Understanding evaluation criteria in public procurement

In public procurement, the winner isn’t always the cheapest. Yet most suppliers still bid as if price is all that matters.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: you could submit a technically excellent bid at a competitive price and still lose to a competitor. Why? Because you didn’t understand how the buyer was going to score your bid.

This is where evaluation criteria in public procurement becomes your competitive advantage. Evaluation criteria are the formal scoring system that public sector buyers use to assess tenders fairly and transparently. They tell you exactly what the buyer values, how much weight they give to each factor, and what “excellent” looks like. Yet most suppliers treat them as an afterthought, something to glance at before writing their bid.

The suppliers winning contracts today are those who treat evaluation criteria as a blueprint, not a compliance box. They read the scoring matrix upfront, structure their entire bid around it, and allocate effort proportionally to what the buyer actually cares about.

This guide walks you through the mechanics of public procurement evaluation criteria, explains how they’ve changed under the Procurement Act 2023, and gives you a practical framework for turning them into winning bids. By the end, you’ll understand not just what evaluation criteria are, but how to use them strategically.

Why Understanding Evaluation Criteria Is the Key to Winning Bids

Let’s start with a fundamental principle: public procurement is transparent by design. Buyers aren’t trying to hide what they want. They publish evaluation criteria because they want you to understand how you’ll be scored.

The suppliers who win are those who treat this as an advantage.

The Price Myth

Many suppliers assume price is the deciding factor. It isn’t. Under modern procurement law, buyers are explicitly required to assess tenders on value, not just cost. This means they’re looking for the “most advantageous tender”—the bid that delivers the best overall value, not necessarily the cheapest option.

Think about it practically. A £500,000 bid with excellent methodology, a strong team, and genuine social value commitments can easily beat a £450,000 bid with weak project planning and no community benefit. The buyer isn’t looking for the lowest price; they’re looking for the best outcome for the organisation and the public.

The Scoring System Advantage

Evaluation criteria are the formal scoring sheet the buyer will use. Each criterion has a weighting (e.g., price 40%, quality 60%), and each quality criterion breaks down into sub-criteria (technical merit, team experience, methodology, social value, etc.). Understanding the relative importance assigned to each criterion is essential, as it guides where to focus your effort. The scoring methodology used in public procurement ensures transparency and objectivity in evaluating bids by clearly defining how both qualitative and quantitative factors are assessed.

Here’s the strategic insight: if you know price is weighted at 40% and quality at 60%, you don’t waste energy trying to compete on price. You allocate 60% of your bid effort to quality, where you can differentiate. Suppliers who don’t understand the weighting waste effort on low-weighted criteria and under-address high-weighted ones. They lose points. They lose bids.

The Regulatory Shift

Under the Procurement Act 2023 (implemented February 2025), this dynamic has intensified. Buyers now have more flexibility to prioritise non-price factors like social value, innovation, and environmental sustainability. Quality weighting has increased across most sectors. This is a game-changer for suppliers who can evidence these factors—and a threat to suppliers who still think price is the main battleground.

The bottom line: understanding evaluation criteria isn’t about compliance. It’s about winning. The suppliers who decode the scoring matrix and structure their bids accordingly win more contracts. It’s that simple.

What Are Procurement Evaluation Criteria?

Before we go further, let’s define the term clearly.

Procurement evaluation criteria are the formal, published scoring system that public sector buyers use to assess tenders fairly and transparently. They’re not subjective opinions or hidden preferences. They’re objective scoring rules that the buyer is legally required to follow. It is a legal requirement for evaluation criteria to be objective and transparent, ensuring that all bidders understand how their proposals will be assessed.

Why They Exist

Public procurement is governed by strict legislation—the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 and the Procurement Act 2023, designed to ensure fairness and transparency. Existing legislation continues to apply to procurement processes initiated before new laws come into force, ensuring ongoing projects are governed by the appropriate rules during transitional periods. Evaluation criteria are a core part of that framework. They ensure that all suppliers are assessed against the same standards, that the process is transparent, and that decisions can be justified and defended.

