Compare website proposals fairly

Compare proposals against the same written brief. A page count, attractive portfolio and headline price do not tell you who will write the copy, maintain the software or give you the files you need to move later.

Your decision should leave a clear answer to three questions: what will be delivered, what you must supply and who deals with the website after launch.

Give every supplier the same problem

Share the website brief, your existing site if there is one, the assets you can supply and any fixed deadline. Ask for assumptions and exclusions alongside the proposed work.

If a supplier suggests a different scope, ask what visitor problem it solves. You may prefer their approach, but make the difference explicit before comparing it with a proposal based on your original list.

A comparison of two fictional proposals

Teaching scenario: both proposals answer Alder & Grain's repair-workshop brief. They are invented to demonstrate differences in scope. They are not recommendations, real quotations or industry price benchmarks.

Proposal A might suit an owner who already has accurate copy and wants direct control of routine edits. Proposal B may be more useful where content preparation is the main obstacle. Neither is automatically better; B's undefined export arrangement remains an important gap, while A leaves more work with the owner.

Compare complete costs, using the same period

Ask each supplier to separate the initial project, recurring services, optional work and changes outside scope. For recurring charges, record the billing period and any conditions for cancellation or transfer. Clarify whether quoted totals include applicable taxes.

Use a period that matches your decision, such as the build and the first year of operation. Add owner-supplied costs separately, including photography or writing. A blank cost cell is an unanswered question, not zero.

Do not award points to vague promises such as “ongoing SEO” without a description of the work, reporting and responsibility. Ranking and sales outcomes depend on more than the deliverables in a website quotation.

Examine relevant work with a task in mind

Choose one or two portfolio sites similar in purpose to your project. Try to complete a real visitor task. Notice whether the service scope is understandable, navigation is usable on your phone and the next step works.

Ask the supplier what they actually contributed: design, development, writing, photography or maintenance. A polished site may include work by several parties. Ask how the example relates to your requirements rather than requesting a copy of its appearance.

W3C's first accessibility checks can reveal basic problems, but passing them does not establish complete accessibility. Treat any stronger claim as a reason to ask for the evaluation scope and evidence.

Put access and handover in writing

Create an inventory covering the domain, hosting, business email, content system, source files, image originals, design files, licences and backups. For each item, record who controls it, who pays for it and what the business receives at handover.

Discuss how another competent supplier could operate the site. Ask for an example of the documentation or export you would receive. If the system depends on the current supplier's platform, understand that dependency before choosing it.

These are questions to settle in your agreement. A planning checklist does not determine legal ownership or replace the terms agreed between the parties.

Make the final choice with the open issues visible

For each essential requirement, record included, excluded or unclear, with the relevant proposal wording beside it. Resolve every essential “unclear” item. Then assess which approach matches your capacity, constraints and required support.

Before paying for the build, agree the acceptance checks, the person who consolidates feedback and the process for scope changes. Use the launch checklist to make the final review concrete, and keep the completed brief alongside the accepted proposal.