Use case

Build this RFP review workflow.Prepare bid/no-bid review from cited public RFP facts.

See the source-backed workflow, example output, checks, and human-review notes.Prepare source-backed bid/no-bid inputs from public RFP packages: dates, obligations, risks, evaluation cues, and open questions.

Who this helps

A bid/no-bid meeting works better when the team starts from cited facts instead of scattered impressions.

What problem this use case solves

Early pursuit reviews can miss important dates, submission rules, attachment requirements, evaluation criteria, or ambiguous instructions when the package has not been organized.

How SourceFlag helps

Builds a first-pass view of deadlines, requirements, risks, and source-backed questions.
Lets reviewers ask grounded questions against the public package.
Creates review flags for human decision points.
Moves the result into kickoff notes if the pursuit continues.

When to use this workflow

Use before a pursuit meeting when leadership needs cited facts separated from capture judgment.
Use when due dates, evaluation factors, attachments, staffing cues, and unresolved risks need a single review surface.
Use when the team needs to decide what remains open before committing proposal effort.

Copyable table

Synthetic bid/no-bid review inputs

Example facts and decision cues for human pursuit review.

Synthetic bid/no-bid review inputs: Example facts and decision cues for human pursuit review.
Review factor	Source	Evidence	Owner	Decision cue
Due date	Cover page; Section L, p. 4	Proposal due June 14, 2026 at 2:00 PM ET.	Proposal Manager	Can the team meet the schedule with review time?
Evaluation factors	Section M, pp. 3-6	Technical approach is more important than past performance.	Capture Lead	Can the team address the highest-weighted factors?
Pricing workbook	Attachment J.2	Official workbook required with protected formulas.	Pricing Owner	Confirm pricing capacity and workbook handling before bid decision.

TSV copy block

Review factor	Source	Evidence	Owner	Decision cue
Due date	Cover page; Section L, p. 4	Proposal due June 14, 2026 at 2:00 PM ET.	Proposal Manager	Can the team meet the schedule with review time?
Evaluation factors	Section M, pp. 3-6	Technical approach is more important than past performance.	Capture Lead	Can the team address the highest-weighted factors?
Pricing workbook	Attachment J.2	Official workbook required with protected formulas.	Pricing Owner	Confirm pricing capacity and workbook handling before bid decision.

What to verify before relying on output

Verify Q&A, site visit, amendment acknowledgment, portal, and proposal due dates.
Check evaluation factors, required volumes, past performance rules, pricing forms, and submission mechanics against the source.
Separate cited facts from human judgment about fit, win strategy, staffing, and pricing capacity.
Assign a human owner and reviewer before using the output for drafting, kickoff, or pursuit decisions.
Keep restricted, controlled, non-public, private capture, pricing strategy, regulated personal, or sensitive teaming/customer material out of the workspace.

Bid/no-bid input

Questions due May 29; proposal due June 14; pricing workbook required

Review item

Questions due May 29; proposal due June 14; pricing workbook required

Source

Cover page, Section L, Attachment J.2

Status

Needs review

Human review note

Decision cue: confirm workbook formulas and submission method.

Buyer notes

Use SourceFlag as preparation, not as a pursuit decision-maker.
Capture, pricing, teaming, and leadership judgment remain human responsibilities.

Product proof

Inspect SourceFlag before choosing a plan.

Source the facts. Flag the risks. Review the product workflow and synthetic sample output before bringing a public solicitation package into a workspace.

See Product See Sample Output

Start from a clearer source-backed workspace.

U.S.-based business customers only. Public and unclassified solicitation materials only. Human review required.

Start a Workspace Compare Pricing