Evaluation Criteria in Public Procurement 2026

Definition: Evaluation criteria in public procurement are the benchmarks set and disclosed in advance by the contracting authority for assessing tenders in order to identify the most economically advantageous tender. They cover award criteria and — at the upstream suitability stage — selection criteria.

Last updated: January 2026 · Legal basis: Art. 67–68 Directive 2014/24/EU, §§ 58–59 VgV, § 16d VOB/A, §§ 91 et seq. BVergG 2018

---

What are evaluation criteria in public procurement?

Evaluation criteria are the central instrument for objectifying procurement decisions and making them transparent. They ensure that the contracting authority does not decide on the basis of subjective preference but according to objective benchmarks set and publicly announced in advance. Procurement law draws a fundamental distinction between selection criteria (assessing the operator) and award criteria (assessing the tender).

Selection criteria

Selection criteria relate to the bidder itself and check whether the operator is, in principle, capable of performing the contract properly. They sit upstream of the substantive evaluation and cover:

• Authorisation: entitlement to pursue the profession (trade register entry, chamber membership)
• Reliability: absence of mandatory and discretionary exclusion grounds
• Economic/financial standing: minimum turnover, professional liability insurance, credit evidence
• Technical/professional ability: reference projects, staff qualifications, technical equipment

Selection criteria must not be applied again in the award decision (separation principle).

Award criteria

Award criteria relate to the tender and determine which of the admitted tenders is awarded the contract. Procurement law requires that the most economically advantageous tender be contracted. Award criteria may include:

Price and cost

• Total tender price
• Life-cycle costs (operating, maintenance, disposal costs)
• Price-performance ratio

Quality criteria

• Technical characteristics
• Aesthetic and functional properties
• Environmental characteristics and energy efficiency
• Social aspects (e.g. accessibility)
• After-sales service and technical support
• Delivery conditions and completion period
• Qualification of the staff assigned
• Concept and methodology (for services)

Weighting and transparency

Award criteria must be published in advance together with their weighting in the contract notice or procurement documents. Only in duly substantiated exceptional cases may a ranking be given instead of a weighting (Art. 67 (5) Directive 2014/24/EU). The weighting is binding for the entire evaluation process and may not be changed afterwards.

Typical weighting structure:

Criterion	Weighting
Price	40–60 %
Quality / concept	25–40 %
Completion periods	5–15 %
Sustainability aspects	5–10 %
Other	up to 10 %

Sub-criteria

Award criteria can be broken down into sub-criteria to allow more differentiated scoring. Sub-criteria must also be disclosed in advance; new sub-criteria may not be introduced after tender opening.

FAQ

May the contracting authority evaluate on price alone? Yes, for simple, standardised services evaluation purely on price is permitted. For more complex services a qualitative component is advisable and often legally required.

What is the difference between evaluation criteria and selection criteria? Selection criteria concern the qualification of the bidder (who is allowed to take part?). Evaluation criteria in the narrow sense (award criteria) concern the quality of the tender (which tender is the best?).

Can qualitative criteria be weighted more heavily than price? Yes, provided this is objectively justified and announced in advance. For design and consultancy services a heavier weighting of quality over price is customary and sensible.

---

Last updated: January 2026 Information provided without warranty. For legally binding advice, please consult a law firm specialising in public procurement.