Assess whether past performance will score or be deemed not relevant (b017f3)

SITUATION After a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year, shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps is what capture manager can touch in a mid-tier integrator bidding a DoD IDIQ task order. Government RFP will live with Past performance will score versus Be deemed not relevant on this Compliance and Cyber Requirements file.

DECISION Capture manager in a mid-tier integrator bidding a DoD IDIQ task order must choose Past performance will score / Be deemed not relevant using shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps after a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year.

HYPOTHESES TO TEST 1. Authorize Past performance will score now; shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps already has the discriminator after a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year. 2. Keep Be deemed not relevant in force until shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps is completed after a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year for capture manager. 3. Treat shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps as Past performance will score because both readings appear after a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year. 4. Refuse a Government RFP close: capture manager does not have the decision past performance will score turns on in shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps.

ANALYSIS REQUIRED 1. Compare teaming and past-performance claims to what shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps attaches. 2. Normalize pricing and exceptions against the solicitation that governs past performance will score. 3. Score competitive posture if capture manager pursues, partners, or no-bids. 4. For this Government RFP Compliance and Cyber Requirements file, read shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps against a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year and write the one fact that would move past performance will score for capture manager.

RECOMMENDATION Choose Past performance will score / Be deemed not relevant on this Government RFP / Compliance and Cyber Requirements packet (shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps after a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year). If shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps cannot force a Government RFP label under Compliance and Cyber Requirements, stop. Do not invent missing evidence a mid-tier integrator bidding a DoD IDIQ task order does not have.

COMMAND RETURNS - Bottom-line Government RFP option on past performance will score, then the evidence in shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps, then the action for capture manager - Hypothesis scorecard against shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps: supported / rejected / untestable - Compliance and Cyber Requirements finding in shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps that a second reviewer can re-perform - Missing page in shall-statement compliance matrix with gaps after a data-rights assertion the customer already rejected last year, if any