This is crucial: once the buyer publishes evaluation criteria, they can’t change them. They’re legally binding. This works in your favour because you know exactly how you’ll be scored.

Most public sector organizations are legally required to publicise contract awards and provide feedback to unsuccessful bidders.

The Two-Part Structure

Evaluation criteria are typically split into two components, often referred to as selection criteria:

Price (usually 30–50% of the total score). The lowest price typically receives the maximum available points; other bids score proportionally lower. The formula is straightforward: (Lowest price / Your price) × Maximum points = Your score. If the lowest bid is £100,000 and yours is £120,000, you’d score (100/120) × 100 = 83 points.

Quality (usually 50–70% of the total score). This is where you differentiate. Selection criteria for quality often include specific technical, qualitative, and performance-based factors, broken down into sub-criteria such as:

• Technical merit (your approach, solution design, methodology)
• Project methodology (how you’ll deliver, timeline, risk management)
• Team experience (relevant experience, qualifications, track record)
• Service delivery (quality and management of services, delivery methods, compliance with output specifications)
• Social value (community benefit, job creation, local supply chain, skills development)
• Innovation (new approaches, efficiency gains, technology)
• Environmental sustainability (carbon reduction, waste minimisation)

Each sub-criterion has a weighting and scoring bands that tell you what “excellent” looks like.

The Balance Is Crucial

The weighting between price and quality tells you what the buyer cares about. A 50/50 split means price and quality matter equally. A 30/70 split means quality matters much more. Under the Procurement Act 2023, quality weighting has increased significantly across most sectors. Buyers now assess the overall quality of proposals, including technical, design, and management aspects, to ensure robustness, acceptability, and clarity in areas such as design, safety, environmental considerations, and service delivery.

Understanding this balance is the foundation of bid strategy. You can’t win on price alone (unless you’re genuinely the cheapest). Quality is where you win or lose.

Decoding the Scoring: A Practical Guide to Public Procurement Evaluation

Now let’s move from theory to practice. How do you actually read an evaluation matrix and use it to structure your bid? Access to all relevant information is crucial during public procurement processes, as it enables suppliers to make informed bidding decisions and avoid being disadvantaged by missing details.

Finding the Evaluation Matrix

It’s in the Invitation to Tender (ITT) or tender documents, usually in a section titled “Evaluation Criteria,” “Assessment Criteria,” or “Scoring Matrix.” Download it immediately when you start your bid. This is your blueprint.

Reading the Matrix

A typical evaluation matrix looks like this:

Criterion	Sub-criteria	Weighting	Scoring Bands
Technical Capability	Relevant experience, Technical approach, Quality assurance	25%	Excellent: 90–100 points; Good: 70–89; Acceptable: 50–69; Poor: 0–49
Project Methodology	Delivery timeline, Risk management, Resource plan	20%	Excellent: 90–100 points; Good: 70–89; Acceptable: 50–69; Poor: 0–49
Team Experience	Team qualifications, Relevant experience, Track record	20%	Excellent: 90–100 points; Good: 70–89; Acceptable: 50–69; Poor: 0–49
Social Value	Community benefit, Job creation, Local supply chain	15%	Excellent: 90–100 points; Good: 70–89; Acceptable: 50–69; Poor: 0–49
Price	Cost	20%	Lowest price: 100 points; Others scored proportionally

Note: In some cases, evaluation matrices also include key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure and monitor contract performance, ensuring service quality and effective delivery throughout the project lifecycle.

Understanding the Scoring Bands

These are critical. They tell you what “excellent” actually means. If the band says “Excellent: Demonstrated experience with 5+ similar projects,” you now know what you need to evidence. If it says “Good: Demonstrated experience with 3–4 similar projects,” you know the minimum bar for a respectable score. Aligning your bid with the scoring bands is considered good practice in public procurement.

Using It as a Bid Blueprint

This is the strategic step. Use the evaluation criteria as your bid structure. If the matrix has 6 criteria, your bid should have 6 main sections, one for each criterion. Structuring your bid around the evaluation criteria allows you to address the unique requirements of each specific project, ensuring your response is tailored and relevant. This makes it easy for the evaluator to find where you’ve addressed each scoring opportunity.

