Staffing RFP Evaluation: Criteria, Scoring Matrix & Checklist
The evaluation criteria, with suggested weights
Weights below are StaffingPulse editorial suggestions - adjust to your program, but write the weights down before responses arrive, or the incumbent wins by familiarity.
| Criterion | Suggested weight | What evidence looks like |
|---|---|---|
| Fill performance & speed | 25% | Named fill rates and time-to-submit metrics, per comparable account |
| Compliance posture | 20% | Certificates of insurance, screening standards, E-Verify status, AI governance one-pager |
| Rate competitiveness | 15% | Markup or rate card against your benchmark, modeled with your payment terms |
| Technology & VMS readiness | 15% | Named VMS connectors in production, not on a roadmap |
| Sector expertise | 15% | Reference clients in your vertical, recruiter tenure on that desk |
| References | 10% | Reachable references you select from a client list, not three curated fans |
The scoring matrix, worked
Score each criterion 1-5, multiply by weight, sum to 100. Example: a supplier scoring 4 on fill (25% × 4/5 = 20 pts), 5 on compliance (20), 3 on rates (9), 4 on tech (12), 5 on sector (15), 4 on references (8) totals 84/100. Rank suppliers on the total, and record the sheet - the audit trail is the point.
Twelve questions for the bidders’ conference
- Who is the incumbent and why is this out for bid?
- What volumes ran through this program in the last 12 months, by location?
- How are the evaluation criteria weighted?
- What payment terms are non-negotiable?
- Which VMS will orders flow through?
- How many suppliers will be awarded, in how many tiers?
- What are the rate card reopener conditions?
- What conversion fee structure applies?
- What insurance minimums are required?
- Is E-Verify contractually required?
- What AI usage disclosures do you require of suppliers?
- What is the decision timeline, and who signs?
Red flags evaluators miss
- Metrics without denominators ("98% fill rate" - of what, over when?)
- References only from logos, never from named humans you can call
- Roadmap answers to production questions, especially on VMS connectors
- Rates that only work at volumes the RFP does not guarantee
- No compliance documentation attached - if it existed, it would be attached