Evaluating Video Production Bids: A Scoring Guide for NGOs

A good terms of reference brings in several proposals. Then comes the harder part: deciding between them. One studio sends a beautiful treatment and a high fee, another a modest budget and a thin plan, a third sounds right but has never filmed in the places your programme works. Without a clear way of scoring, the decision tends to drift towards whoever presented most confidently, or simply whoever was cheapest.

This guide sets out a practical scoring approach for NGOs evaluating video production bids. It borrows from the methods development banks and UN agencies use for consultancy contracts, trimmed down to suit a communications team commissioning a film rather than a ministry buying a road.

Decide how you will score before the proposals arrive

The single most useful step happens before you read anything. Agree the criteria, the weight each carries and the pass mark, and put them in the call for proposals. Bidders then know what matters to you and write to it, and your panel cannot be accused of moving the goalposts after seeing who applied. If you have not yet drafted the call itself, our guide to writing a terms of reference for video production covers the sections that make proposals comparable in the first place.

Write the scoring grid down, share it with everyone on the panel and keep a copy with your procurement file. Donors that audit spending will want to see it.

Separate quality from price

Most institutional buyers score technical quality and price separately, then combine them. UNDP, for example, describes a combined scoring method in which the weight split between the technical and financial proposals is set out in the request for proposals. Under the quality and cost-based selection method used on World Bank-financed consultancies, the technical proposals are scored first, and bids that fall below a minimum technical score are set aside before any prices are opened.

That sequence matters for video. If the panel sees the prices first, it is very hard to judge a creative approach on its merits. Ask bidders to submit the financial proposal as a separate document, or at least a separate attachment, and open it only for the bids that pass the technical stage. Our checklist of what a good video production quote should include helps make the financial proposals comparable.

Choosing the weighting

The split between quality and price is your choice, and it should reflect what you are buying. Training material for World Bank-financed procurement gives a technical weight of between 60 and 90 per cent, with 80:20 typical for consultancy work, and a JICA evaluation template uses the same 80:20 ratio as its example.

For a short, simple deliverable, such as recording a panel discussion, a heavier price weight is reasonable because most competent studios will produce similar results. For a fundraising film, a documentary or anything involving vulnerable contributors, quality and ethics carry far more risk, and 80:20 or even 85:15 is easier to defend.

Technical criteria that predict a good film

A technical score out of 100 might be built from five or six criteria. The weights below are a starting point to adapt, not a standard.

• Understanding of the brief (20 points). Does the proposal show that the bidder grasped your purpose, audience and key message, or does it restate the ToR back to you? Look for a clear idea of what the finished film will make the viewer feel and do.
• Creative and technical approach (25 points). A treatment, a proposed structure, the style of interviews, how sound and light will be handled in the field, the delivery formats and languages. Specific beats general.
• Relevant experience and portfolio (20 points). Watch the sample films all the way through, not just the first minute. Ask which parts the bidder actually produced, and whether the work is comparable in subject, setting and scale.
• Ethics, consent and safeguarding (15 points). How will contributors be informed and asked for consent? Who handles interviews with children or survivors? Is there a written policy? Our own ethical storytelling policy shows the kind of commitments worth looking for.
• Team and local capacity (10 points). Named people with clear roles, language skills for the communities involved, and the ability to reach your project sites. If the film needs aerial footage, ask whether the drone operator holds the licences Kenyan law requires.
• Workplan and risk management (10 points). A realistic schedule, review rounds that match your approval process, and a sensible answer to the obvious risks: rain, access, a contributor withdrawing, a delayed sign-off.

Use a simple scale for each criterion so scores mean the same thing across the panel. For example: 0 for not addressed, 1 for weak, 2 for adequate, 3 for good and 4 for excellent, then convert to points. Agree in advance what “adequate” looks like for each one.