Allocating Effort Proportionally

If price is 20% and quality is 80%, allocate your bid effort accordingly. Don’t waste 50% of your bid on price (you can’t control that; it’s what it is). Spend 80% on quality, where you can differentiate and score points.

Red Flags in the Matrix

Watch for:

• Vague criteria with no sub-criteria (you don’t know what they’re looking for)
• Missing weighting (you don’t know what matters)
• Unclear scoring bands (you don’t know what “excellent” means)

Action: If you see red flags, use bid clarification to ask for clarity. This is exactly what that process is for.

Price Evaluation: How It Works

Price scoring is straightforward. The lowest price gets maximum points; other bids score proportionally lower. You can’t win on price alone (unless you’re genuinely the cheapest). Price is a threshold; quality is where you differentiate. In public procurement, efficient use of public money is a key consideration—procurement processes are designed to ensure that public funds are spent transparently and deliver value for taxpayers.

The key insight: don’t waste bid effort trying to compete on price. You can’t control what competitors bid. What you can control is how well you evidence your quality, capability, and value. Focus your effort there.

Quality Evaluation: Where You Differentiate

Quality evaluation is where you win or lose. It’s typically 50–70% of the total score, broken down into sub-criteria like technical merit, project methodology, team experience, social value, innovation, and environmental sustainability.

Each sub-criterion has a weighting and scoring bands. Your job is to understand what “excellent” means for each one, then evidence it in your bid.

Example: If “Team Experience” is weighted at 20% and the excellent band says “Demonstrated experience with 5+ similar projects in the public sector,” your bid should include CVs showing this experience, case studies proving successful delivery, and client testimonials. Don’t just say “Our team has experience.” Prove it with evidence.

Quality criteria are where you can differentiate from competitors. This is where your bid wins or loses.

The Impact of the Procurement Act 2023 on Evaluation

The Procurement Act 2023 (implemented 1 January 2024) fundamentally changed how public sector buyers approach evaluation. Understanding this shift is critical to your bid strategy.

The Regulatory Shift: MEAT to MAT

The old regime (Public Contracts Regulations 2015) required buyers to assess tenders on the “Most Economically Advantageous Tender” (MEAT) basis. This forced a specific balance between price and quality—usually around 50/50 or 60/40.

The new regime (Procurement Act 2023) allows buyers to assess on the “Most Advantageous Tender” (MAT) basis. This gives them more flexibility to prioritise non-price factors. Quality weighting can now be 70%, 80%, even 90% if the buyer chooses.

What This Means in Practice

According to our Tracker market analysis conducted in December 2025, frameworks account for just 17.95% of all published notices, yet they represent a significant 74.3% of total contract value—a striking concentration of opportunity. More importantly, buyers are now explicitly encouraged to prioritise:

• Social value (community benefit, job creation, local supply chain, skills development)
• Innovation (new approaches, technology, efficiency gains)
• Environmental sustainability (carbon reduction, green supply chains, waste minimisation)
• Supply chain resilience (avoiding single-source dependencies, UK-based suppliers)

Framework Evaluation: A Strategic Opportunity

This framework concentration represents a critical strategic challenge and opportunity. While frameworks represent the bulk of contract value (74.3%), according to the same December 2025 market analysis, only 31.7% of suppliers have access to this 74.3% of value. For suppliers bidding on framework tenders, understanding evaluation criteria becomes even more critical—frameworks typically use multi-stage evaluation processes with stricter quality gates. A procurement framework defines the evaluation criteria and transparent processes for selecting suppliers, guiding both the selection and contract award stages in public procurement. This explains why framework tenders often have lower submission volumes but higher average bid quality. If you can navigate framework evaluation criteria effectively, you’re competing against fewer, more capable bidders, but you’re also competing for substantially larger contract values.

How Tracker Intelligence Supports Framework Success

Tracker Intelligence helps suppliers understand and compete more effectively for framework opportunities by providing visibility into live and upcoming frameworks, historic framework awards, evaluation weighting, and incumbent suppliers. This insight allows you to target the right frameworks, tailor your submissions to the evaluation criteria, and plan strategically for re-procurements and call-offs—maximising access to high-value framework spend. Speak to the team today.

