When you're responding to a federal RFP, you'll encounter rated technical criteria that assess your firm's demonstrated expertise and capability—what procurement professionals sometimes call "savoir-faire criteria." These point-rated elements measure how well you can do the work, not just whether you meet the minimum bar. They typically make up a significant portion of your technical score and directly influence whether you win the contract.
How It Works
The Supply Manual (section 4.75.1) defines rated criteria as "criteria that are assigned a point rating (such as experience or qualifications of the bidder and/or key resources proposed)." Your total rating gets compared to a minimum pass mark, or—in best-overall-value competitions—used to rank your bid against others. Here's the thing: you won't even get scored on these criteria unless you first clear all the mandatory technical requirements. Standard RFP templates on CanadaBuys make this explicit: evaluation happens in two phases, with mandatory criteria acting as a gate before any point-rated assessment begins.
In practice, these criteria evaluate things like your past performance on similar projects, the qualifications of key personnel you're proposing, your technical approach or methodology, and your understanding of the requirement. Each criterion must have a clearly disclosed weighting. If "Project Manager qualifications" is worth 15 points and "Corporate experience" is worth 25 points, the RFP must say so upfront. Section 4.75 of the Supply Manual requires that "the relative importance of each criterion must be clearly stated in the bid solicitation," along with the scoring grid and any minimum thresholds you need to hit.
Different departments apply different weightings depending on the complexity and risk of the procurement. PSPC might weight methodology heavily for a complex IT implementation, while DND might emphasize security clearances and past defence work. There's no government-wide formula. But whatever the split, the Treasury Board Directive on the Management of Procurement mandates that evaluation criteria be "appropriate, clear, and directly related to the requirements" and support fairness, openness, transparency, and value for money.
Key Considerations
- Weighting disclosure is mandatory. You should know exactly how many points each rated criterion is worth before you submit. If the RFP is vague about scoring, that's a red flag worth raising during the bidder question period.
- Minimum pass marks vary by criterion. Some RFPs set an overall minimum technical score (say, 70 out of 100), while others set individual minimums for specific criteria. Read the evaluation section carefully—you can lose even if your total is high but you fall short on one element the evaluators flagged as non-negotiable.
- Evaluators score what you write, not what you know. Your firm might have decades of experience, but if your proposal doesn't clearly demonstrate that experience with specifics—project names, dates, outcomes, relevant personnel—evaluators can't give you credit. Assume they know nothing about your company. That's the mindset.
- Recourse is limited once scores are set. If you believe the evaluation was conducted inconsistently or didn't follow the stated criteria, you can file a complaint with the Office of the Procurement Ombudsman. But disagreeing with evaluators' professional judgment on the quality of your response is much harder to challenge.
Related Terms
Mandatory Criteria (M-Criteria), Point-Rated Criteria, Technical Evaluation
Sources
- Supply Manual – Section 4.75.1: Rated Criteria
- Supply Manual – Section 4.75: Technical Evaluation
- Treasury Board Directive on the Management of Procurement
Bottom line: treat rated technical criteria as your opportunity to differentiate your bid. Minimum compliance gets you in the door; demonstrating superior capability wins you the contract.