RFP Generator (Request for Proposal for Software & IT Services)

About the RFP Generator (Request for Proposal for Software & IT Services)

A request for proposal (RFP) tells vendors what you need, how to answer and how you will choose — and a good one makes the answers comparable. Build one for software or IT services step by step: the background and objectives, the scope, a requirements matrix (functional and non-functional: security, privacy, integrations, service levels, support, data location, accessibility) with a MoSCoW priority and a weight on every line, a vendor questionnaire, a price schedule priced over three years, evaluation criteria whose weights must add up to 100, a timeline from issue to award, and the terms of the request. Starter libraries for a CRM, HR and payroll, accounting, a help desk, project management and a website build give you a first draft to edit; an RFI mode asks for information without scoring.

The request comes out as a PDF and a Word file, with a response workbook (XLSX) in which vendors answer every requirement Yes, Partial, No or Roadmap, answer the questions and price each line, the totals worked out by formulas. When the workbooks come back, choose them here for a compliance summary: the must-haves each vendor meets, their answers side by side, and a scoring sheet of your criteria.

Your draft stays in this browser. Without a pass the document shows as a free preview — every page marked “not for use”, your own details readable and the standard wording partly hidden; a Premium pass downloads the clean PDF, the Word file, the response workbook and the vendor summary.

Common uses

• Choosing a CRM, an HR and payroll system, accounting or help desk software, or a project management tool.
• Asking agencies to quote for a website build on the same terms.
• A first market scan with an RFI before a full RFP.
• Comparing what vendors say they meet, must-have by must-have, before the demos.

What the request contains

• About the request, objectives and scope: what you need and why, in your own words.
• Requirements by area, each with an ID (F-01, SEC-01 …), a priority — Must, Should, Could or Won’t have this time — and a weight from 0 to 10. A Must have answered No may exclude a proposal; Won’t have lines tell vendors what is not wanted now.
• Questions for vendors: the company, experience and references, implementation, support and roadmap, security and data, commercial terms and exit.
• Price schedule: the lines to price for each of three years, so the comparison is of what you pay to use and keep the solution, not only to buy it.
• Evaluation: the compliance check first, then the weighted criteria, the 0–5 scoring scale of the requirements and how price is scored.
• Timeline, how to respond, the terms you choose and the contact.

Evaluation that compares like with like

• Score quality and price together: the UK Government Commercial Function’s Sourcing Playbook asks for tenders to be evaluated on price and quality (including social value), and for whole-life cost to be the measure, warning that competing on price alone “can create false economies” (Sourcing Playbook).
• Publish the criteria and weights with the request, and keep them: they must add up to 100. If social value is part of the decision, give it a criterion of its own; the Playbook sets a minimum weighting of 10% where it applies to UK central government.
• Price scoring: the ratio method (the lowest compliant total ÷ each total × the price weight) is common and simple, but it pins every score to the lowest bid; the Playbook links scoring pinned to the lowest price with a bias towards low-cost bids and asks for a business reason before using it in UK central government. The panel method scores price for value instead.
• Describe outcomes, not products: say what the solution must achieve and let vendors propose how.

The response workbook and the summary

• Instructions, Vendor (name and contact), Requirements (each ID with a Response column — Yes, Partial, No or Roadmap — and a Comment column), Questions, Prices (a unit price for each year; the year totals and the three-year total are formulas) and, for an RFP, the Criteria.
• Vendors must keep the sheet names, the IDs and the column order, so their answers can be read back.
• The summary reads each returned workbook: the must-haves met and not met, the Partial, Roadmap and unanswered lines, the requirements met by weight (Yes counts in full, Partial half), the questions answered and the three-year total, worked out again from the unit prices and quantities. Its workbook puts every vendor’s answers side by side and adds a scoring sheet: the panel enters a score out of 100 per criterion, and the weighted total works itself out.

Limitations

• Not legal or procurement advice: the documents are generic templates. Public-sector buyers must follow their own procurement rules and thresholds, which this request does not apply; have your procurement or legal team review the request and the terms.
• The compliance summary reads what vendors say about themselves: check the key answers in demonstrations and references before you decide.
• The response workbook is read back by its sheet names and IDs: a workbook a vendor has restructured may need its answers copied back.
• The requirements in the starters are a first draft: remove what does not apply and add what is particular to you.

Privacy

On this device; its files download once

Your request is kept as a draft in this browser (tool settings) and never uploaded. Returned workbooks are read on this device and kept only while the page is open.