The Social Value Imperative

Pending legislative updates expected in early 2026 will likely embed social value more deeply into evaluation criteria. Consultation recommendations suggest that contracts above £5 million will be required to include at least one evaluation criterion assessing jobs, skills, and social value with a minimum 10% weighting. For bidders, this means social value commitments are shifting from nice-to-have to non-negotiable evaluation points. These commitments often benefit local communities through job creation, skills development, and economic growth. Suppliers should now structure their bids assuming this weighting, even on current tenders, to future-proof their bid strategy.

The Real-World Impact

A buyer might now weight criteria as: Price 40% | Technical Merit 20% | Social Value 20% | Innovation 10% | Environmental 10%. Under the old MEAT rules, this weighting would have been unusual. Under MAT, it’s increasingly common.

This is a game-changer. You can now win on value, not just cost. If you’re not the cheapest, you can still win if you deliver superior social value, innovation, or sustainability. This is a genuine competitive advantage for suppliers who can evidence these factors.

Timeline Consideration

All new tenders published after 1 January 2024 follow MAT rules. This change is part of the new rules introduced by the Procurement Act 2023, which brings updated compliance requirements and governance frameworks to public procurement. If you’re bidding on tenders published before that date, they may still use MEAT. Check the tender documents to see which approach applies.

The bottom line: quality matters more than ever. Buyers have more flexibility to prioritise what they actually care about. If you understand the specific weighting in each tender and structure your bid accordingly, you can compete on value, not just price.

Navigating the Broader Public Procurement Process

Evaluation criteria don’t exist in isolation. They’re part of a larger procurement process. Understanding where they fit helps you use them strategically. After proposals are evaluated, a key step is the award decision, where the contracting authority formally selects the winning bid based on the published criteria. This stage follows evaluation and is crucial for transparency and fairness in public procurement.

The Full Procurement Journey

Here are the key stages:

1. Opportunity identification: Buyer publishes a tender on Contracts Finder, Find a Tender, or sector-specific portals
2. Pre-market engagement (optional): Buyer may consult suppliers before publishing the formal tender
3. Tender publication: Buyer publishes the Invitation to Tender (ITT), specification, evaluation criteria, and contract terms
4. Bid window: You have 30–40 days to submit your bid
5. Bid clarification: You have 5–10 days to ask questions about the tender (including evaluation criteria)
6. Bid submission: You submit your bid before the deadline
7. Evaluation: The buyer’s evaluation panel scores all bids against the evaluation criteria (typically 4–8 weeks)
8. Contract award: The buyer notifies the winner and publishes the contract award notice, marking a key milestone in the procurement process
9. Standstill period: A mandatory 10-day period before the contract is signed (allows for challenges)
10. Contract signature and mobilisation: You sign the contract and begin delivery

Where Evaluation Criteria Fit

Evaluation criteria are published in Stage 3 (Tender publication) and used in Stage 7 (Evaluation). But understanding them early (Stage 3) influences your entire bid strategy.

If you understand the evaluation criteria upfront, you can:

• Decide whether to bid. Does the weighting favour your strengths? Can you evidence what the buyer is looking for?
• Plan your bid structure. Mirror the criteria so evaluators can easily find where you’ve addressed each scoring opportunity.
• Allocate effort proportionally. Focus on high-weighted criteria; don’t waste effort on low-weighted ones.
• Use bid clarification strategically. Ask about ambiguous criteria before you write a single word of your bid.

This is the strategic advantage. Most suppliers see the tender and start writing immediately. Smart suppliers read the evaluation criteria first, decide whether to bid, plan their approach, and then start writing.

Emerging Tender Formats

The Procurement Act 2023 also introduced the Competitive Flexible Procedure (CFP), allowing buyers to run multi-stage tenders with workshops, demos, and feedback loops. If bidding on a CFP tender, evaluation criteria will be published across multiple stages, not just at final tender submission. Understanding the criteria for each stage allows you to shape your engagement strategically and respond to feedback effectively.

