The RFP template for choosing RFP software

What questions should you ask RFP software vendors?

Before the detail, three questions tend to decide the evaluation. They are also the ones a scripted demo is least likely to answer on its own, so they are worth asking in writing, early, and checking again in the live tests.

Whole bid?

Does the platform run the whole bid, from the tender pack to the submission package, in one workspace? Or does it answer the questions and leave the rest of the bid to Word, PowerPoint, email and the bid manager? (Section B)

Adapts to you?

Does the platform adapt to your company's process, and let each person work the bid their own way inside it? Or does everyone work around the vendor's process? (Sections C and D)

Defensible?

Can every answer be traced to its source, with how it was built, who changed it and who approved it? (Sections J, L, M and N)

How do you run an RFP software evaluation?

The template is built to be sent, not filled in by you on the vendors' behalf. Each vendor answers in its own column, and you score what comes back.

1. Shortlist

Delete the vendor columns you are not evaluating, or rename the spare one. The vendor columns are empty on purpose.

2. Set priorities

Change Must, Should and Could on the Requirements sheet to match your own needs. The weights sit at the top of the Scoring sheet, so you can change those too.

3. Send it

Send the Requirements and Pricing scenario sheets to each vendor. Ask them to answer against the 'What a complete answer shows' column and to attach evidence where it helps.

4. Test it live

Run the demo tests with each shortlisted vendor, on your own documents. Send the tests before the demo rather than during it, so nobody can say they were ambushed.

5. Score it

Score every answer from 0 to 3 on the Scoring sheet. The weighted totals, the Summary sheet and the count of failed must-haves update on their own.

How do you score RFP software vendors?

The Scoring sheet works as a weighted scoring matrix. Each answer gets a score from 0 to 3, and each requirement carries a weight from its priority: 3 for a Must, 2 for a Should, 1 for a Could. The weighted score is shown as a share of the maximum over the rows you have scored so far, so a vendor is not marked down for questions you have not reached yet.

Next to it sits the number of must-haves scored 0, and that is often the more useful figure. A vendor with a high average and two failed must-haves is usually one you cannot buy, however well the rest of the demo went.

3

Fully meets the requirement, as shown in the 'What a complete answer shows' column, and demonstrated.

2

Meets most of it, or meets it with configuration or a workaround the vendor has explained.

1

Partly meets it, or depends on a third-party tool, custom development or the roadmap.

0

Does not meet it, or no clear answer was given.

What should an RFP for RFP software cover?

The 123 requirements are the evaluation criteria, grouped into 21 sections. They are written for organisations that answer a large volume of tenders, RFPs and questionnaires, with a core bid team and many more occasional contributors. Smaller teams can drop the sections that do not apply and keep the scoring intact.

The bid itself

The whole bid in one workspace; tender intake, analysis and qualification; AI drafting and answer quality; languages; the buyer's files, forms and submission package; compliance and completeness checking.

Your process and people

How far the platform adapts to your process, how each person works the bid their own way, review, approval and collaboration, and access control.

Trust and control

Knowledge and content, AI governance and guardrails, the audit trail, and security, certification and data protection.

Running it

Reporting and dashboards, integrations, implementation and onboarding, and support and service levels.

Buying and leaving

The vendor's profile and enterprise fit, commercials, and exit and data portability.

Why do the demo tests matter more than the written answers?

A written answer tells you what a vendor believes its product does, in the vendor's own words, and almost every answer to a question like 'Can it handle Excel questionnaires?' will be yes. The difference shows up when the questionnaire is locked, has dropdowns and a hidden column, and has to come back in exactly the shape the buyer sent it.

That is what the 17 tests are for. Each one is run live, on your own material, and recorded as Pass, Partial or Fail, with a note on what to watch for. A few of them:

The missing-answer test

Attach three files and ask a question whose answer is in none of them. The AI should say it cannot find the answer and ask where to look; an invented answer fails.

The Excel round-trip test

Send a locked questionnaire with dropdowns, protected cells, formulas and a hidden column, and ask for it back answered, with all of that intact.

The completeness test

Take a finished response from a past bid, delete two answers, cut a third down so it only mentions the topic, and leave a '[TBD]' in. All four should be found, and the half-answer graded partial rather than counted as done.

The access test

Have the vendor create a Pricing folder only one team can open, then log in as someone outside that team and ask the AI for your price on lot 2. If the AI answers, access control stops at the screen, not at the AI.

How do you compare RFP software pricing?

Vendors price per user, per project, per response or per credit, which makes two quotes very hard to compare honestly. The Pricing scenario sheet fixes the scenario first: tenders per year, core bid managers, occasional contributors, business units, response languages, hosting region and contract term. Every vendor then prices that scenario over the full term with every cost included, and the sheet works out the cost per response and per person involved.

It also asks about the costs that usually surface late: caps on projects or responses, AI usage beyond what is included, single sign-on, onboarding, support levels, API access and the minimum term.

Who wrote this template, and is it fair to other vendors?

This template was written by SEQUESTO, a vendor in this market, and it is worth saying so plainly. The SEQUESTO column holds SEQUESTO's own answers as of November 2026, filled in as an example of the level of detail to expect. Verify them like any other vendor's, in the demo tests.

The requirements reflect what enterprise bid teams ask for. Where SEQUESTO does something differently from other platforms, the guidance column describes what to look for in any vendor's answer rather than SEQUESTO's way of doing it. Every priority can be changed, any requirement deleted and your own added. Questions about SEQUESTO's answers can go to hello@sequesto.com.