Appendix 1: Evaluation Model Worked Examples
Scenario's 1, 2 and 3 highlight the potential for different outcomes from the JWCC procurement
caused by applying different levels of evaluation weighting between cost and quality criteria.
Scenario 1:
Evaluation Equally Weighted between price and quality
Price
Quality Marks
Price Score
Quality Score
Total Score
Bidder 1
£1,000,000
400
500
455
Bidder 2
£1,050,000
440
476
500
Bidder 3
£1,100,000
420
455
477
Outcome: The second lowest cost bidder wins with the highest quality score
JWCC Project Team Conclusion: Preferred approach which offers an appropriately balanced model
Evaluation Weighted in favour of Price
Price
Quality Marks
Price Score
Quality Score
Total Score
Bidder 1
£1,000,000
400
500
435
Bidder 2
£1,100,000
430
455
467
Bidder 3
£1,200,000
460
417
500
Outcome: The lowest cost bidder wins with the lowest quality score
JWCC Project Team Conclusion: Not preferred because long term service quality is not prioritised.
955
976
932
Scenario 2:
Evaluation Weighted in favour of Quality
Price
Quality Marks
Price Score
Quality Score
Total Score
Bidder 1
£1,000,000
400
500
435
Bidder 2
£1,050,000
430
476
467
Bidder 3
£1,100,000
460
455
500
Outcome: The highest cost bidder wins with the highest quality score
JWCC Project Team Conclusion: Not preferred because the need to deliver savings is not prioritised.
935
922
917
Scenario 3:
Maximum price/quality score
500
- 18 -
935
944
955