The Critical Role of Bid Clarification

Bid clarification is a formal period (usually 5–10 days into the bid window) when you can submit written questions to the buyer. Answers are published to all bidders simultaneously.

This is your only chance to get official clarity on ambiguous evaluation criteria.

When to Use It

Use bid clarification if the evaluation criteria are:

• Ambiguous: “What does ‘relevant experience’ mean? Does it include similar organisations, or only identical sector experience?”
• Conflicting: “Section 2 says ‘in-house delivery,’ but Section 4 mentions ‘subcontractors.’ Are subcontractors permitted?”
• Missing information: “The specification mentions ‘integration with existing systems.’ Can you provide details?”
• Unclear weighting: “The evaluation matrix shows ‘quality’ is weighted at 60%, but doesn’t break down the sub-criteria. Can you clarify?”

How to Ask

Frame questions for clarity, not advantage. Good: “Can you clarify what you mean by ‘innovative approach’?” Bad: “Is innovation more important than price?”

Be specific. Reference the page, section, and exact wording. Use a professional tone. Submit early; don’t wait until the last day.

What Happens After

The buyer compiles all questions from all bidders, answers them, and publishes answers to everyone simultaneously. No secret advantages. This is a level playing field.

Why It Matters

If you don’t understand the evaluation criteria and don’t ask, you’ll make assumptions. Your bid will be misaligned. You’ll lose points. You’ll lose the bid.

Using bid clarification shows you’re detail-oriented and thorough. It’s not a sign of weakness; it’s a sign of professionalism. And it’s your only chance to get official clarity before you commit significant effort to your bid.

How to Structure Your Bid to Maximise Your Score

Now for the practical execution: how to structure your bid to maximise your score against the evaluation criteria. Clear bid structures not only help evaluators, but also enable potential suppliers to understand exactly how to meet the evaluation criteria, ensuring a fair and transparent public procurement process.

The Golden Rule: Mirror the Criteria

Use the evaluation criteria as your bid structure. If the evaluation matrix has 6 criteria, your bid should have 6 main sections, one for each criterion. This makes it easy for the evaluator to find where you’ve addressed each scoring opportunity.

Example:

Evaluation matrix says: “Technical Capability (25%)” with sub-criteria: “Relevant experience,” “Technical approach,” “Quality assurance”

Your bid structure: Create a section titled “Technical Capability” with subsections for each sub-criterion. The evaluator can quickly scan your bid and see that you’ve addressed every scoring opportunity.

Evidence Is Everything

Every claim must be backed by proof. Don’t say “Our team has 20 years of experience.” Provide CVs showing specific relevant experience, case studies showing successful delivery, client testimonials, certifications, data, metrics.

Weak evidence = low score. Strong evidence = high score.

Example:

• Weak: “We’ve delivered similar projects”
• Strong: “We’ve delivered 5 similar projects in the NHS, with an average delivery time of 12 weeks and 95% client satisfaction, as detailed in the case studies in Appendix B”

Signposting for Evaluators

Make it easy for the evaluator to find your answers:

• Use clear headings and subheadings
• Use bold text to highlight key claims
• Use bullet points for lists
• Don’t make them hunt for your answer; make it obvious

Avoid Assumptions

If the criterion is vague, don’t assume you know what it means. Use bid clarification to ask for clarity. Then structure your bid based on the clarification answer.

Quality Over Length

A concise, well-evidenced response beats a verbose one. Respect page limits. Every word should add value.

Competitive Intensity Matters

The competitive landscape is intensifying. According to December 2025 market analysis, there’s been a 6.7% increase in buyers and 11% increase in suppliers year-on-year, pushing the supplier-to-buyer ratio from 5.1 to 5.31. This means more competition for each opportunity. Evaluation criteria are no longer just guidelines—they’re your competitive differentiation tool. When you’re bidding against 5+ other suppliers on average, mirroring the evaluation matrix isn’t optional; it’s essential for standing out. Buyers are evaluating more bids with the same resources, which means they’re increasingly relying on clear, well-structured responses that make scoring straightforward.

