IT vendors and contracts

RFP scoring matrix template: criteria, weights and total cost

Published 20 October 2026 · 6 min read

An RFP scoring matrix for an IT purchase lists a short set of criteria with weights that add up to 100, scores each bid on a fixed scale (0 to 5 works well), converts scores into points (score × weight ÷ 5), and marks the must-have criteria as knock-out: a bid scoring below the threshold on one of them is excluded whatever its price. Price is not scored by judgement but by formula, on the total cost over the contract term (recurring charges plus transition costs): price score = 5 × lowest total cost ÷ the bid's total cost. Weights, scale, knock-out criteria and formula are written down and dated before the bids are opened.

Write the matrix before bids arrive

A matrix built after reading the bids tends to describe the favourite bid. Written before, it protects the decision: bidders can be told how they will be judged, evaluators score against the same yardstick, and the losing bidder who asks why gets an answer on paper. Public buyers in the EU have this as an obligation: under Article 67(5) of Directive 2014/24/EU on public procurement, as transposed into national law, the contracting authority specifies in the procurement documents the relative weighting of each criterion used to identify the most economically advantageous tender, or, where weighting is not possible for objective reasons, lists the criteria in decreasing order of importance. Private companies are not bound by that directive, but the logic holds for any purchase you may have to justify.

Criteria families

Family	What it scores	Knock-out?
Price	Total cost over the term, by formula	No
Functional fit	Coverage of the numbered mandatory and desirable requirements	Usually yes
Service levels	Targets, measurement, service credits, reporting	No
Security	Security assurance plan, incident notification, subcontractors, data location	Usually yes
Exit and reversibility	Formats, exit assistance, its duration and cost	No
References and team	Comparable references, named team, transition approach	No
Sustainability	Commitments relevant to the service	No

Every criterion must trace back to requirements in the specification; a requirement you cannot score is a wish. Writing requirements as numbered, testable items is covered, for a building automation specification, in the BMS specification template; the method is the same for IT services.

Weighting without distortion

Weights add up to 100 and are set in a meeting, by criticality of the service, before the tender is launched.
No double counting: security scored under "Security" is not scored again under "Functional fit".
No decorative criteria: a criterion weighted so low that it can never change the ranking should be removed or turned into a pass/fail check.
Knock-out instead of weight for what is non-negotiable: a threshold (for example 2 out of 5) protects you against a cheap bid that is weak on security, which a weight alone cannot do.
Two evaluators score separately, then agree, and write one factual sentence per score.

Scoring price on total cost

The lowest annual price is not the lowest cost. Changing provider costs money: takeover, parallel running, training, the incumbent's exit fees. Compute for each bid: total cost = annual price × term in years + one-off transition costs, then price score = 5 × lowest total cost ÷ total cost of the bid. The cheapest bid gets 5, a bid 20% more expensive gets 4.17, and the formula is announced in advance. In public procurement, Article 67(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU requires the most economically advantageous tender to be identified on the basis of price or cost, using a cost-effectiveness approach such as life-cycle costing, and allows it to include the best price-quality ratio; and Article 68 lists the costs life-cycle costing may cover, including acquisition, use, maintenance and end-of-life costs.

Example on three bids (fictitious data)

Outsourced service desk, three-year term. Weights: price 30, functional fit 25 (knock-out), service levels 15, security 15 (knock-out), exit 8, references 7. Knock-out threshold: 2 out of 5.

Criterion (weight)	Bid A	Bid B	Bid C
Annual price + transition	210,000 + 30,000	190,000 + 75,000	170,000 + 40,000
Total cost over 3 years	660,000	645,000	550,000
Price (30)	4.17 → 25.00	4.26 → 25.58	5.00 → 30.00
Functional fit (25, KO)	4 → 20.00	4 → 20.00	3 → 15.00
Service levels (15)	4 → 12.00	3 → 9.00	3 → 9.00
Security (15, KO)	4 → 12.00	4 → 12.00	1 → 3.00
Exit (8)	3 → 4.80	4 → 6.40	2 → 3.20
References (7)	4 → 5.60	3 → 4.20	3 → 4.20
Score out of 100	79.40	77.18	64.40
Eligible / rank	Yes / 1	Yes / 2	No (security below 2)

Bid B's annual price is about 9.5% below bid A's, but its higher transition cost narrows the gap to about 2.3% over three years. Bid C is the cheapest by far and is excluded on security, which is exactly what the knock-out criterion is for. Bid A wins on service levels and references; the report says so in one sentence per score.

Documenting the decision

A one-page evaluation report closes the process: the matrix as announced, the scores with their rationale, the knock-out checks, the ranking, the decision and who approved it. File it with the bids and the specification. The winning contract then enters the IT contract register with its end date, notice period and owner, so that the next decision is not left to chance.

What the tool does for you

The IT Vendor and Contract Management Kit is a nine-sheet Excel workbook with native formulas and no macros, for Excel 2016 and later or Google Sheets. Its Bid scoring sheet takes the criteria (price, functional compliance, SLA, security, exit, references, sustainability) with their weights, which must add up to 100 or the cell turns red, and the knock-out flags; you enter three bids with their annual price and transition costs, and it computes the total cost over the reference term (a setting, three years by default), the price score, points per criterion, score out of 100, eligibility against the knock-out threshold (2 out of 5 by default), ranking and gap to first place, with a block for the score rationale and the decision. The Word templates include a ten-section requirements specification, an invitation to bid letter and a grid of 30 questions for bidders; the 22-page guide has a chapter on building a bid scoring grid you can defend. Other sheets cover the contract register, SLA tracking, vendor reviews, exit readiness, budget and a dashboard. Fictitious data set, unlimited use within the licensed company, 12 months of updates.

IT Vendor and Contract Management Kit: $290 excl. tax

Launch code LANCEMENT: 30% off, for the first 20 orders or until 30 November 2026.

FAQ

Should bidders see the weights?

Yes. Announcing criteria, weights and knock-out rules in the invitation lets bidders answer what you will actually score, and it is required of EU public buyers under Article 67(5) of Directive 2014/24/EU.

What about an abnormally low bid?

The price formula rewards it, so check it before scoring: ask the bidder to explain the price in writing. The knock-out criteria and the total-cost view also limit the risk.

More than three bids?

Score them all on the same matrix, or run two rounds: a first scoring to shortlist, then presentations and a final scoring for the shortlisted bids.