When you're responding to a federal RFP, you'll encounter two types of technical criteria: mandatory (M) requirements that you either meet or you don't, and rated (R) requirements where your score actually matters. Rated requirements are the point-scored evaluation criteria that determine how well you've addressed what the government wants—not just whether you can do the job, but how effectively you'll do it compared to your competitors.
How It Works
The evaluation process happens in stages. First, evaluators assess mandatory criteria on a simple pass/fail basis, as specified in Supply Manual Subsection 4.35.1. Fail any mandatory requirement? You're out. No second chances.
Once you clear that hurdle, the real competition begins with rated requirements. Here's where evaluators assign numerical scores—typically on a scale that totals 90 or 100 points for the technical component. Treasury Board Contracting Policy Section 10.7.25 requires these weighted criteria to accurately identify all performance elements significant to project success. You might see criteria like "methodology and approach" worth 40 points, "team qualifications" worth 30 points, and "past performance" worth 20 points. Each criterion will have detailed rating scales disclosed in the RFP, because Section 10.7.27 of the TBCP requires transparency about measurement criteria and weighting.
In practice, your technical score gets combined with your price score under a best value procurement approach. The formula varies—sometimes it's 70% technical, 30% price; other times it's 60/40 or even 50/50. The government must disclose this ratio upfront. Most RFPs also set a minimum point threshold for technical evaluation. Score below that number, and even the lowest price won't save your bid. The highest-ranked bidder after combining both scores wins the contract.
Key Considerations
- Don't just meet the requirement—exceed it strategically. Rated criteria reward you for going beyond the baseline. If the RFP asks for three case studies, providing five well-chosen examples might earn you maximum points, while three adequate ones might only get you halfway there.
- Word count matters less than relevance. Evaluators score against published rating scales, not page counts. A concise, targeted response that directly addresses each sub-criterion will outscore a verbose submission that makes evaluators hunt for your answer.
- Minimum point thresholds are non-negotiable. Many bidders focus so heavily on price competitiveness that they submit barely adequate technical proposals. The catch is this: if you score 55 points but the minimum is 60, your pricing is irrelevant—you're rated non-responsive.
- Rating scales aren't always linear. You might see criteria where "meets requirement" earns 60% of available points, "exceeds requirement" earns 80%, and "significantly exceeds requirement" earns 100%. Understanding these scales helps you allocate your proposal effort where it delivers the most competitive advantage.
Related Terms
Mandatory Requirements (M), Statement of Work, Best Value Procurement, Technical Evaluation, Point-Rated Criteria
Sources
- Supply Manual - Subsection 4.35.1, Public Services and Procurement Canada
- Assessor Guidance for Supply Arrangement Requirements, Government of Canada
- Procurement Practice Review of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Office of the Procurement Ombudsman
When you're developing your proposal strategy, map out exactly where points are available and what level of effort each criterion deserves. The difference between second place and winning often comes down to a few points on a couple of well-executed rated requirements.