Mirroring the Criteria: The Structure Template

Here’s a concrete template:

Step 1: Download the evaluation matrix
Step 2: List all criteria and sub-criteria
Step 3: Create a section in your bid for each criterion
Step 4: Within each section, address each sub-criterion
Step 5: Back every claim with evidence
Step 6: Use clear headings so the evaluator can easily map your bid to the evaluation matrix

Evidence Is Everything: The Proof Principle

Claims without evidence = low score. Claims with evidence = high score.

Types of evidence: case studies, client testimonials, CVs, certifications, data, metrics, references, process documents.

Example:

• Weak: “Our team has 20 years of experience”
• Strong: “Our team includes 3 members with 5+ years of experience in the NHS, as evidenced by the CVs attached and the case studies in Appendix A”

Specificity matters:

• Weak: “We’ve delivered similar projects”
• Strong: “We’ve delivered 5 similar projects in the NHS, with an average delivery time of 12 weeks and 95% client satisfaction, as detailed in the case studies in Appendix B”

The evaluator is looking for proof. Give them proof, and they’ll award you points.

Staying Compliant with Public Procurement Regulations

Evaluation criteria are not arbitrary. They’re set within a strict legal framework (Public Contracts Regulations 2015, Procurement Act 2023) to ensure fairness and transparency.

Why Compliance Matters

Buyers can’t change evaluation criteria after publication. They’re legally binding. This works in your favour because you know exactly how you’ll be scored—but it also means you must comply with every requirement.

Non-compliance with mandatory requirements = automatic disqualification. No amount of quality in other areas will save you.

Example: If the specification says “Must be ISO 9001 certified” and you’re not, you’re disqualified. The evaluation panel won’t even score your bid on quality.

Common Compliance Risks

• Missing mandatory requirements (e.g., certifications, insurance, experience)
• Submitting after the deadline (automatic rejection)
• Failing to address a criterion in the evaluation matrix
• Exceeding page limits (some buyers will reject over-length bids)
• Using the wrong format (some buyers require specific file types)

Linking Evaluation to Contract Performance

From April 2026, a new UK 9 notice (Contract Performance Notice) will report supplier performance for contracts with a value of more than £5 million. This notice will include KPIs and marks an important shift: evaluation criteria now often include KPI commitments linked to contract performance reporting. When you evidence “quality” in your bid, those commitments will be measured against published KPIs post-award. This creates accountability linkage between what you promise in your bid and what you deliver. Suppliers should understand this connection and ensure their bid commitments are realistic and measurable. It is essential that suppliers are prepared to deliver contracts in line with the commitments made in their bids and the requirements of the new procurement regime.

Mitigating Compliance Risk

1. Read the specification and evaluation criteria carefully
2. Use bid clarification to ask about ambiguous requirements
3. Create a compliance checklist before submitting
4. Have someone else review your bid for compliance before submission

The regulatory framework exists to ensure fairness. Compliance isn’t a burden; it’s a protection. If you comply, you’re on a level playing field with other bidders. If you don’t, you’re at risk of disqualification.

Turn Evaluation Criteria into Your Winning Blueprint

Here’s what you now understand: evaluation criteria are not obstacles. They’re your roadmap.

Buyers publish them because they want you to understand how you’ll be scored. The suppliers who win are those who treat the criteria as a blueprint, not an afterthought.

Three key takeaways:

1. Evaluation criteria are a strategic advantage. They tell you exactly what the buyer values and how much weight they give to each factor. Use this information to structure your bid and allocate effort.
2. Quality matters more than price. Under the Procurement Act 2023, buyers have more flexibility to prioritise non-price factors like social value, innovation, and sustainability. You can win on value, not just cost.
3. Structure your bid to match the criteria. Mirror the evaluation matrix in your bid structure. Back every claim with evidence. Make it easy for evaluators to award you points.

The suppliers winning public sector contracts today are those who understand evaluation criteria deeply and structure their bids strategically. This isn’t luck. It’s skill. And it’s a skill you can develop.

Finding opportunities where your strengths align with the buyer’s priorities is the first step. Tracker Intelligence helps you identify those tenders and understand the buyer’s focus before you write a single word of your bid—so you can bid on opportunities you can actually win. Speak to the team today to get started.