RFP Accelerator — Walkthrough for Jack Jacobs

Step 1 of 8
Step 1 of 8

Load Your RFP

Upload or paste any Aerospace & Defense solicitation document.

RFP Acceleratorrfp-demo.pyonair.com
✓
RFP Document Loaded
Advanced Tactical Systems (ATS) Solicitation — 14 pages
▶ Analyze
Step 2 of 8

One Click, Under a Second

The analysis completes instantly — every requirement extracted and scored.

Analysis Complete0.8 seconds
14
Requirements
8
Grounded
6
Refused
2
High Risk
7
Medium
5
Low
Step 3 of 8

Risk-Scored Requirements

Every requirement color-coded by risk level — see exposure at a glance.

Requirements14 extracted
HIGH SECRET-cleared engineering personnel for classified defense platforms
HIGH Maintain AS9100 Rev D certification throughout period of performance
MED ITAR export control compliance
MED Monthly status reports per CDRL A001
MED Engineering and technical support for ATS program
LOW Work performed in accordance with DFARS clauses
LOW Quarterly program management reviews
+ 7 more requirements...
Step 4 of 8

The Trust Engine: Grounded vs. Refused

The feature no other tool has — it tells you when it doesn't know.

Trust Engine8 grounded · 6 refused
8 GROUNDED (57%)
6 REFUSED (43%)
GROUNDED Engineering support for ATS — verbatim match in source
GROUNDED ITAR compliance — explicit in Section C.2.4
REFUSED Cyber incident reporting timeline — insufficient evidence in source
↪ Recommendation
Request clarification from the contracting officer on reporting timeline specifics (e.g. 72-hour DFARS 252.204-7012 window vs. solicitation-specific terms).
REFUSED Subcontractor flow-down verification — no source reference found
↪ Recommendation
Request the referenced flow-down requirements from the prime, or review the cited DFARS clauses before committing to compliance language.
Why refusals help you: every REFUSED item comes with a next step. When the trust threshold is below 70%, we recommend going back to the solicitation source or contacting the contracting officer for clarification before building your compliance response — cheaper than a rejected bid.
Step 5 of 8

Cost Risk Drivers

Flag requirements that carry the heaviest compliance burden — before you price.

Cost Risk Drivers2 flagged
⚠ HIGH — ITAR Compliance
Export control requirements (DFARS 252.225-7048). Requires ITAR-registered facility, controlled access, export licensing. Significant infrastructure and personnel cost.
⚠ MEDIUM — AS9100 Certification
Aerospace quality management certification required throughout contract. Annual audit cycle, documentation overhead, corrective action systems.
CDRL Coverage
12.5% — 7 gaps found
Step 6 of 8

Documentation Gaps

CDRL gaps that human reviewers miss — each one a potential protest ground.

CDRL Gap Analysis7 gaps detected
GAP DI-MGMT-80368 — Monthly Status Report (A001) referenced but format unspecified
GAP DI-MISC-80711 — Technical Data Package not mapped to SOW section
GAP DI-QCIC-80553 — Inspection/acceptance criteria not cross-referenced
GAP Test procedure deliverables referenced in C.3 but no CDRL mapping
GAP Configuration management plan — implicit but no DID specified
+ 2 more gaps...
Step 7 of 8

Evaluation Factors — Know How You'll Be Scored

See exactly where evaluators will focus before you write a single word.

Evaluation Factors (Section M)4 factors
Technical Approach
40%
Past Performance
30%
Cost/Price
20%
Small Business Participation
10%
Step 8 of 8

The Bottom Line: Why This Is Different

Deterministic. Secure. Production-scale.

Export Compliance ArtifactsOne Click
Compliance Matrix (CSV) RTM (CSV) Risk Register (CSV) Executive Summary (HTML) Compliance Matrix (HTML) RTM (HTML) Risk Register (HTML) ROM Estimate (HTML)
Secure by design: zero external API calls, zero LLM dependencies, deterministic analysis only.
Your data stays in your tenant. Deploy on your infrastructure — nothing leaves your environment.
0
LLMs Used
12
Modules
1,163
Automated Tests