Disclosure of Scoring

Disclosure of scoring is the practical mechanism through which the principle of transparency obligation is realised at the end of a procurement. A supplier cannot meaningfully assess whether an evaluation was fair if it does not know how its bid was scored, how the winning bid was scored, and how those scores were derived. Disclosure of scoring bridges that information gap.

What is disclosure of scoring?

Disclosure of scoring refers to the communication by a contracting authority of the numerical scores (or equivalent assessments) assigned to a tenderer's bid across each evaluation criterion or sub-criterion. The EU Directives impose minimum standards; national law and practice vary considerably in how far disclosure goes.

Under Directive 2014/24/EU, the debriefing obligation requires authorities to communicate "the characteristics and relative advantages of the selected tender" to an unsuccessful bidder that requests a debriefing. This implicitly covers scoring information but does not mandate disclosure of the winning bidder's precise scores in every case.

The UK Procurement Act 2023 takes a more prescriptive approach. It requires authorities to issue an "assessment summary" automatically to every tenderer at the point of the award decision letter. This summary must include:

• The scores achieved by the recipient's bid against each criterion.
• The scores achieved by the winning bid against each criterion.
• An explanation of how the scores were reached.

This makes automatic score disclosure a legal requirement in the UK rather than a contingent right triggered by a debriefing request. Several other EU member states (including the Netherlands and Sweden) have developed similar practices through procurement guidance or case law.

Authorities may redact confidential information from score disclosures, but they cannot refuse to disclose scoring information on the grounds that it is commercially sensitive per se. The evaluation methodology and criteria must have been published in advance, so applying them is not itself confidential.

Why it matters for bidders

Score disclosure is the single most important piece of post-tender intelligence a supplier can obtain. It reveals: (a) which criteria you underperformed on; (b) the gap between your performance and the winner's; and (c) whether the evaluation was internally consistent (for example, whether scores track the stated methodology).

Bidders who review their scores systematically improve their win rates over time. Scores also provide the factual foundation for any legal challenge: an inconsistency between stated methodology and awarded scores, or an implausibly high score for a competitor on a criterion where the evidence does not support it, is the starting point for a viable challenge during the standstill period.

Example

A Danish software company bids for a public sector data analytics platform and receives an assessment summary showing its technical quality score as 62 out of 80 and the winner's as 76. The breakdown shows it lost points on data security architecture (8 out of 15 vs. the winner's 14 out of 15). This feedback directly informs its next submission, where it invests in a more detailed security architecture section, achieving a score of 13 out of 15 and winning the rebid.

Frequently Asked Questions

Must the contracting authority disclose the evaluator's written comments, not just the numbers?

In the EU, the minimum obligation is the characteristics and relative advantages of the winning tender. In the UK, the assessment summary must include explanatory narrative alongside scores. Detailed evaluator comments are not always required but are often disclosed in practice, particularly during a full debriefing.

Can I use a freedom of information request to obtain scoring information?

Yes, in many jurisdictions. If a voluntary debriefing does not yield sufficient scoring information, freedom of information requests can be used to obtain evaluation sheets and scoring records, subject to applicable exemptions for confidential commercial information.

What if the authority refuses to disclose scores on confidentiality grounds?

A blanket confidentiality refusal is difficult to sustain. The evaluation methodology and criteria must have been published before the deadline, so applying them cannot be treated as inherently confidential. Bidders who face unjustified refusals can escalate to the review body, ombudsman, or court depending on the jurisdiction.