departments must disclose both the relative importance of price versus rated criteria and the actual scoring methodology before bids close.
Here's where it gets specific: PSPC and other departments publish their weighting formula right in the solicitation, often using Standard Acquisition Clauses and Conditions (SACC) for consistency. You'll see language like "The technical component will be given a weighting of 70% and the price component will be given a weighting of 30%." Your final score typically comes from a formula: (Technical Score × Technical Weight) + (Price Score × Price Weight) = Total Evaluated Score. The price score itself usually follows a ratio where the lowest bid gets maximum points, and higher bids get proportionally fewer.
In practice, this means a technically superior proposal can overcome a higher price, but only to the extent the weighting allows. If technical is weighted at 60% and you score 90/100 on technical while your competitor scores 70/100, you've gained 12 points on the technical side (20 × 0.60 versus 30 × 0.60 in the combined calculation). If their price is 20% lower and price is weighted at 40%, they might still win. The catch? Treasury Board's Directive on the Management of Procurement requires that these weightings be determined before solicitation and applied consistently—no shifting the goalposts after evaluators see your numbers.
Key Considerations
- Minimum thresholds can eliminate you before price matters. Many grids include minimum pass marks—say, 70/100 on technical—below which your bid is declared non-responsive regardless of price. Supply Manual 4.45.1 explicitly allows for minimums on individual criteria or total technical scores.
- The weighting isn't always 60/40 or 70/30. While those splits are common, departments have flexibility to set weightings that reflect their actual priorities. DND might weight technical at 80% for complex defence systems; SSC might use 50/50 for commodity IT services. Check each solicitation.
- Evaluators can only score what's disclosed in the solicitation. The evaluation grid used internally must mirror exactly what was published. If the RFP says "experience" is worth 15 points, evaluators can't later decide to split that into "government experience" (10 points) and "private sector experience" (5 points). That violates Treasury Board policy on transparent procurement.
- Your basis of selection clause tells you the formula. Don't guess. The SACC clauses spell out whether it's a linear ratio, a proportional calculation, or something else. Read the actual formula before you price your bid.
Related Terms
Mandatory Requirements, Basis of Selection, Technical Evaluation, Point-Rated Criteria, Best Value Procurement
Sources
- Supply Manual – Section 4.45.1 Evaluation grids
- Supply Manual – Section 4.45.5 Point rated evaluation criteria
- PSPC Guidance on evaluation criteria and basis of selection
The winning strategy? Map your proposal structure directly to the grid, allocate your effort proportional to the points available, and never assume evaluators will connect dots you haven't drawn.