SEO agency RFP template: get proposals you can actually compare
Generate a complete agency brief with a fixed response structure, named-team questions, implementation ownership, commercial rules and a transparent 100-point evaluation method.
The RFP is a comparison instrument, not a request for agencies to guess your strategy
Give every bidder the same business truth, constraints and response structure. Ask them to show diagnosis, choices and assumptions. A long deliverables wishlist can make proposals look comparable while hiding entirely different teams, implementation models and definitions of success.
Free RFP generator · no signup
Build a comparable SEO agency brief
The full 11-section document is already written. Add the facts that make it yours, choose the work in scope, then copy or download the draft.
Start with the defaults. Empty fields remain visible as prompts in the downloaded document, so you cannot silently forget them.
Live document
11 sections · 100-point evaluation
# Request for proposal: SEO agency partner ## 1. RFP details - Organisation: [organisation name] - Website: [website URL] - RFP contact: [name and email] - Response deadline: [date, time and timezone] - Target start date: [date] - Indicative budget: [monthly or project range and currency] ## 2. Business context [Explain the business model, customers, products, current situation and why this project exists now] - Priority markets: [countries, regions or languages] - Website platform and relevant systems: [CMS, commerce platform, analytics, CRM and development model] ## 3. Primary outcome Increase qualified non-brand organic demand and attributable business outcomes. Proposals must separate business outcomes from diagnostic indicators. Explain how brand and non-brand demand, qualified conversions, revenue or pipeline, and data-quality limitations will be handled. ## 4. Scope under consideration - Technical SEO - Content strategy and production - Analytics and measurement For every workstream, state what is included, excluded, dependent on the client, subcontracted, or priced separately. Distinguish recommendations from implementation. ## 5. Current evidence and constraints The selected agency will receive appropriate access after shortlisting. In the proposal, list the minimum information required to validate assumptions. Identify material unknowns rather than inventing certainty. Address likely dependencies including development capacity, subject-matter review, legal or brand approval, analytics quality, publishing access, release windows and third-party platforms. ## 6. Required response structure Please answer in this order: 1. Your initial diagnosis and the evidence or assumptions behind it. 2. The first 90 days, with priorities, dependencies, owners and expected decisions. 3. The named delivery team, roles, seniority, location and approximate allocation. 4. What your team will implement directly and what the client must implement. 5. Measurement definitions, baseline approach, reporting cadence and sample report. 6. Two relevant case examples with starting point, work performed, timeframe and measurable outcome. 7. Link acquisition and digital PR methods, including prohibited methods and disclosure. 8. Use of subcontractors, freelancers, automation and generative AI. 9. Full pricing, assumptions, pass-through costs, optional work and change-control rates. 10. Contract term, termination, notice, ownership, access handover and conflicts policy. ## 7. Commercial response Provide one comparable total for the proposed scope. Show setup fees, recurring fees, project fees, software, media or placement costs, travel, taxes and any minimum commitment separately. State what changes when volume, timing or client dependencies change. ## 8. Evaluation method Responses will be scored on a common 100-point rubric: - Diagnosis and prioritisation: 20 points - Delivery approach and scope clarity: 15 points - Named team and capacity: 15 points - Measurement and reporting: 15 points - Implementation and governance: 15 points - Relevant evidence and references: 10 points - Commercial and contract clarity: 10 points Polish, gifts, paid directory positions and unsupported guarantees do not earn points. Finalists may be asked the same clarification questions and scores may be revised only with a written reason. ## 9. Procurement rules - Send clarification questions to [RFP contact] by [question deadline]. - Material answers will be shared with every invited bidder. - Keep the main response within [page limit] excluding appendices. - Do not contact other employees unless invited. - Mark assumptions, exceptions and requested contract changes clearly. - The organisation may pause or cancel the process and is not required to accept the lowest-priced response. ## 10. Requested attachments - Named-team biographies and availability - Two relevant case examples and two client references - Sample roadmap, technical recommendation and performance report - Standard agreement, statement of work and data-processing terms - Insurance, security or compliance information relevant to the access requested - Conflict disclosure and subcontractor list ## 11. Selection timetable - RFP issued: [date] - Questions due: [date] - Answers shared: [date] - Proposals due: [date] - Finalist meetings: [date range] - References and contract review: [date range] - Decision communicated: [date] - Target start: [date]
Selection sequence
Run the RFP in four controlled stages
Write the buying decision
Define the business outcome, constraints, non-negotiable work and budget authority before asking agencies to prescribe tactics.
