Unified submission register
- Sheets
- Generic AI
- Eval
For evaluation committees
ProTender Eval
Score submissions with evidence,not guesswork.
Criteria matrices, cited scoring, live rankings, and an audit trail in one committee workspace.
- QCBS
- SSTE
- PPRA
- Closed beta
Invite-only for procuring authorities. Org review before activation.
ProTender Eval · RankingsLive
Evaluation project
PEECA 600 kWp Solar EPC
#BidderScoreStatus
- 1Horizon EPC92.4Leading
- 2Atlas Infra88.1Scored
- 3Nexus Build81.6Scored
- 4Summit JVn/aIn review
Illustrative ranking. Live scores update as the committee enters them.
The evaluation desk today
Spreadsheets were never an evaluation system.
Committees lose time reconciling files, then struggle to defend scores.
Before the meeting
Scattered packages
ZIP dumps, email threads, and shared drives with no single register.
Spreadsheet matrices
Weights drift. Version fights. Nobody trusts the latest file.
Slow comparative work
Manual extract-and-paste while the award clock runs.
Until the award
Uncited scores
Marks without page evidence that will not survive a challenge.
Offline consensus
Chair reconciles private sheets after the meeting ends.
Weak audit story
Who changed what, and why, is a reconstruction exercise.
Workflow
From RFP close to award recommendation.
Four stages in one workspace. No scattered sheets.
- 01
Create evaluation project
Set workflow type (SSTE, QCBS, comparative), criteria weights, and committee roles.
- 02
Ingest RFP and submissions
Upload the solicitation and bidder packages. Responses map to your matrix.
- 03
Score and rank
Members enter scores with citations. Rankings update live. Overrides stay auditable.
- 04
Publish results
Export comparative statements and evaluation reports for the procurement file.
Workflow
From RFP close to award recommendation.
Scroll the stack to walk setup, ingest, scoring, and publish.
Product capabilities
Everything the committee needs.
One question: is the ranking defensible?
Core
Criteria matrix
Weighted QCBS, SSTE, and comparative workflows with live total checks.
- Mandatory + scored criteria
- Responsiveness before technical
Proposal analysis
Ingest bidder packs and map structured responses to your matrix.
Evidence scoring
Score against cited excerpts. Overrides leave an immutable trail.
Live ranking
Rankings update as members score. Export comparative statements for the file.
Committee workflow
Roles for chair, members, and secretariat. Every change is attributable.
Committee dashboard
Parse the solicitation into criteria and notes, then track scoring progress across the desk in one place.
Live rankingEvaluating
- #1Horizon EPC92.4
- #2Atlas Infra88.1
- #3Nexus Build81.6
Why ProTender Eval
Built for defensible committee rankings.
Spreadsheets do not scale. Chatbots do not keep an audit trail. Eval does both.
RFP → criteria extraction
- Sheets
- Generic AI
- Eval
Weighted QCBS / SSTE matrix
- Sheets
- Generic AI
- Eval
Evidence-cited score cells
- Sheets
- Generic AI
- Eval
Override audit trail
- Sheets
- Generic AI
- Eval
Role-based chair / member access
- Sheets
- Generic AI
- Eval
Live shared rankings
- Sheets
- Generic AI
- Eval
Comparative statement export
- Sheets
- Generic AI
- Eval
Time to defensible ranking
- Sheets
- Weeks
- Generic AI
- Days+
- Eval
- Hours–days
Security & trust
Isolated from bidder drafting. Built for public procurement.
Evaluator workspaces are product-gated. Submissions never mix with Bid drafting data. Every action is attributable.
- Row-level tenant isolation via Postgres RLS
- No training on your evaluation data
- Super-admin approval before evaluator orgs go live
Tenant isolation
Org-scoped rows with Postgres RLS. Cross-tenant leakage is refused at the database.
Encrypted storage
TLS in transit. AES-256 at rest for documents and sensitive fields.
SSO via Clerk
Okta, Azure AD, Google Workspace, or SAML 2.0. Provisioning stays automated.
Score change audit
Every override, score entry, and export is recorded and exportable.
Product gating
Eval and Bid are separate products. Orgs without Eval cannot open evaluator routes.
Separated data paths
Submission documents and committee scores live in distinct, access-controlled stores.
FAQ
What chairs and IT ask first.
Straight answers on desk, trust, product, and enterprise setup.
No. It gives the committee one workspace for criteria, evidence, scores, and rankings. Judgment stays with the chair and members.
Score cells can attach cited excerpts from submissions. Overrides are attributed and written to an append-only audit trail.
No. Training opt-out is on. Nothing you upload trains our models or a vendor's.
QCBS, SSTE, and comparative workflows with weighted criteria and responsiveness flags.
They are separate products with product gating. An org without Eval access cannot open evaluator routes.
Comparative statements, rankings, and evaluation records suitable for committee archives.
Closed beta is invite-only. Request access; our team reviews evaluator organisations before activation.
Yes via Clerk. Okta, Azure AD, Google Workspace, and SAML 2.0 IdPs are supported.
Sister product
Open ProTender BidWriting proposals instead of scoring them?
ProTender Bid: RFP analysis, go/no-go, citation-locked drafting, and export.
Closed beta
Bring a sample pack. See it scored live.
Invite-only for procuring authorities. Request access, or book a walkthrough with your RFP and a bidder package.
- Share your authority and a sample pack
- Focused session on criteria, evidence, rankings
- Org review before activation. No card required
Book a demo