AI for RFP responses and tenders
Ultramarine Work reads the tender pack, every amendment and the answer library you already keep, then hands back the compliance matrix, first drafts and SIG responses. Reviewers get the file behind every claim, so they can test it.
Fairview-compliance-matrix.xlsxExampleFairview Schools ITT, open requirements
- ITT 2.4.1Addendum 2, Q14Flagged
Addendum 2 cut Volume 1 to 30 pages and our draft runs 34, so cut 4 pages from Section 3.
- ITT 5.3Addendum 1, Q6Flagged
Addendum 1 added a social value shall weighted at 10%, and no section answers it, so assign a writer.
- ITT 3.1.6Vol 1, Sec. 2.3Answered
Section 2.3 answers the safeguarding shall, with the DBS check policy as evidence.
- ITT 4.2.2Pricing scheduleWaiting
Prices must hold for 36 months, so the pricing lead must confirm before we answer.
How it works
- 1
Drop in the bid folder
The tender pack with every amendment, the compliance matrix from the last bid, the answer library, past-performance write-ups, resumes, the security library and the pricing workbook, kept the way your team already organizes them.
- 2
Ask for the next deliverable
It shreds the solicitation, drafts each volume to the buyer’s outline and word limits, fills the SIG questionnaire from the security library and builds the ROI model. Each statement names the file it came from.
- 3
Run the reviews, then submit
Fact-check every name, number and certification, chase down the claims that lack proof, and put the draft through pink, red and gold team reviews. The win themes, the price and what finally goes in the portal are yours.
Inside the Proposals & Bids mode
Proposals and RFP responses
Shreds the pack into a compliance matrix, drafts each volume to the evaluation factors and checks that every requirement is answered where the matrix points.
Security questionnaire response
Answers SIG, CAIQ and the buyer’s Excel questionnaires from the approved security library, and flags what only InfoSec can decide.
Statement of work
Turns a SOO into the SOW you propose, with the deliverables and SLAs the buyer’s QASP can measure, plus the assumptions and exclusions that protect the price.
Business case and capital allocation
Compiles the ROI and cost-benefit case behind the value narrative, tracing every input to a file the customer’s finance team can challenge.
- Office skills
- Excel, Word, PowerPoint, PDF
- Tools
- Read, edit and write files, Search files, Run code, Search and read the web, View images
- Connectors
- SharePoint, Google Drive, Gmail, and additional custom connectors
- House style
- Your fonts, layouts and rules, on every file
Ask it for
“Break the Fairview Schools tender pack into a compliance matrix. Log every shall in the ITT and its two addenda, with the page and volume that answers each.”
Fairview-compliance-matrix.xlsx“Draft the executive summary for the Harborstone Utilities bid around our three win themes, and tie every claim to its evaluation factor and evidence file.”
Harborstone-exec-summary.docx“Write past-performance narratives for our three Army clinic projects from the CPARS summaries, and map each one to the Section M factor it supports.”
Past-performance-narratives.docx“Fill the 128-question SIG Lite from our policy folder and last year’s SIG answers. Back each response with its evidence and flag every question that has none.”
SIG-Lite-response.xlsx“Assemble the SOW for the managed help-desk bid. The buyer’s QASP will measure us against it, so make each deliverable and SLA measurable and list exclusions.”
SOW-helpdesk-proposal.docx“Build the five-year ROI case for the Calloway County fiber bid from the pricing workbook, and list every assumption the county’s finance team will challenge.”
ROI-case-fiber-rollout.xlsx
Who it’s for
Proposal and bid managers, writers and coordinators and capture managers who run RFP, tender and questionnaire responses in any industry.
Questions
Will it invent certifications or past performance we don’t have?
No, it drafts from the files in the folder, and its skills tell it to cite the source for each statement and to note what it could not find instead of guessing. That still leaves the fact-check on you, since a wrong date in a source file becomes a wrong date in the draft. Review every claim, because the buyer holds your firm responsible for what it reads and no tool shares that responsibility.
Won’t our answers read like every other bidder’s AI draft?
No, not if you feed it your own material. Buyers catch generic content, and one buyer threw a team out of a competition because another bidder had submitted the exact same response. Ultramarine Work starts from your past proposals, project files and the evidence already in the folder, and it applies your house style, so the proof points and the numbers are yours. The win themes and the argument stay with you.
Do buyers make us disclose that AI helped write the bid?
Some do, and the UK formalized it in PPN 017. Central government buyers ask unscored disclosure questions, and a solicitation can set its own rules, so read the instructions and every amendment. The usual set asks whether and where generative AI was used, what quality assurance it got and whether you confirm the response is accurate. The disclosure call belongs to your compliance team, and Ultramarine Work’s file citations give you the paper trail those questions ask for.
Can we load the buyer’s confidential tender pack into it?
Tender packs usually arrive under an NDA, so check with your compliance team first. Ultramarine Work changes files only in the project’s folder. When a request needs it, it can read files elsewhere on your computer, never passwords, keys or app data, and you can turn that off in settings. The model runs on Paper Instruments’ servers, so the content it works on is sent there to be processed. Paper Instruments is SOC 2 Type II, and our security and compliance details are on our compliance page.
Can it catch every requirement buried in the attachments and amendments?
No, and it hands the final check to you. It reads the whole folder, so the amendments, attachments and mandatory forms a pasted excerpt never reaches are all in scope, and each matrix row cites the page it came from. The skills also make it note requirements it cannot find or reconcile. A human still peer-reviews the matrix before drafting starts, because a reader has to weigh which of two conflicting instructions the amendment meant.
What happens when a questionnaire question has no approved answer?
It flags the question rather than inventing an answer. The security questionnaire skill tells it to work from the approved answers and evidence in the folder and to note anything it could not support, so InfoSec gets a short list of open questions to settle. Their review decides what the buyer finally sees, because the security lead signs the completed questionnaire and answers for its contents.