Invite a deliberate shortlist
Use published evidence to select a small set of plausible partners. Give every bidder the same document, timetable and access to clarifications.
Score before finalist meetings
Have reviewers score independently against the published rubric. Use meetings to investigate assumptions, not replace criteria with presentation chemistry.
Validate the people and agreement
Meet the delivery team, check references, reconcile scope with the statement of work and review ownership, exit, access and subcontracting terms.
Published evaluation
A 100-point rubric that keeps trade-offs visible
Weights belong in the RFP, before bids arrive. Reviewers should judge the submitted evidence independently and use finalist meetings to resolve uncertainty.
Score up to three proposalsDiagnosis and prioritisation
20
Understands the problem, marks assumptions, identifies constraints and sequences the highest-value decisions.
Delivery approach and scope
15
Connects workstreams to outcomes; distinguishes advice, production, implementation, exclusions and dependencies.
Named team and capacity
15
Identifies the people doing the work, their relevant experience, allocation, supervision and continuity plan.
Measurement and reporting
15
Defines conversions, baselines, brand splits, attribution limits, data quality and decision-oriented reporting.
Implementation and governance
15
Shows how recommendations ship through owners, approvals, releases, quality checks, escalation and change control.
Relevant evidence
10
Provides comparable case evidence and references with the starting point, work, timeframe and measurable outcome.
Commercial and contract clarity
10
Makes price, assumptions, pass-through costs, term, exit, ownership, conflicts and handover understandable.
Rules that keep the process fair and comparable
One question channel
Require questions by a deadline and share material answers with every invited bidder.
One response structure
Force the same order, page limit and appendices so omissions and differences remain visible.
Named delivery team
Ask who will work after the pitch, approximate allocation and what happens if a named person changes.
No hidden implementation gap
Ask who writes, approves, develops, deploys and validates—not only who recommends.
Comparable total cost
Separate setup, recurring, project, software, pass-through and optional costs in the same currency and period.
Written score changes
Allow scores to move after clarification only when the reviewer records the evidence and reason.
Do not award the pitch team by accident
Require the proposed delivery team, allocation and continuity plan in writing. Meet those people before selection. If staffing changes before signature, re-evaluate the team criterion rather than treating the names as interchangeable.
Share enough evidence for a diagnosis—not production access
Google advises businesses considering an SEO to ask for a technical and search audit, give read-only Search Console access at that stage, and be sceptical of guaranteed first-place claims. Keep any finalist exercise bounded and protect customer, analytics and platform access.
Google: Do you need an SEO?Common questions
SEO agency RFP FAQs
What should an SEO agency RFP include?
Include business context, desired outcomes, required and excluded scope, markets and systems, implementation capacity, measurement expectations, response instructions, named-team requirements, evidence requests, commercial assumptions, contract questions, evaluation weights and the selection timetable.
How many SEO agencies should receive an RFP?
Use a shortlist small enough to evaluate carefully. The right number depends on procurement rules and market complexity, but a focused group of credible candidates usually produces more comparable attention than an open invitation with no qualification step.
Should the RFP disclose the SEO budget?
A realistic range helps agencies propose a feasible team and scope. If the range is confidential, disclose enough about available capacity and commercial boundaries to prevent proposals that cannot be compared. Always require assumptions and optional costs to be separated.
Should an RFP ask for a free SEO audit?
Ask for an initial diagnosis and the evidence or assumptions behind it, not a complete unpaid audit. Finalists can receive controlled read-only information for a bounded exercise. Do not give broad write access or ask agencies to perform speculative production work.
How should SEO proposals be scored?
Publish weighted criteria before proposals arrive, have reviewers score independently, keep capability separate from evidence confidence, and record why a score changes. A 100-point model covering diagnosis, delivery, team, measurement, implementation, proof and commercial clarity makes trade-offs visible.
What happens after an agency wins the RFP?
Reconcile every material promise with the statement of work and agreement, verify the named team and start date, complete references and conflicts checks, then begin a controlled onboarding covering ownership, access, measurement, stakeholders, content, implementation and approvals.
Turn the brief into a defensible selection
Shortlist companies using published capability evidence, score every proposal with the same rubric, then make sure the signed agreement preserves the scope, team, ownership and exit promises that earned the winning score.