Maintained reference
What multilateral development banks actually require in a technical proposal — forms, page limits, expert rules, evidence and submission mechanics — with every requirement traced to the procurement document it comes from.
Sources last reviewed:
Verified against primary sources · 14 entries
Consultant selection runs on the Standard Request for Proposals, which is derived from the Master Procurement Document agreed between participating multilateral development banks. That shared origin is why an AfDB or IsDB submission feels familiar to a team that has done a World Bank one — the section structure is largely common.
Request for Proposals, all consultant selections using the SRFP
The Data Sheet states whether a Full Technical Proposal (FTP) or a Simplified Technical Proposal (STP) is required. The two differ by which standard forms must be submitted, not by how much detail is welcome.
This is the first thing to read and the most commonly skipped. An STP that arrives with TECH-2 and TECH-3 attached is not more thorough — it is non-responsive to the instructions.
Full Technical Proposal (FTP)
An FTP requires forms TECH-1 (Technical Proposal Submission Form), TECH-2 with TECH-2A Consultant's Organization and TECH-2B Consultant's Experience, TECH-3 with TECH-3A comments on the Terms of Reference and TECH-3B comments on counterpart staff and facilities, TECH-4 Approach, Methodology and Work Plan, TECH-5 Work Schedule and Planning for Deliverables, TECH-6 Team Composition, Key Experts Inputs and attached CVs, and TECH-7 Code of Conduct.
Simplified Technical Proposal (STP)
An STP requires only TECH-1, TECH-4, TECH-5, TECH-6 and TECH-7. TECH-2 (organization and experience) and TECH-3 (comments on the Terms of Reference and on counterpart staff and facilities) are not required.
The difference between the two is precisely the firm-level material. An STP is scored on approach, schedule and team — corporate experience does not carry the submission.
Technical proposal formatting
The Checklist of Required Forms carries a Page Limit column, and it is left blank in the standard document. Page limits are therefore set per assignment in the specific RFP, not by a standing World Bank rule.
Worth stating plainly because the opposite is widely assumed: there is no universal World Bank page limit for a technical proposal. Read the issued RFP; a limit from a previous assignment does not carry over.
Key experts, both FTP and STP
TECH-6 covers team composition, key expert inputs and the attached curricula vitae, and is required in both the full and the simplified proposal.
TECH-6 is one of only five forms an STP requires, which makes the CV set proportionally more important on a simplified submission than on a full one.
Terms of Reference
Section 7, Terms of Reference, describes the scope, objectives and specific tasks, provides details on the required qualifications of the key experts, and lists the expected deliverables. It cannot be used to over-write provisions in Section 2.
Key expert qualifications live in the ToR, not in the instructions. If a CV is being assessed against a profile, that profile is in Section 7.
Proposals submitted by a joint venture
A joint venture attaches to TECH-1 either a letter of intent or a copy of an existing agreement. Several powers of attorney are also required: one for the authorized representative of each JV member, and one for the representative of the lead member to represent all members. There is no pre-set format for the powers of attorney.
The count is what catches teams: a three-member JV needs four powers of attorney, not one. These take longer to sign than the proposal takes to write, so they belong on the schedule at kick-off.
All proposals under the January 2020 revision
TECH-7, the Code of Conduct, is required for both FTP and STP. Each named expert signs a statement confirming receipt of the Code in a language they comprehend, and an authorized representative of the Consultant countersigns. The Code addresses sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) and sexual harassment (SH); an attachment lists prohibited behaviours.
Two signatures per expert, one of which is not the expert's. On a ten-person team with experts in different time zones, this is a scheduling item, not a formality.
Choice of selection method
The SRFP can be used with Quality- and Cost-Based Selection (QCBS), Quality-Based Selection (QBS), Selection under a Fixed Budget (FBS) and Least-Cost Selection (LCS). For Selection Based on Consultant's Qualifications (CQS), or any selection method costing less than US$300,000 equivalent, relevant elements of the SRFP may be used and further simplified.
Under QBS the price does not compete, so effort spent sharpening the financial offer is effort not spent on the technical one. The method is stated up front; read it before allocating the team's time.
Cross-institution planning
The World Bank SRFP is based on the Master Procurement Document for Selection of Consultants, prepared by participating multilateral development banks and reflecting what are considered best practices. The SRFP follows the structure and provisions of the Master Document except where the institution required a change.
This is why a firm's reusable content survives across banks. The differences between MDB submissions are real but bounded; the common structure is deliberate.
Expressions of Interest, World Bank Group corporate procurement
Expressions of Interest should not exceed 15 pages, should be submitted in English electronically through WBGeProcure RFx Now, and the total size of all attachments should be less than 5MB.
Verified on an individual advertisement rather than in a standing rule. Limits are set per notice — treat this as the common pattern and confirm against the notice you are answering.
Expressions of Interest
Firms indicate interest by providing information showing they are qualified to perform the services — brochures, description of similar assignments, experience in similar conditions, and availability of appropriate skills among staff. Individual consultants provide a CV and cover letter.
"Experience in similar conditions" is a separate test from "similar assignments". A project of the same type in a very different operating context may not answer it.
Evaluation using rated criteria
The World Bank publishes dedicated procurement guidance on evaluating bids and proposals with rated criteria, current version dated February 2025.
