A Request for Proposal (RFP) for Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) and Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) services isn’t just a bureaucratic box check. As a GEO agency, we love how a great RFP sets the stage for current state and client goals. Here are the 10 sections we wish every RFP had: purpose, key dates, company background, current-state disclosure, scope of work, a vendor questionnaire, commercial terms, proposal format, a weighted evaluation rubric, and terms and conditions. Below we provide tips for how to make each section valuable to the agencies you’re asking to participate. PLUS, a copy/paste prompt you can use in ChatGPT or Claude to draft it from your own notes.
According to GNW Consulting and Demand Metric’s 2026 State of GEO in B2B Marketing report, based on 225 B2B marketing and revenue leaders surveyed in Q1 2026, 92% of B2B organizations are now investing in GEO, and a structured RFP is the fastest way to keep that spend from going to a repositioned SEO shop.
The full, ready-to-use RFP template this post is built from is free to download here, no form required. Copy it, trim what doesn’t apply, and use the prompts below to fill in each section.
For ease, you can also download the RFP and then prompt: “I want to create a GEO RFP from the attached sample. Use this page (https://gnwconsulting.com/resource-center/how-to-build-an-rfp-for-aeo-and-geo-services/) with recommendations to create a version for my company. Use previous context to fill in what you can and ask me any questions where you’re unsure of the answer.”
Key Takeaways
- A GEO/AEO RFP needs 10 sections: purpose, key dates, about us, current state, scope of work, vendor questionnaire, commercial, proposal format, evaluation criteria, and terms and conditions.
- 92% of B2B organizations are investing in GEO, according to GNW Consulting and Demand Metric’s 2026 State of GEO in B2B Marketing report (225 respondents, Q1 2026).
- The vendor questionnaire is the section that separates real GEO/AEO practitioners from repositioned SEO shops. It should press on team, proof, methodology, measurement, and fit.
- Off-site source strategy (industry publications, review sites, Wikipedia, high-authority third-party content) deserves as much scrutiny in the scope of work as on-site content.
- A workable starting evaluation rubric weights methodology and proof at 25% each, measurement and team at 15% each, and fit and commercials at 10% each.
- A formal RFP is not always the right process. Below a certain spend and vendor shortlist size, a structured scorecard gets you the same rigor faster.
What is an RFP for GEO/AEO services?
An RFP for GEO/AEO services is a structured document a company issues to compare vendors who can improve its visibility, accuracy, and citation frequency across generative engines (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Microsoft Copilot) and answer engines (Google AI Overviews, featured answers, voice and assistant results). It sets the same starting conditions for every vendor, the same current-state data, the same scope categories, and the same questions, so responses can be scored against each other instead of against each vendor’s own pitch deck.
The 10 sections of a GEO/AEO RFP, with a prompt for each
1. Purpose of the GEO RFP
State what you’re trying to accomplish in one or two sentences. There are considerable differences in our delivery when we build a GEO/AEO strategy from scratch versus audit and improve existing efforts, or augment your internal SEO and content team. Name the business outcome you actually care about (LLM-referred pipeline, brand accuracy in AI answers, category ownership, defensive share of voice), not just “improve visibility.”
Prompt:
“Write the purpose section of a GEO/AEO RFP for my company. We’re trying to [build our strategy from scratch / audit existing efforts / augment our internal team]. Our main business objective for this engagement is [pipeline, brand accuracy, category ownership, etc.]. Keep it to two or three sentences.”
2. Key dates
Lay out the RFP timeline: issue date, questions due, answers circulated to all bidders, proposals due, shortlist and vendor presentations, selection decision, and target engagement start. A typical GEO/AEO RFP runs two to four weeks from issue to proposal deadline, plus one to two weeks for scoring and reference checks.
Prompt:
“Build a key dates table for a GEO/AEO RFP. We want to issue it on [date] and start the engagement by [date]. Work backward and fill in questions-due, proposals-due, shortlist/presentations, and selection-decision dates, leaving two to four weeks for vendors to respond and one to two weeks for scoring.”
3. About us
Describe your company, what you sell (we need product-level data here), who you serve, your primary objective for this engagement, roles and responsibilities, and, critically, geographies and languages in scope. Product, geography and language are the biggest missing levers we see. There is an explosion of prompts to create, manage and monitor as geographies expand into different languages and across a diverse product set. Another big component in terms of ownership is your existing marketing team structure. Working through in-house SEO or content function is very different from driving updates with a single person.
Prompt:
“Write the ‘About Us’ section of a GEO/AEO RFP. Company: [description, industry, size]. What we sell and who we serve: [products/services, ICP]. Focus on the specifics of product names and the detailed data points we’ve established for our ICP. Also include geographies and languages we serve: [list]. Internal owner and existing team: [name/role, and whether there’s an in-house SEO or content function].”
4. Current state
Describe honestly what you already know about your AI visibility, existing content assets, current SEO status, martech and analytics stack, and known constraints. Something that makes GNW’s GEO practice stand out is our experience in RevOps consulting. We tie every GEO initiative back to revenue, but need to know what kind of stack we can leverage to do so.
