Acquisition support: assisting reviews and co-drafting technical evaluation documents
Description
How can ACF teams more efficiently review contract proposals and summarize technical evaluation discussions? In response to Requests for Information and Requests for Proposals, ACF teams receive responses from interested vendors. In the review process, ACF staff need to provide summarized comments for each response on potential suitability for delivering the work. These summaries are based on individual and group review against pre-established criteria. When there is a high volume of vendor responses, review teams have many summaries to write.
Detailed example
Draft language for technical evaluation documents, based on user-provided context, direction, analysis, and examples. For example, the user may provide a statement on why they assess a proposal to be unsuitable based on the evaluation criteria, and then leverage the AI tool to draft language to pull and format specific examples with page citations from the proposal. AI is only used to draft language and make it easier to find relevant passages in proposal materials. AI is not used to make final determinations. The technical evaluators review and revise as needed all AI-drafted language, verifying accuracy of any cited excerpts.
AI / analytics pattern
Generative AI: AI that generates new or synthetic content (e.g., images, videos, audio, text, code).
Automation level / stage
c) Deployed – The use case is being actively authorized or utilized to support the functions or mission of an agency.
Expected benefit
Increased efficiency in drafting technical evaluation documents, so that more time is spent on review and analysis and less time is spent on "blank screen syndrome"
Controls / human review
ATO: Yes; PIA: To be posted on https://www.hhs.gov/pia/index.html, pending HHS OCIO action
Data needed
RAG implementation using commercially-available LLMs and received capability statements