The verdict in three sentences
A well-weighted scoring grid protects a public buyer from two risks: picking the cheapest bid that then fails, and facing a challenge from an unsuccessful bidder. In 2026, the most robust weighting for a public-sector website is technical quality 50 to 60%, price 30 to 40%, delivery and sustainability 10%. Realistic budgets range from 25,000 to 120,000 EUR excl. VAT depending on scope, and a bid 30% below the average should trigger a request for justification.
Recommended criteria and sub-criteria
EU-derived procurement rules require objective criteria, linked to the subject of the contract and published with their weighting in the tender documents. For a website build or redesign, technical quality must be split into separately scored sub-criteria, otherwise the score becomes subjective and open to challenge.
| Criterion | Weighting | Sub-criteria | Supporting document |
|---|---|---|---|
| Methodology and understanding of needs | 20% | Audit of existing site, user workshops, schedule | Technical proposal, 10 to 20 pages |
| Quality of references | 10% | 3 comparable public sites delivered since 2023 | URLs and client letters |
| Assigned team | 10% | Project lead, UX, developers, allocated time | CVs and person-days |
| Accessibility and security | 10% | WCAG 2.1 AA target, audit, EU hosting | Statement of commitment |
| Maintenance and exit plan | 5% | Support, knowledge transfer, source code ownership | Support annex |
| Price | 35% | Fixed total price, rate card | Pricing schedule |
| Delivery and sustainability | 10% | Delivery time, eco-design | Schedule, sustainability note |
This grid gives 65% to technical quality in the broad sense (method, team, accessibility, maintenance, references) and 35% to price. For a simple site for a small authority, you can move to 50 / 40 / 10.
2026 price ranges by scope
The buyer must know market orders of magnitude to spot unrealistic bids in both directions. The amounts below are 2026 estimates observed on tenders from local authorities and public bodies in Europe.
| Scope | Pages and features | Budget excl. VAT | Typical timeline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Small authority (under 5,000 residents) | 30 to 60 pages, news, events | 25,000 to 40,000 EUR | 3 to 4 months |
| Mid-sized city council | 150 to 300 pages, e-services, publications | 45,000 to 75,000 EUR | 5 to 7 months |
| Regional or joint body | Multi-site, mapping, tenders | 50,000 to 90,000 EUR | 6 to 8 months |
| Chamber of commerce | Directory, training, online payment | 60,000 to 120,000 EUR | 6 to 9 months |
| Annual support | Maintenance, changes, hosting | 4,000 to 15,000 EUR per year | Over 3 or 4 years |
| Initial accessibility audit | Sample of 15 to 20 pages | 3,000 to 6,000 EUR | 2 to 4 weeks |
Above the EU threshold, around 216,000 EUR excl. VAT for sub-central authorities over 2026-2027, the full open procedure applies. Most public-sector websites stay below it, even including 4 years of support.
The abnormally low bid trap
The most common price scoring formula is: score = 35 × (lowest price / bid price). It mechanically favours the cheapest bid. If one agency offers 18,000 EUR where others sit between 45,000 and 60,000 EUR, it scores 35 points and its competitors 10 to 14. The buyer must then request written clarification on how the price is built (person-days, subcontracting, licences). The bid can only be rejected after this exchange, and only if the explanations are insufficient. A practical rule: a gap of more than 30% below the average bid, or person-days below 60% of the internal estimate, should always trigger a justification request.
Mini case study
Need a professional website?
Kolonell builds websites that attract clients, optimized for the Sénégalese market. Free quote in 2 minutes.
Nadia, procurement officer at a county council serving 38,000 residents in the Dublin area, receives 6 bids for a website redesign estimated at 55,000 EUR. Bid A: 41,000 EUR, technical score 42/65. Bid B: 58,000 EUR, technical score 58/65. With the formula above, A scores 35 + 42 + 7 (delivery) = 84 points, B scores 35 × 41,000 / 58,000 = 24.7 + 58 + 8 = 90.7 points. B wins despite costing 17,000 EUR more. Over 4 years, if bid A had required a 25% change order and an accessibility fix at 6,000 EUR, its real cost would have reached 57,250 EUR, almost B's price for lower quality.
FAQ
What price versus quality weighting suits a public-sector website?
The most defensible weighting is 50 to 60% for technical quality and 30 to 40% for price, with 10% for delivery and sustainability. Price weighted above 50% pushes towards under-resourced bids.
How many bids does a website tender usually attract?
Between 4 and 9 bids for a budget of 25,000 to 120,000 EUR. A vague specification often pushes the number of off-target bids above 12.
Can a very low bid be rejected straight away?
No, the buyer must first ask in writing for justification of the price build-up. Rejection is only possible after reviewing those explanations, with a reasoned decision.
Should accessibility be scored?
Yes, it is mandatory for public-sector websites under the EU Web Accessibility Directive and deserves about 10% of the score. An initial audit costs 3,000 to 6,000 EUR and should be budgeted in the contract.
Should maintenance be part of the same contract?
It is recommended, over 3 or 4 years, for 4,000 to 15,000 EUR per year. It avoids a second tender and clarifies the exit plan from day one.
Let's scope your project. Share your tender documents or scope: we respond with a structured technical proposal, a person-day pricing schedule and a realistic plan. Detailed quote within 48 h. WhatsApp +221 77 596 93 33.
Mohamed Bah
Fondateur, Kolonell
Passionate about digital and entrepreneurship in Africa, Mohamed has been helping Sénégalese businesses with their digital transformation since 2020. Founder of Kolonell, he believes every SME deserves a professional and accessible online présence.
