rfp-response

Drafts evaluation-ready U.S. federal RFP responses across all standard proposal volumes (cover letter, technical, cost/price, reps and certs). Enforces FAR compliance, CPARS references, and Section L/M alignment. Use when preparing federal solicitation submissions, responding to government RFPs, or drafting procurement bids.

11 stars

Best use case

rfp-response is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.

Drafts evaluation-ready U.S. federal RFP responses across all standard proposal volumes (cover letter, technical, cost/price, reps and certs). Enforces FAR compliance, CPARS references, and Section L/M alignment. Use when preparing federal solicitation submissions, responding to government RFPs, or drafting procurement bids.

Teams using rfp-response should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.

When to use this skill

  • You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.

When not to use this skill

  • You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
  • You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.

Installation

Claude Code / Cursor / Codex

$curl -o ~/.claude/skills/rfp-response/SKILL.md --create-dirs "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/CaseMark/skills/main/skills/legal/rfp-response/SKILL.md"

Manual Installation

  1. Download SKILL.md from GitHub
  2. Place it in .claude/skills/rfp-response/SKILL.md inside your project
  3. Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill

How rfp-response Compares

Feature / Agentrfp-responseStandard Approach
Platform SupportNot specifiedLimited / Varies
Context Awareness High Baseline
Installation ComplexityUnknownN/A

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this skill do?

Drafts evaluation-ready U.S. federal RFP responses across all standard proposal volumes (cover letter, technical, cost/price, reps and certs). Enforces FAR compliance, CPARS references, and Section L/M alignment. Use when preparing federal solicitation submissions, responding to government RFPs, or drafting procurement bids.

Where can I find the source code?

You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.

SKILL.md Source

# RFP Response

Produces a complete federal proposal structured to FAR requirements and scored against typical source selection criteria.

## Prerequisites

Collect before drafting:

1. **RFP package** — solicitation number, title, SOW, Section L/M instructions
2. **Contracting Officer** — name, title, agency, address
3. **Offeror profile** — legal name, UEI/CAGE, NAICS, small business certifications, SAM.gov status
4. **Past performance** — 3–5 relevant contracts with CO/PM contacts, values, CPARS ratings
5. **Key personnel** — resumes, clearance levels
6. **Cost data** — indirect/fringe rates, labor categories and rates, subcontractor quotes

## Quick Start

1. Parse Section L (formatting) and Section M (evaluation factors) — these control everything
2. Build a compliance matrix mapping every SOW/Section L requirement to a proposal section
3. Draft volumes in order: cover letter → technical → cost/price → reps and certs
4. Verify every capability claim cites past performance, test results, or published research
5. Confirm all FAR/CAS citations against current regulations before submission

## Proposal Volumes

### 1. Cover Letter (≤2 pages)

Include: addressee (named CO), solicitation reference, agency-specific mission knowledge, qualifications with CPARS ratings, compliance affirmation for all mandatory requirements, validity period (per solicitation, typically 60–120 days), authorized signatory with binding authority.

### 2. Executive Summary (≤3 pages)

- Restate requirements interpretively — connect SOW to agency mission (do not paraphrase)
- Differentiated solution with named methods, partnerships, or innovations
- Quantified value proposition tied to documented past performance
- Key personnel highlights and organizational depth

### 3. Technical Approach

Mirror SOW structure — one response per major task. For each task address:

- Methods, tools, technologies, and rationale for selection
- Resource requirements, dependencies, GFE/GFI needs
- Integration points with agency systems or other contractors
- Applicable standards (cite by name and number)
- QA/QC protocols, acceptance criteria, corrective action process
- Risk identification with specific mitigation plans
- Technical diagrams (professional quality, labeled, referenced in text)

### 4. Management Plan

**Org structure:** management philosophy, org chart with key personnel (% time, reporting lines, sub interfaces), PM authority and span of control.

**Resumes (consistent format):** education, certifications, clearances, government contract experience, measurable accomplishments.

**Schedule:** milestones, deliverables, dependencies, critical path. Gantt or PERT format with historical duration estimates.

**Administration:** invoicing method/frequency, progress reporting cadence (CDRL-compliant), change control process, COR/COTR communication protocols, FAR clause procedural responses.

**Staffing:** recruitment plan, retention approach, succession plan, subcontractor oversight.

### 5. Past Performance

Per reference (3–5 projects):

| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Client / agency | Name, federal/state/local |
| Contract number | Including vehicle (GWAC, IDIQ, etc.) |
| Type and value | FFP/CPFF/T&M; total value |
| Period and scope | Dates; elements paralleling current SOW |
| CPARS ratings | By evaluation factor; "Satisfactory" or above |
| Outcomes | Quantified savings, defect rates, on-time %, awards |
| Challenges | Obstacles encountered and corrective actions |
| Reference contact | Name, title, phone, email (verified, willing) |

If limited prime experience: include key personnel track records and teaming partner experience with clear role delineation. Address any negative performance with corrective action narrative.

