Productivity
Score competing proposals
A defensible evaluation with the reasoning recorded per criterion.
Fill it in
What was submitted.
What matters and how much.
With the reasoning that survives a challenge.
Your prompt
Evaluate the proposals in . Criteria: [your criteria and weights] Score against the criteria as published, and only those. An evaluation that introduces a consideration nobody was told about is the thing that gets an award overturned, and it usually happens through a sentence like "they also seemed more responsive". Write the REASONING per criterion per bidder before the score, not after. A score chosen first and justified afterwards is visible in the language, and it is what an appeal looks for. Apply the weights arithmetically and show the working. Write the award memo: what was evaluated, how, who scored, the outcome, and why the winner won on the stated criteria. Note where a proposal was unclear rather than guessing in its favour.
Continue and pick your folderOpens with everything above already filled in.
Why this works
Awards get overturned on a sentence like "they also seemed more responsive". This scores only the published criteria, writes the reasoning before the score rather than after, and produces a memo that says why the winner won on those criteria.