<!-- Powered by BMAD™ Core -->

# Review Simulation Task

## Purpose

- Simulate government evaluator review process to identify proposal weaknesses
- Evaluate proposal content against Section M criteria
- Identify compliance gaps and areas for improvement
- Provide structured feedback for proposal enhancement
- Reduce risk of negative evaluation findings

## Usage Scenarios

### Scenario 1: Section-Level Review

1. **Section Selection**: Choose specific proposal section for review
2. **Criteria Mapping**: Identify applicable evaluation criteria
3. **Evaluation Simulation**: Score section against criteria
4. **Improvement Recommendations**: Generate specific enhancement suggestions

### Scenario 2: Full Proposal Evaluation

1. **Evaluation Planning**: Establish review approach for entire proposal
2. **Comprehensive Review**: Evaluate all sections against criteria
3. **Findings Compilation**: Aggregate strengths, weaknesses, and gaps
4. **Strategic Recommendations**: Provide prioritized improvement plan

## Task Instructions

### 1. Evaluation Preparation

**Preparation Process**:

1. **Evaluation Criteria Analysis**:
   - Extract Section M evaluation factors and subfactors
   - Identify scoring methodology (adjectival, numerical, etc.)
   - Determine relative importance of criteria
   - Map criteria to proposal sections

2. **Review Team Setup**:
   - Define review roles (technical, management, past performance)
   - Establish scoring guidelines and standards
   - Create evaluation worksheets
   - Set up review documentation process

3. **Baseline Establishment**:
   - Determine minimum acceptable scores
   - Identify critical success factors
   - Establish evaluation priorities
   - Define "must win" criteria

4. **Competitive Context**:
   - Consider likely competitor approaches
   - Identify areas requiring differentiation
   - Determine competitive benchmark standards
   - Assess relative strengths and weaknesses

### 2. Evaluation Simulation Process

**Simulation Methodology**:

1. **Pink Team Review** (Early Compliance Check):
   - Verify requirement coverage from compliance matrix
   - Check section alignment with RFQ structure
   - Identify missing content or requirements
   - Assess initial win theme integration
   - Provide early course correction guidance

2. **Red Team Review** (Evaluator Simulation):
   - Score proposal using Section M criteria
   - Identify strengths, weaknesses, risks, and deficiencies (SWaRD)
   - Evaluate technical approach feasibility
   - Assess management approach effectiveness
   - Review past performance relevance and quality
   - Provide detailed scoring rationale

3. **Gold Team Review** (Executive Assessment):
   - Evaluate overall proposal strategy effectiveness
   - Assess executive summary impact
   - Review key discriminator presentation
   - Evaluate proposal from senior decision-maker perspective
   - Provide high-level strategic guidance

4. **Final Review** (Pre-submission Verification):
   - Confirm all previous review findings addressed
   - Verify compliance with all requirements
   - Conduct final quality and consistency check
   - Ensure all evaluation criteria are addressed
   - Provide submission readiness assessment

### 3. Findings Documentation

**Documentation Components**:

1. **Strengths Identification**:
   - Document positive discriminators
   - Highlight effective win theme integration
   - Note areas exceeding requirements
   - Identify compelling evidence and proof points

2. **Weakness Documentation**:
   - Flag compliance gaps or omissions
   - Identify unclear or unconvincing content
   - Note areas lacking evidence or proof
   - Highlight potential evaluation concerns

3. **Risk Assessment**:
   - Identify solution or approach risks
   - Note areas with insufficient risk mitigation
   - Flag potential pricing or resource risks
   - Document compliance or responsiveness risks

4. **Deficiency Reporting**:
   - Document non-compliant elements
   - Identify missing required content
   - Flag incorrect or misaligned responses
   - Note formatting or structural issues

### 4. Improvement Recommendations

**Recommendation Process**:

1. **Prioritized Enhancement Plan**:
   - Rank findings by impact on evaluation
   - Identify critical vs. nice-to-have improvements
   - Create actionable improvement tasks
   - Establish timeline for revisions

2. **Section-Specific Guidance**:
   - Provide targeted recommendations by section
   - Suggest specific content enhancements
   - Recommend additional evidence or proof points
   - Propose structural or organization improvements

3. **Strategic Adjustments**:
   - Recommend win theme refinements
   - Suggest competitive differentiation enhancements
   - Propose emphasis shifts based on evaluation priorities
   - Identify opportunities for strategic messaging

4. **Implementation Support**:
   - Provide examples or templates for improvements
   - Offer specific language suggestions
   - Recommend graphic or visual enhancements
   - Create revision checklists for authors

## Best Practices

- **Evaluator Mindset**: Review from the perspective of government evaluators, not proposal authors
- **Criteria Focus**: Base all evaluations strictly on Section M criteria
- **Evidence-Based**: Provide specific examples for all findings
- **Constructive Approach**: Frame weaknesses with actionable improvement recommendations
- **Prioritized Feedback**: Focus on highest-impact improvements first
- **Objective Assessment**: Evaluate based on what's actually in the proposal, not what authors intended
- **Comprehensive Coverage**: Review all sections against all applicable criteria
- **Documentation Discipline**: Maintain detailed records of all findings and recommendations

## Integration Points

- **Compliance Matrix Generation**: Verifies requirements coverage
- **Win Theme Development**: Assesses theme effectiveness and integration
- **Proposal Content Generation**: Provides feedback for content improvement
- **Submission Checklist**: Ensures all compliance issues are addressed

## Related Agents

- **Evaluator Simulator**: Primary agent for this task