Federal proposals go through multiple stages of development and review before submission. Among these stages, the Red Team review is one of the most important. It simulates how evaluators will assess the proposal, applying criteria aligned with Section M of the solicitation. By following structured red team scoring criteria, contractors can identify weaknesses, refine messaging, and increase their probability of win before the proposal reaches government evaluators.

What Is a Red Team Review?

A Red Team review is a structured evaluation of a nearly complete proposal draft. Unlike Pink Team reviews, which focus on structure and compliance, the Red Team assesses proposals from the evaluator’s perspective. Reviewers ask:

• Does the proposal address every requirement?
• Does it align with evaluation criteria?
• Does it highlight clear strengths and discriminators?
• Is the writing persuasive and evaluator-friendly?

The goal is to replicate how government evaluators will score the proposal, identifying gaps and opportunities to strengthen it before submission.

Why Red Team Scoring Criteria Matter

Without structured criteria, Red Team reviews risk becoming unproductive, focusing on grammar or personal preference rather than compliance and scoring. By using red team scoring criteria, contractors benefit from:

• Evaluator Alignment – Reviews reflect how actual evaluators will assess the proposal.
• Objective Feedback – Criteria keep reviews focused on requirements, not opinions.
• Improved Persuasiveness – Win themes and discriminators are tested for impact.
• Compliance Assurance – Section L and M requirements are validated systematically.
• Increased Win Probability – Proposals are stronger and more competitive.

Core Red Team Scoring Criteria

1. Compliance with Section L
   • Does the proposal meet all submission instructions?
   • Are volumes, sections, and formats consistent with requirements?
2. Alignment with Section M
   • Does content address all evaluation factors?
   • Are strengths clearly tied to scoring criteria?
3. Clarity and Readability
   • Can evaluators quickly find answers to requirements?
   • Is technical content translated into clear, plain language?
4. Win Theme Integration
   • Are win themes embedded across volumes?
   • Do discriminators stand out as unique strengths?
5. Risk Mitigation
   • Does the proposal anticipate risks and provide credible solutions?
   • Are approaches low-risk compared to competitors?
6. Evidence and Proof Points
   • Are claims backed by data, case studies, or past performance?
   • Do narratives provide measurable results, not just promises?

Best Practices for Applying Red Team Scoring Criteria

• Use Scoring Sheets – Mirror the structure of Section M with scoring rubrics.
• Train Reviewers – Ensure reviewers understand how evaluators assign scores.
• Simulate the Evaluator’s Role – Ask reviewers to justify ratings with evidence.
• Focus on Strengths and Gaps – Identify where evaluators would award or withhold points.
• Document Feedback Clearly – Provide actionable comments for writers to revise.
• Hold Debrief Sessions – Discuss major findings and next steps with the proposal team.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Unstructured Reviews – Leads to vague or conflicting feedback.
• Focusing on Grammar – Language polish is for later reviews, not Red Team.
• Using Writers as Reviewers – Reduces objectivity and mirrors existing biases.
• Overlooking Section M – Weakens alignment with evaluator scoring.
• Failing to Track Revisions – Without accountability, issues persist after the review.

Avoiding these mistakes ensures Red Team reviews drive measurable improvements.

How Red Team Reviews Strengthen Proposals

Applying red team scoring criteria benefits all stakeholders:

• Writers – Receive clear, actionable feedback tied to compliance and evaluation.
• Proposal Managers – Gain visibility into where proposals are strong or weak.
• SMEs – See how technical input translates into evaluator impact.
• Leadership – Gains confidence in the proposal’s competitiveness.

For evaluators, refined proposals are easier to score and highlight strengths more clearly, increasing the chance of selection.

Tools That Support Red Team Scoring Criteria

• Digital Score Sheets – Standardized forms that map to Section M.
• Proposal Software – Tracks review comments and compliance checks.
• Collaboration Platforms – Teams or SharePoint centralize reviewer input.
• Version Control Systems – Ensure reviewers work from the same draft.

These tools strengthen consistency and accountability in Red Team reviews.

Conclusion

Federal proposals demand more than compliance—they must persuade evaluators that a contractor is the best choice. Red team scoring criteria provide the structure needed to evaluate proposals objectively, align with Section M, and strengthen win themes. By simulating the evaluator perspective, contractors refine proposals into persuasive, compliant submissions that maximize win probability.

For expert support in applying red team scoring criteria to your federal proposals, contact Hinz Consulting. To review solicitations and evaluation factors for your next proposal, visit SAM.gov.