diff --git a/docs/use-case-evaluation/evaluation-matrix.md b/docs/use-case-evaluation/evaluation-matrix.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..34df85f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/use-case-evaluation/evaluation-matrix.md
@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+# VEDA Auth Solution Evaluation Matrix
+
+The below table refers to the previously [defined auth workflows](https://github.com/NASA-IMPACT/veda-auth-central/blob/main/docs/use-case-evaluation/workflows.md).
+
+Our goal with this evaluation is to find out whether there is a solution that fulfils the workflows while relying on existing community solutions as much as possible,
+only with IaC and durable configuration of the solution.
+
+Building a replicable platform from community-maintained upstream solutions is a principle of the [VEDA Open Source Ecosystem](https://docs.openveda.cloud/open-source-ecosystem/).
+
+The evaluated options are [KeyCloak](https://www.keycloak.org/) and [Apache Airavata Custos](https://airavata.apache.org/custos/), which uses KeyCloak under the hood.
+
+
+## Explanation of the evaluation criteria
+
+1. Can this workflow already be satisfied with this technology without having to *build* new things?
+2. Did we (the NASA VEDA team) *build* this, in contrast to *deploying* a specific configuration of features built by an upstream community?
+3. Level of effort to implement and document the workflow solution, in developer sprints (2 weeks)
+4. Ongoing effort required to maintain this workflow in the future. This includes keeping up with upstream releases.
+5. How easy is it to extend and modify this workflow in the future?
+
+
+## Explanation of the values
+
+To evaluate these workflows, each cell in the below shall be given
+
+1. yes/no
+2. yes/no
+3. Estimated number of developer sprints (2 weeks)
+4. Numerical score (1-5, where 5 is best)
+5. Numerical score (1-5, where 5 is best)
+
+## Matrix
+
+| [Workflow](https://github.com/NASA-IMPACT/veda-auth-central/blob/main/docs/use-case-evaluation/workflows.md) | (E1) Already implemented | (E2) Built by VEDA | (E4) Level of Effort | (E3) Ongoing Maintenance Effort | (E6) Ease of future change | 
+| - | - | - | - | - | - |
+| W1 KeyCloak |  |  |  |  |  |
+| W1 Custos |  |  |  |  |  |
+| W2 KeyCloak |  |  |  |  |  |
+| W2 Custos |  |  |  |  |  |
+| W3 KeyCloak |  |  |  |  |  |
+| W3 Custos |  |  |  |  |  |
+| W4 KeyCloak |  |  |  |  |  |
+| W4 Custos |  |  |  |  |  |
+
+## Cost estimates
+
+The evaluation criteria include level of effort to implement. This is both for project costs but even more for project planning - how much will it take to get to a solution for a workflow. 
+This assumes that there is only a smaller additional effort required for implementing a concrete use case that makes use of a given workflow.
+
+It seems like there will be no other costs than developer time:
+1. It seems like there will be no subscription costs - there seem to be different ways for us to get around paying for a new CILogon subscription https://github.com/NASA-IMPACT/veda-auth-central/issues/139
+2. All solutions are/will be open-source, so no license fees either.
+3. Infrastructure costs should also be negligible - probably some low-powered EC2 instances for the KeyCloak and maybe Custos services + UI, etc.