Set a pass mark

A minimum technical score keeps a cheap but unsuitable bid from winning on price alone. Pick a figure that represents a film you would genuinely be happy to publish, for example 70 out of 100, and state it in the call for proposals.

Scoring price fairly

The common formula gives the lowest-priced compliant proposal full marks and scores the others in proportion. In the form used in World Bank-style evaluations, the financial score is 100 multiplied by the lowest price, divided by the price of the proposal being scored. A bid that costs a quarter more than the cheapest therefore scores 80.

Before you apply it, check that the prices cover the same thing. One studio may include translation, subtitles, permits and travel to the field; another may list them as extras or leave them out. Normalise the bids against your list of deliverables, ask bidders to clarify anything missing, and treat a price far below the others as a question rather than a bargain. Very low bids often mean fewer filming days, no budget for consent and translation, or a plan to recover costs through change requests later.

A simple worked example

Imagine three bids for a five-minute fundraising film, scored 80:20 with a technical pass mark of 70.

• Bid A scores 86 on the technical criteria and is 25 per cent more expensive than the cheapest bid. Financial score 80. Combined: (86 × 0.8) + (80 × 0.2) = 84.8.
• Bid B scores 74 and is the cheapest. Financial score 100. Combined: (74 × 0.8) + (100 × 0.2) = 79.2.
• Bid C scores 65. It fails the pass mark, so its price is never opened.

Bid A wins despite costing more, because the panel judged it substantially stronger. Had the weighting been 60:40, the result would flip: Bid B would win narrowly, by 84.4 to 83.6. That is why the weighting has to be settled, and published, before anyone sees a price. Running the numbers both ways in advance is a useful check that it rewards what you actually care about.

Running the panel

Three evaluators is a practical minimum: someone from communications, someone from the programme the film is about and, ideally, someone from finance or procurement. Each should declare any conflict of interest and score independently before the panel meets. Then compare scores, discuss the big differences and agree a consensus score with a short written justification for each criterion. Those notes are what you will rely on if a bidder asks for feedback, or an auditor asks why the higher price won.

For larger contracts, a short interview with the top two or three bidders is worth the time. Ask the person who would actually direct the film to walk you through the approach. Then take up references, and ask previous clients specific questions: were deadlines met, how were problems handled, and did contributors feel respected?

Red flags worth noticing

• A portfolio of polished commercials but no work with real people in real settings.
• No mention of consent, or a promise to “capture emotional stories” with no word on how contributors will be protected.
• Vague answers on who owns the raw footage and the finished films.
• A team that will be “confirmed on award”.
• Prices with no breakdown, or a breakdown that leaves out the field days your ToR clearly requires.

For a broader view of what to look for in a long-term partner, rather than a single contract, see our guide to choosing an NGO video production partner. And if you would like to see how a production company responds to a well-structured brief, our NGO video production page sets out how we work with programme and communications teams.

Frequently asked questions

What is a fair weighting between quality and price for a video production tender?

It depends on the risk in the work. Development bank practice for consultancy contracts commonly uses around 80 per cent for technical quality and 20 per cent for price. A heavier price weight can suit simple, low-risk recording jobs; storytelling with vulnerable contributors justifies a heavier quality weight.

How do you score the price of video production proposals?

A widely used formula gives the lowest compliant price 100 points and scores every other bid as 100 multiplied by the lowest price, divided by that bid’s price. Check that each bid covers the same deliverables before applying it.

Should we open the prices before scoring the technical proposals?

No. Score the technical proposals first, remove any that fall below your published pass mark, and only then open the financial proposals. This keeps the creative assessment independent of cost.

How many people should evaluate video production bids?

At least three, drawn from communications, the relevant programme and finance or procurement. Each should declare conflicts of interest and score independently before the panel agrees a consensus score with written reasons.

Afrovo Studios is a Nairobi-based video production company working across East Africa, making documentaries, campaign films and corporate video for NGOs, conservation organisations and brands. Get in touch to talk about your next project.