### 6. Cost/Price Breakdown

Structure by government cost element:

| Element | Detail |
|---|---|
| Direct Labor | LCAT, hours by year/task, rate (loaded/unloaded) |
| Fringe / Overhead / G&A | Rate %, allocation base, pool composition |
| Materials | Itemized with vendor quotes for major purchases |
| Subcontracts | Same breakdown as prime, per subcontractor |
| Travel | Trips, destinations, duration, FTR per diem |
| ODCs | Software, communications, printing, shipping |
| Fee/Profit | Justified by risk, complexity, capital investment |

- Derive labor hours from historical actuals, industry standards, or bottom-up analysis — no unsupported round numbers
- Apply index-based escalation (ECI, CPI) with cited sources for multi-year contracts
- All costs must be allocable, allowable, and reasonable per FAR Part 31

### 7. Cost Supporting Documentation

- [ ] Basis of Estimate narrative per major cost element
- [ ] Labor rate documentation (payroll, salary surveys, market data)
- [ ] Vendor quotes (current, ≤6 months; multiple for major items)
- [ ] Indirect rate documentation: FPRA/PREA or rate build-up with CAS disclosure
- [ ] Escalation factor support with index citations
- [ ] Subcontractor proposals with competitive selection documentation
- [ ] Accounting system description; CAS Disclosure Statements if applicable

### 8. Representations and Certifications

- **SAM.gov** — confirm UEI, CAGE, NAICS, size standards current as of submission
- **Small business** — verify against NAICS size standard; SBA cert current if WOSB/SDVOSB/HUBZone
- **Tax compliance** — no delinquent federal tax liabilities (coordinate with finance)
- **Executive compensation** — disclose if ≥80% federal revenue and >$25M
- **Procurement certs** — OCI disclosures, conflict of interest, applicable statutes/EOs
- **Signatory** — officer with actual binding authority; verify before execution

> **Legal risk:** False certifications trigger termination, suspension/debarment, civil penalties, and criminal prosecution. Escalate any compliance uncertainty to legal counsel.

## Pitfalls

- **Section L violations disqualify** — every formatting requirement is mandatory; page limits are strict
- **No marketing language** — every claim must cite evidence (past performance, certifications, test results)
- **Jargon balance** — precise terminology but accessible to non-specialist evaluators
- **Graphics standards** — all diagrams must be professional, labeled, captioned, and cited in text
- **Citation verification** — confirm all FAR, CAS, and statutory references against current FAR/DFARS before submission
- **Jurisdiction** — U.S. federal procurement only; apply DFARS supplements for DoD solicitations

Related Skills

tracking-treatment-response

11
from CaseMark/skills

Monitors treatment response using imaging criteria, biomarkers, and clinical assessment with documentation. Use when assessing treatment response, documenting disease status, or tracking progression.

measuring-tumor-response

11
from CaseMark/skills

Applies RECIST 1.1 and iRECIST criteria for tumor measurement and treatment response assessment. Use when measuring tumor response, applying RECIST criteria, or documenting treatment effects.

managing-rapid-response-nursing

11
from CaseMark/skills

Structures rapid response team activation criteria and nursing documentation during rapid response events. Use when activating rapid response, documenting RRT events, or recognizing deterioration.

managing-privacy-breach-response

11
from CaseMark/skills

Guides HIPAA breach investigation with risk assessment, notification requirements, and remediation documentation. Use when managing data breaches, assessing breach risk, or documenting breach response.

managing-pandemic-response

11
from CaseMark/skills

Structures pandemic response planning with surge capacity, resource allocation, and communication protocols. Use when planning pandemic response, managing surge operations, or coordinating emergency health responses.

nov-response

11
from CaseMark/skills

Drafts formal responses to governmental Notices of Violation, covering acknowledgment, factual timeline, legal defenses, mitigation, and proposed corrective action. Use when responding to environmental enforcement actions, regulatory citations, compliance violations, or governmental NOVs from agencies including EPA, OSHA, state environmental departments, or local code enforcement.

interrogatory-response-summaries

11
from CaseMark/skills

Generates structured summaries of interrogatory responses in commercial litigation, extracting key facts, objections, evasions, patterns, and inconsistencies per interrogatory. Use when analyzing opposing party interrogatory answers, spotting discovery gaps, or preparing for depositions.

incident-response-playbook

11
from CaseMark/skills

Drafts incident response plans and scenario playbooks for U.S. legal organizations, aligning NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 2 phases with ABA Model Rules 1.1/1.4/1.6 and privilege preservation. Use when creating or updating an incident response plan, breach response policy, ransomware playbook, or regulatory notification checklist. Trigger keywords: incident response, playbook, data breach, ransomware, cybersecurity policy, NIST 800-61.

incident-response-plan

11
from CaseMark/skills

Drafts incident response plans and playbooks for legal organizations, adapting NIST SP 800-61 to law firm contexts including privilege preservation, ethics obligations, and state breach notification compliance. Use when creating IR plans, cybersecurity playbooks, breach response policies, or data incident procedures for law firms or legal departments.

ca-discovery-response

11
from CaseMark/skills

Drafts code-compliant California responses to Requests for Production (CCP § 2031.010 et seq.) for Superior Court. Use when the user mentions California RFP responses, CCP 2031, discovery objections, compliance statements, inability to comply, privilege objections, Bates numbering, verification requirements, or responding to document requests in California state court. California Superior Court only — not for federal court without substantial modification.

appellees-response-brief

11
from CaseMark/skills

Drafts an Appellee's Response Brief defending the trial court's judgment and arguing for affirmance. Covers standard of review analysis, record-based rebuttal, authority distinction, and procedural compliance. Trigger when drafting appellee briefs, response briefs, answering briefs, or defending trial court judgments on appeal.

appellee-response-brief

11
from CaseMark/skills

Drafts appellee response briefs for federal and state appellate courts, exploiting standards of review and record evidence to defend trial court decisions. Trigger when the user needs to respond to an appellant's opening brief or defend a favorable lower court ruling on appeal.