QCBS (Quality- and Cost-Based Selection) is the method most international financial institutions use, by default, to select consulting firms: shortlisted firms submit a technical and a financial proposal in two envelopes; the technical proposal is scored against published criteria; financial proposals of firms that pass the minimum technical mark are then opened and scored; and the contract goes to the firm with the highest combined weighted score. Under the World Bank's current rules — the Procurement Regulations for IPF Borrowers, seventh edition, September 2025 — the quality-to-cost weighting ranges from 90/10 for highly complex assignments to 50/50 for routine ones. In World Bank terminology, the winner is the "Most Advantageous Proposal".
This article describes the World Bank's regulations as its baseline (the September 2025 edition), notes where ADB and EBRD differ, and works one example end to end.
The selection sequence
A QCBS selection on a World Bank–financed project runs, in the terminology of the Regulations:
- General Procurement Notice (GPN) — the project's procurement programme is announced; the Bank publishes it on its external website.
- Request for Expressions of Interest (REOI) — the borrower advertises the assignment; firms get at least ten business days to submit expressions of interest.
- Shortlist — the borrower selects no fewer than five and no more than eight eligible, qualified firms.
- Request for Proposals (RFP) — issued to shortlisted firms only, using the Bank's standard RFP; it states the evaluation criteria, sub-criteria, the technical minimum score, and the quality/cost weighting.
- Two-envelope submission — technical and financial proposals sealed separately.
- Technical evaluation — scored first, financial envelopes unopened.
- Financial opening and evaluation — only for proposals that met the minimum technical score.
- Combined scoring — weighted sum determines the ranking.
- Negotiations — with the top-ranked firm, covering terms of reference, methodology, staffing inputs and special conditions; negotiations "shall not substantially alter" the original scope or contract terms.
- Notification of Intention to Award and standstill — a ten-business-day standstill period runs from the notification, during which unsuccessful firms may seek a debriefing; the contract cannot be signed during it.
How the technical score is built
The RFP fixes the criteria; typical structure (the Regulations leave exact points to the RFP):
- Specific experience of the firm relevant to the assignment;
- Methodology and work plan responding to the terms of reference — usually the highest-weighted and the most differentiating criterion;
- Key experts' qualifications and competence — scored per expert against the positions in the terms of reference;
- Sometimes knowledge transfer and national-expert participation.
Each proposal must clear a minimum technical score stated in the RFP; miss it and your financial envelope is returned unopened. In our experience preparing and evaluating proposals, most selections are decided in the methodology and key-experts sections: firm experience tends to compress (all shortlisted firms are plausible), while a CV that doesn't match the position's required years or certifications loses points nothing else can recover.
How the financial score works
Under the World Bank formula, the lowest evaluated price receives the full financial score of 100 points, and other proposals score inversely proportional to their price (lowest price ÷ your price × 100). The combined score is then:
Combined = Technical score × T% + Financial score × C%
The weightings — what the current rules actually say
The World Bank's seventh-edition Regulations set the quality/cost split by assignment complexity:
| Assignment type | Quality (T) | Cost (C) |
|---|---|---|
| Highly complex / specialised | 90% | 10% |
| Moderate complexity | 70–80% | 30–20% |
| Standard / routine | 60–50% | 40–50% |
Older guidance ("cost normally 20–30 points") still circulates on the web; it no longer reflects the current table. ADB historically applied 90:10 and 80:20 as its standard QCBS ratios under the 2017 Procurement Regulations; note that ADB's framework changed on 1 January 2026, when the new Procurement Directive for ADB Borrowers took effect for new projects (the 2017 Regulations continue to govern the earlier portfolio), with an increased emphasis on quality and merit-point criteria — check which regime your project falls under before assuming a ratio. EBRD does not use the QCBS label at all: under its Procurement Policies and Rules (May 2022), consultant selection is principally quality-based, with price as a possible secondary consideration set per tender — see our practical guide to ECEPP and EBRD tendering.
A worked example
Assume an RFP with an 80/20 weighting and a minimum technical score of 75. Three shortlisted firms submit:
| Technical | Price (USD) | Financial score | Combined (80/20) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Firm A | 88 | 1,000,000 | 85.0 | 87.4 |
| Firm B | 79 | 850,000 | 100.0 (lowest) | 83.2 |
| Firm C | 72 | 700,000 | — not opened (below 75) | eliminated |
Firm A wins despite being 18% more expensive: at 80/20, one technical point is worth four financial points, and Firm B's price advantage (15 financial points × 0.2 = 3 combined points) cannot close a nine-point technical gap (7.2 combined points). This arithmetic is why experienced firms spend their effort on methodology and CVs rather than price-cutting — and why, at 90/10, price is very nearly decorative.
The other selection methods, briefly
- QBS (Quality-Based Selection) — technical quality alone determines the winner; the financial proposal of the top-ranked firm is then negotiated. Used for assignments where scoping is genuinely uncertain or downstream impact dwarfs the fee.
- FBS (Fixed Budget-Based Selection) — the budget is disclosed and fixed; the best technical proposal within the budget wins. Used for well-defined assignments with firm budgets.
- LCS (Least Cost-Based Selection) — among proposals clearing the technical minimum, the cheapest wins. Standard, routine work (audits are the classic case).
- CQS (Consultant's Qualification-Based Selection) — for small assignments: firms submit qualifications only; the best-qualified firm is invited to submit combined technical and financial proposals and negotiate. No full competitive proposal stage.
- Direct Selection — single-source, requiring specific justification (continuity, genuine urgency, only-one-qualified-firm).
FAQ
What does QCBS stand for and who uses it?
Quality- and Cost-Based Selection. It is the default consulting-firm selection method under the World Bank Procurement Regulations and has been ADB's workhorse method; national procurement systems (including several in Central Asia) have adopted variants of it.
What is a typical QCBS technical/financial split?
Under the current World Bank rules: 90/10 for highly complex assignments, 70–80/30–20 for moderate complexity, 50–60/50–40 for routine work. The RFP states the exact split — never assume it.
What happens if my technical score is below the minimum?
Your financial proposal is returned unopened and you are out of the competition, regardless of price. The minimum is stated in the RFP (75–80 is common in practice).
Is the cheapest proposal ever rejected under QCBS?
Routinely — that is the design. The lowest price maximises the financial score, but at 80/20 or 90/10 weightings a modest technical deficit outweighs a large price advantage, as the worked example above shows.
How is QCBS different from how the EBRD selects consultants?
The EBRD's Procurement Policies and Rules (May 2022) do not prescribe QCBS; evaluation is principally quality-based, with shortlists of three to six firms (versus the World Bank's five to eight) and price treated as a secondary consideration where used.
Can we improve our technical score by proposing more staff-months than the terms of reference suggest?
Padding inputs rarely scores and often backfires in negotiations. Evaluators score responsiveness to the terms of reference — a methodology that shows you understand the assignment's actual risks outperforms volume.
FORLOG AG has worked on both sides of QCBS since 1997 — preparing expressions of interest and technical proposals as a bidder on World Bank, ADB and EBRD assignments across Central Asia, and supporting implementing agencies with shortlisting and bid evaluation as a consultant, on projects including the World Bank–financed WASIS water programme in Uzbekistan and EBRD-financed municipal projects in the Kyrgyz Republic. If a proposal or an evaluation needs experienced hands, talk to us.