If you are requesting custom website development proposals, start with the commercial job: explain your services, publish useful content and make it easy to enquire. Then define how your team will keep that information current. Two quotes for “ten pages with a CMS” can describe very different deliveries.
I would compare proposals using a real service page, an article and a contact journey. This guide covers a public business website. A portal with customer accounts, orders or operational rules needs a different brief. For the general terms of commissioning software, see my custom software quote guide.
When to commission custom development and when to adapt
A distinctive design does not require a content management system built from scratch. If an existing tool supports the pages, forms and editing workflow, configuring it and designing around it may be enough. If your current website already supports the work, improving navigation, content and contact may be the better first step.
- Hosted website builder: can fit a team that needs visual editing and accepts the platform's limits and subscriptions. Ask for a demonstration on the plan you would actually buy.
- A CMS such as WordPress with a custom design: separates content from presentation. Someone still needs to own hosting, extensions and updates. Its roles and capabilities help distinguish editing from administration; verify permissions in the proposed setup.
- A custom frontend with a CMS or file-based publishing: can suit specific integration, structure or deployment requirements. If changes require a developer, make that dependency and its cost explicit.
Before commissioning a full build, I would ask which requirement the simpler options cannot meet. “More scalable” or “better for SEO” needs an explanation tied to your site, rather than a technology preference.
A proposal comparison matrix for a business website
Copy these rows into your brief. For each supplier, record whether the item is included, optional, excluded or unresolved; the evidence they will deliver; its owner and cost. Resolve essential requirements first. A high combined score cannot compensate for nobody being able to publish an urgent correction.
| Decision | What the proposal should cover | How I would accept the work |
|---|---|---|
| Pages and content | Page types, content quantity, languages and responsibility for copy and images. | Review a real page of each type, with long content and the agreed language versions. |
| Editing | Editable fields, permissions, drafts, previews and recovery of changes. | A team member updates a service and publishes an article without changing the design or using an administrator account. |
| Contact | Channel, destination, form fields if needed and error behaviour. | Complete a test enquiry on mobile and confirm receipt at the agreed destination. |
| Migration | URL inventory, retained content and required redirects. | Visit the agreed old URLs and verify destinations, internal links, canonicals and language links. |
| Usability and performance | Devices, keyboard navigation, test content and measurement conditions. | Complete reading, menu and contact journeys without clipping; record agreed measurements and limits. |
| Handover and exit | Accounts, transferable code or configuration, content, licences and instructions. | Another authorised person can edit and publish; an export or backup is checked outside the original environment. |
An example that exposes differences between quotes
Hypothetical example: a company needs six business pages and a blog in English and Spanish. Marketing publishes articles; management approves service changes. Existing URLs need to be retained. Visitors contact the business through WhatsApp. A shop, customer portal, professional translation and ongoing copywriting are excluded unless quoted separately.
Proposal A includes design and initial content entry, but every new page needs technical work. Proposal B includes a CMS with content types, permissions and training. A may fit if changes are rare and someone can make them. B may fit a team that publishes frequently. The difference should appear in the quote and editing demonstration before launch.
For acceptance, I would ask marketing to create a draft with a long title, an image and links; have management review the intended version; and check that the published content preserves the layout and link to the other language. If prior approval is required, an editorial account must not be able to bypass it. These are requirements to implement and test, not features I assume every CMS provides.
Deliverables and exclusions to put in writing
The first release should identify the page map, approved designs, content types, populated pages, review environment and publishing configuration. I would also specify the verification report, editorial training and operating instructions.
Clarify who supplies copy, translations, photographs and legal text; how many revision rounds are included; who configures measurement; and who approves the materials. Rankings, advertising and regular content production are not included merely because a proposal promises an “optimised website”.
If URLs change, ask for an old-to-new map, permanent redirects where appropriate, updated internal links and a sitemap. Google's site migration documentation provides a reference for that review. Following it does not guarantee rankings. I would not approve a migration by looking only at the new homepage.
Ownership: what you can retain and keep using
The business should control its domain and the relevant service accounts. Document administrators, billing, source repository, design files and licences. A password or a ZIP file does not establish that another team can keep operating the website.
For example, Webflow's code export documentation says export requires a paid Workspace and excludes the CMS and other site functionality. Forms and search do not automatically work on the exported site either. If leaving the platform is a requirement, the proposal needs to describe the rebuilding work involved.
For a custom solution, I would ask for a publishing demonstration using a business-controlled account and a recovery check against the agreed backup. For a hosted platform, check account transfer, available exports and features that depend on an active subscription. The software total-cost model helps include that transition.
Compare implementation and maintenance separately
Request separate items for discovery, design, development or configuration, content entry and migration, testing, launch and training. Additional languages, page types, integrations or inconsistent source content change the work. Page count alone does not explain the cost.
For operations, identify domain renewal, hosting, CMS, extensions, form services, backups and support. WordPress is distributed under GPLv2 or later; that licence does not make implementation or maintenance free. For Webflow, check the required plan against its current official pricing: site features, editorial capabilities and add-ons need to fit the intended use. Sources checked on October 29, 2026; these are not prices for my services.
Compare the same period and assumptions for traffic, languages and editors. Record currency, taxes, renewals and billing terms for each licence. An unresolved cost is not zero. Separate corrections against agreed requirements, updates, support and new pages or features; assign owners and coverage without assuming round-the-clock support.
What I need to assess your website
Send the current URL if there is one, the site's purpose, page types, languages, who will edit it and any essential integration. Include content readiness, the target date and its reason, and budget constraints. If you have proposals already, share the scope differences without credentials or customer records.
I can review which parts fit an existing solution and which need custom development. If you need help assessing the options before selecting a supplier, see my technical leadership work. You can also tell me about the project.