Total = sum of (criterion weight × rating ÷ 4), giving a score from 0 to 100. Preserve the unrounded calculation; report the result to one decimal place. Ten fully demonstrated criteria produce 100. Ten unsupported assertions produce 25.
Also publish documented evidence coverage: add the weights of criteria rated 2 or higher. This is a simple coverage measure, not a second quality rating. A proposal can have extensive documents while important claims remain uncorroborated.
| Weighted score | Editorial interpretation | Action when no stop gate is open |
|---|---|---|
| Below 50 | Too much remains unestablished for this mandate | Request focused evidence, reduce scope, or examine another route |
| 50–69.9 | Conditional shortlist candidate | Resolve the largest weighted gaps before appointment; a bounded test may be useful |
| 70–84.9 | Candidate for a controlled pilot or negotiation | Set conditions, expenditure cap, acceptance tests and named decision owners |
| 85–100 | Strong evidence for an approval review | Complete contract, rights and financial review; do not substitute the score for approval |
These thresholds are not empirically calibrated. A high score never cures an open stop gate, a known disqualifying conflict or an unacceptable commercial term.