Reading the evaluator's own guidance is the cheapest available advantage in a tender, and it is public.
Governing framework
Project procurement is governed by the World Bank's Project Procurement Framework, which publishes the standard procurement documents used for international competitive procurement.
Verified against primary sources · 5 entries
EU-financed service contracts separate the team into key experts, who are named, evidenced and scored, and non-key experts, who are not evaluated at all. Getting that distinction wrong is the most common structural error in an EU technical offer.
EU-financed service contracts
Key experts are those whose involvement is considered instrumental to achieving the contract objectives. The qualifications and experience of each key expert must clearly match the profiles indicated in the Terms of Reference.
"Clearly match" is the operative phrase. An evaluator should not have to infer that a stated qualification satisfies a profile requirement — the mapping is the bidder's job.
Technical evaluation
Key experts are subject to evaluation according to the evaluation grid in Part C of the tender dossier, and are scored against the requirements stated in the Terms of Reference.
The grid is published with the dossier. A CV that is not ordered against it makes the evaluator search, and search is where marks are lost.
Team composition
Non-key experts may also be instrumental to achieving the contract objectives, but they are not subject to evaluation by the evaluation committee, and their CVs are not necessary.
Submitting unrequested non-key CVs adds pages an evaluator will not score, and on a page-limited offer those pages come out of the material that is scored.
Key expert documentation
Supporting documents for key expert CVs include diplomas and employer certificates or references.
These come from third parties — a former employer, a university — so lead time is outside the bidder's control. Collect them for the standing team before a call opens, not after.
EU Funding & Tenders Portal
The European Commission maintains a portal route for individuals to register as experts supporting EU funding and tenders, separate from bidding as a firm.
Verified against primary sources · 4 entries
Every AfDB consulting procurement opens with a Request for Expressions of Interest. The EOI does not win the work; it is one input into the shortlist, and the Bank is explicit that expressing interest creates no obligation to shortlist you.
Request for Expressions of Interest
An Expression of Interest is a demonstration of readiness to participate, and is one of the sources of information used to prepare the final shortlist of consultants invited to submit proposals. All AfDB consulting procurement begins with a Request for Expressions of Interest published on the AfDB procurement portal; shortlisted firms then receive the full Request for Proposals.
Shortlisting
The African Development Bank Group is under no obligation to shortlist any consultant who expresses interest.
Relevant to qualification, not to writing: EOI effort is speculative by design, which is an argument for a fast reusable EOI pack rather than a bespoke one each time.
Shortlisting of individual consultants
Consultants on the shortlist are judged on the basis of their updated resume against: level of education in general; educational level compared to the field of assignment; years of experience in general; number of years of experience relevant to the assignment; and knowledge of the working environment.
Two of the five are comparative — education against the field, and experience relevant to the assignment as distinct from total experience. A CV that reports only totals answers three of five.
Consultant registration
AfDB maintains DACON, a Database of Consultants, in which firms and individual consultants can register expertise, experience and availability. Registration is not mandatory, but increases visibility to project teams assembling shortlists.
A registration that decays is worse than none, because it presents stale experience to the people building shortlists. Treat it as a maintained record with an owner.
Verified against primary sources · 3 entries
IsDB publishes separate guidelines for consultant services and for goods and works. The consultant selection sequence is fixed and public, which makes it possible to plan a submission calendar backwards from the technical opening.
The published IsDB guidance notes are image-based PDFs that could not be text-extracted for this review. The sequence and document set below were verified; specific evaluation weights and minimum technical scores were not, and are deliberately absent.
Consultant selection process
The selection process runs: preparation of Terms of Reference and cost estimate; advertising of the consultancy assignment; shortlisting and Request for Proposals; submission of technical and financial proposals; evaluation of technical proposals; public opening of financial proposals and combined evaluation; negotiations and draft contract; contract award.
Financial proposals are opened publicly and only after technical evaluation. The technical submission is therefore complete and unalterable before price is ever seen.
Which rulebook applies
IsDB publishes separate procurement guidelines for consultant services and for goods and works. Consultant selection is governed by the consultant guidelines.
Easy to cite the wrong one: the goods-and-works guidance and its evaluation-criteria note are more prominent in search results than the consultant guidelines.
Selection method
The guidelines specify quality- and cost-based selection methods and set out general procedures for proposal evaluation.
Specific weights and any minimum technical score are set per assignment and were not verifiable from the published guidance for this review — read them from the RFP.
Not yet researched
UNDP publishes evaluation criteria per procurement notice rather than in a single standing standard document, so requirements have to be read from the individual notice.
Not yet researched to the standard applied to the other four institutions. No UNDP entries appear below, because writing plausible ones without reading the sources is exactly what this library exists to avoid. Scheduled for the next review.
Where this connects
Knowing that TECH-6 needs a CV per key expert is one problem; producing twelve current, evidenced CVs in the format a funder accepts, inside a submission window, is a different one. ProposalOS is built for the second.
Procurement documents are revised. Every entry above carries the date its source was read; where a requirement decides your submission, confirm it against the document issued with your tender rather than against this page.
A clearer proposal operating model
Tell us how your organization handles opportunities, evidence and review. We’ll tailor the conversation to that context.