Assess whether the SBIR data-rights assertions are too aggressive (3ecf44)

SITUATION Price-to-win analyst is responsible for the SBIR data-rights assertions in a new prime parsing a 400-page Section L/M, using past-performance recency and relevance scorecard as the only working extract. A data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year is what reset the timeline for this Government RFP Performance and Teaming file.

DECISION Price-to-win analyst in a new prime parsing a 400-page Section L/M must choose Pursue / Pursue with conditions / Partner / No-bid using past-performance recency and relevance scorecard after a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year.

HYPOTHESES TO TEST 1. The population in past-performance recency and relevance scorecard is the one a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year named, so Pursue follows for this Performance and Teaming file. 2. The population in past-performance recency and relevance scorecard is adjacent only to a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year; Pursue with conditions is the honest Government RFP call. 3. A new prime parsing a 400-page Section L/M already contained a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year before past-performance recency and relevance scorecard arrived; no new Performance and Teaming path. 4. Provenance on past-performance recency and relevance scorecard after a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year is broken; do not pick Pursue or Pursue with conditions yet.

ANALYSIS REQUIRED 1. Map Section L/M requirements in past-performance recency and relevance scorecard to evaluator notes after a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year. 2. Compare teaming and past-performance claims to what past-performance recency and relevance scorecard attaches. 3. Normalize pricing and exceptions against the solicitation that governs the SBIR data-rights assertions. 4. For this Government RFP Performance and Teaming file, read past-performance recency and relevance scorecard against a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year and write the one fact that would move the SBIR data-rights assertions for price-to-win analyst.

RECOMMENDATION Choose Pursue / Pursue with conditions / Partner / No-bid on this Government RFP / Performance and Teaming packet (past-performance recency and relevance scorecard after a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year). The follow-on Performance and Teaming action is what price-to-win analyst does next: implement the option, assign an owner, and log the missing fact.

COMMAND RETURNS - Bottom-line Government RFP option on the SBIR data-rights assertions, then the evidence in past-performance recency and relevance scorecard, then the action for price-to-win analyst - Hypothesis scorecard against past-performance recency and relevance scorecard: supported / rejected / untestable - Named option among Pursue, Pursue with conditions, Partner and the fact that kills the others - Owner and next date for price-to-win analyst in a new prime parsing a 400-page Section L/M