Prompt:
“I’m writing the current-state section of a GEO/AEO RFP. Here’s what I know: our AI/organic visibility today is [notes], our existing content assets are attached in a GA4 90 day website report [attach], our current SEO status is in the attached [SEO data source – SemRush, Ahrefs], our martech stack is [CMS, GA4, GSC, GEO tools, CRM/MAP], and our known constraints are [dev resources, legal review, budget]. Organize this into a clear disclosure section and flag anywhere it’s too vague for a vendor to scope against.”
5. Scope of work
Mark each item required, preferred, or out of scope: strategy and baseline (including prompt and query research mapped to buyer journey, not just head keywords), on-site optimization (content structure, answerability, schema, crawlability), off-site and source strategy (the third-party publications, review sites, and community platforms models actually cite), content (strategy, prioritization, production or optimization, repurposing into formats like video), measurement and reporting (unified metrics and attribution or a stated proxy), and tooling and integration (GEO measurement platforms, CRM/MAP integration). Off-site and source strategy is the item buyers most often underweight. Large language models cite third-party sources heavily, so a vendor whose plan is entirely on-site content is missing the mechanism that actually drives citations.
Prompt:
“Write the scope of work section of a GEO/AEO RFP covering six areas: strategy and baseline, on-site optimization, off-site and source strategy, content, measurement and reporting, and tooling and integration. For each area, list 2-4 specific line items and mark whether they’re Required, Preferred, or Out of scope for us, based on: [describe what you already have in-house vs. what you need from a vendor]. Make sure off-site source strategy gets its own clear subsection, not a throwaway line.”
6. Vendor questionnaire
This is the section that does the real filtering work. It should press on five areas, and the difference between a strong and weak answer is the fastest way to spot a repositioned SEO shop.
Company and team: ask when the vendor began delivering GEO/AEO specifically, as distinct from traditional SEO, and who would actually staff the account by name and seniority, not just the pitch team. This is a huge problem right now. There are a lot of SEO agency founders out promoting their GEO work, but you’ll never work directly with them and they aren’t true practitioners anymore.
Proof: require two to three case studies with real metrics: citation or visibility lift, AI-referred traffic or pipeline, and time-to-impact, with a stated baseline and timeframe. A weak answer is a screenshot of an “AI visibility score” going up with no baseline date and no named client. Ask directly how the vendor demonstrates value where direct revenue attribution isn’t possible, since an honest answer here is a stronger signal than a confident but unsupported one.
Methodology: ask for the actual 30/60/90-day process, how the vendor decides which engines and queries to prioritize, a concrete off-site citation play they’ve run, and how they keep pace as models change month to month. A weak answer describes a generic content calendar; a strong answer names a specific week-one diagnostic.
Measurement: ask which platforms and metrics the vendor uses and what those tools’ limitations are. A vendor who volunteers a limitation, like most GEO platforms having limits on prompt quantities, is more trustworthy than one who claims no gaps.
Fit and IP: ask what’s proprietary versus off-the-shelf, how they work alongside an in-house team without duplicating effort, and who owns the strategy, content, data, and tooling configuration if the engagement ends. That last question alone eliminates vendors who build engagements designed to be hard to leave.
Prompt:
“Write a vendor questionnaire for a GEO/AEO RFP with five sections: company and team, proof, methodology, measurement, and fit and IP. Include 2-3 specific questions per section, matching this pattern: ask vendors to name when they started GEO/AEO work specifically (not SEO), require case studies with stated baselines and timeframes, ask for their actual 30/60/90-day process and a concrete off-site citation example, ask what tools they use and where those tools fall short, and ask who owns the strategy and data if the engagement ends. Make the questions hard for a repositioned SEO shop to answer convincingly.”
7. Commercial
State your preferred engagement model (retainer, fixed-scope project, or time and materials), and require vendors to provide pricing by phase or workstream, the assumptions behind the pricing, minimum term, what triggers additional cost, and estimated hours or FTE by role.
Prompt:
“Write the commercial section of a GEO/AEO RFP. Our preferred engagement model is [retainer / fixed-scope / time and materials]. Require vendors to break down pricing by phase or workstream, state their assumptions, specify minimum term, list what triggers additional cost, and provide estimated hours or FTE by role.”
8. Proposal format and submission
Set a page limit (excluding case studies) and require the proposal to cover: executive summary, proposed approach and scope response, questionnaire responses, team and staffing, timeline and milestones, commercials, and references. State the submission contact, format, and deadline.
Prompt:
“Write the proposal format and submission section of a GEO/AEO RFP. Set a [X]-page limit excluding case studies, require the seven sections: executive summary, scope response, questionnaire responses, team and staffing, timeline, commercials, and references. Submissions go to [contact] by [date/time/time zone] in [format].”
9. Evaluation criteria
Decide the weights before proposals arrive, not after, and score each vendor independently before comparing notes as a group. A workable starting distribution:
- Demonstrated GEO/AEO methodology and depth: 25%
- Proof and results in comparable contexts: 25%
- Measurement and attribution rigor: 15%
- Team quality and staffing: 15%
- Fit with your stack and internal team: 10%
- Commercial value: 10%
Prompt:
“Build a scoring rubric for a GEO/AEO RFP with these weighted categories: methodology and depth (25%), proof and results (25%), measurement and attribution rigor (15%), team quality (15%), fit with our stack (10%), commercial value (10%). For each category, write three scoring criteria on a 1-5 scale so I can score every vendor proposal consistently.”
10. Terms and conditions
State that the RFP does not commit you to award a contract or reimburse proposal costs, that you reserve the right to reject any or all proposals or request clarification, and how submitted materials will be treated (confidential, or per NDA). Add any procurement, legal, or compliance language your organization requires.
Prompt:
“Write standard terms and conditions language for a GEO/AEO RFP: no commitment to award, no reimbursement of proposal costs, the right to reject any or all proposals or request clarification, and confidentiality of submitted materials. Flag anywhere I should loop in legal before sending this out.”
How to score vendor responses once proposals come back
Once proposals are in, score each vendor against the Section 9 rubric independently before discussing as a group. Groups that discuss a proposal before individually scoring it tend to anchor on whoever speaks first, which defeats the purpose of a structured rubric.
Prompt:
“Here are vendor responses to our GEO/AEO RFP questionnaire: [attached]. Score each against these five categories: company/team, proof, methodology, measurement, and fit/IP. Flag anywhere the answer leans on search-ranking language (keywords, backlinks) instead of citation-specific language (source diversity, answerability, extractability), and flag any question they didn’t actually answer.”
Do you need a formal RFP, or can a scorecard work instead?
You need a formal RFP when you’re comparing three or more vendors seriously, the annual contract value is large enough that a wrong pick costs real budget to unwind (roughly $75,000 and up for most mid-market engagements), or the engagement touches brand-sensitive content that legal or executive stakeholders need to sign off on. Below that, a shorter scorecard using the same weighted categories as Section 9, sent as a document or call agenda instead of a formal issuance, gets you comparable rigor without the multi-week timeline. Skip the formal RFP entirely for a trusted existing vendor relationship, spend under roughly $5,000 to $10,000 a month with a short initial term, or a fast pilot meant to generate the case study data a fuller RFP would later require.
Common mistakes buyers make running a GEO/AEO RFP
Asking for a strategy for free. Strong vendors often decline or submit something generic when asked for a full custom strategy in the RFP response, because a real strategy requires access to your data. Ask for methodology and process instead, and save the deep strategic work for the paid engagement.
Treating “AI visibility” as one number. A vendor who reports a single composite score without breaking it down by engine, query intent, or competitive set is giving you a number that’s hard to act on. Require the breakdown in the response itself.
Skipping the off-site question. Buyers who focus the entire RFP on content and technical SEO miss the off-site source strategy that’s actually driving most citation behavior right now.
No named internal owner before the RFP goes out. Name the owner in Section 3 before the RFP is issued, not after a vendor is selected. GNW Consulting and Demand Metric’s 2026 research found unclear ownership is one of the recurring reasons GEO initiatives stall inside B2B organizations.
Download the RFP template
Everything above maps directly to GNW Consulting’s own GEO/AEO RFP template. Download it here, free and open. Fill it in with the prompts above, trim what doesn’t apply to your situation, and send it out.
Frequently Asked Questions
What’s the difference between GEO and AEO?
There is no industry standard to this definition yet. Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) broadly refers to improving visibility and citation frequency in generative AI tools like ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and Gemini. Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) refers to the same goal applied to answer-style search surfaces like Google AI Overviews, featured answers, and voice assistant results. Most B2B RFPs cover both under a single scope because the underlying content and technical work overlaps heavily.
How long should a GEO/AEO RFP be?
Long enough to cover current-state disclosure, scope of work, and a vendor questionnaire, but short enough that vendors can respond without padding. Most GEO/AEO RFPs run five to eight pages before appendices.
Should we require case studies in a GEO/AEO RFP?
Yes, specifically case studies with stated baselines, timeframes, and named metrics like citation lift, AI-referred traffic, or pipeline impact. A vendor unwilling or unable to provide this is a signal worth weighing heavily.
Who should own AI visibility once the RFP process ends?
Assign a single internal owner for the engagement before proposals go out, not after a vendor is selected. GNW Consulting and Demand Metric’s 2026 research found unclear ownership is one of the recurring reasons GEO initiatives stall inside B2B organizations.
Can our existing SEO agency handle GEO/AEO, or do we need a separate vendor?
It depends on whether that agency can show GEO-specific methodology and results, not just SEO results relabeled. Run your existing agency through the same weighted questionnaire and scoring rubric as any other candidate.
Do we need a formal RFP for a small GEO/AEO pilot?
Not usually. Below roughly $5,000 to $10,000 a month with a short initial term, a structured scorecard covering the same categories gets you comparable rigor without the multi-week RFP timeline.
