Write an RFP for outsourcing company-wide data literacy training

## Role and objective

You are a procurement-document specialist. Produce an RFP for outsourcing company-wide data literacy training, addressed to prospective vendors and usable by the procuring organization identified as [FILL IN: procuring organization]. The RFP must define the requested training service, vendor submission requirements, evaluation method, and procurement schedule without inventing missing facts.

The output is a formal RFP containing the required item names and completion instructions, with criteria and schedule rendered as tables. Completion means every required item is either grounded in the user-provided request or marked CONFIRMED, PROVISIONAL, or [FILL IN], and no invented project name, budget, schedule, institution, statutory applicability, criterion, or weighting appears.

## Scope and given facts

In scope is the outsourcing of company-wide data literacy training. Cover the procurement overview, training scope, expected vendor response, documents to submit, evaluation criteria, and schedule.

The only confirmed project fact is the requested service: outsourced company-wide data literacy training. Treat the following as unconfirmed slots:

- [FILL IN: procuring organization, issuing office, contact, and procurement identifier] — fill from the buyer’s official procurement records.
- [FILL IN: target employee groups, participant count, locations, current skill levels, and accessibility needs] — fill from the buyer’s workforce and training requirements.
- [FILL IN: learning objectives, curriculum topics, delivery format, duration, platform, assessment method, reporting, and support requirements] — fill from the approved statement of need.
- [FILL IN: budget, contract term, milestones, proposal deadline, award date, and service start date] — fill from authorized procurement documents.
- [FILL IN: applicable procurement authority, evaluation weights, insurance, security, privacy, and contractual terms] — fill from counsel, procurement officials, or the governing solicitation framework.

Do not fill the company-wide data literacy training scope with assumed tools, departments, learner numbers, or outcomes.

## Working rules

Mark every item as CONFIRMED, PROVISIONAL, or [FILL IN]. Use CONFIRMED only for facts explicitly supplied in the request or verified from an identified authoritative procurement record. Use PROVISIONAL only when the buyer expressly identifies a working assumption. Use [FILL IN] for every unresolved value, and add one concise line explaining what source or decision supplies it.

Build requirements from observable vendor deliverables. For each requested capability, distinguish between: required, if the buyer has explicitly confirmed it; provisional, if the buyer has authorized it as an assumption; and unresolved, if neither condition applies. Do not turn generic data literacy into unconfirmed requirements such as a particular software product, certification, training modality, learner outcome, or performance target.

If a field requires a project name, budget, schedule, institution name, statutory applicability, evaluation criterion, or weighting and the request does not provide it, leave the field as [FILL IN: exact item]. Do not replace it with a plausible value.

Ask whether the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) governs this procurement. If yes, leave slots for the applicable vehicle—RFP, RFQ, or IFB—and whether the procurement is set aside for small business, 8(a), SDVOSB, or HUBZone. For federal work, leave SAM.gov registration and the NAICS code as [FILL IN] slots. If the procurement is state or local, identify the governing authority as [VERIFY: applicable state or local procurement authority] rather than assuming FAR applies. Name the authority only when supplied or verified; do not state what the authority requires.

Pair each evidence-based requirement with grounding language such as “provide the source or buyer-approved basis.” Do not present legal, regulatory, budgetary, or performance assertions as facts without an identified source.

## Output structure

Produce only the RFP content, using these item names in this order:

1. **Overview** — identify the procurement purpose, issuing organization, procurement identifier, anticipated contract form, and contact fields. Mark unknown values [FILL IN].
2. **Scope of Work** — instruct the buyer to specify learner groups, objectives, curriculum, delivery, materials, assessments, accessibility, reporting, implementation, support, data handling, and measurable deliverables. Do not fill these requirements.
3. **Documents to Submit** — list the response components vendors must provide, such as organizational qualifications, relevant experience, proposed approach, staffing, work plan, references, pricing, assumptions, conflicts, and required certifications, but mark each as [FILL IN] unless confirmed.
4. **Evaluation Criteria with Weights** — render as a table with columns for criterion, description, evidence requested, weight, and scoring method. Leave criteria and weights as [FILL IN] unless supplied.
5. **Schedule** — render as a table with milestone and date columns. Leave every unconfirmed date as [FILL IN].
6. **Procurement authority and compliance fields** — include FAR applicability, vehicle, set-aside status, SAM.gov registration, NAICS code, or [VERIFY] state or local authority as applicable.

Include the instruction “Vendors must identify assumptions and cite supporting evidence where requested.” Do not populate any field requiring buyer decisions.

## Style rules

Use a hybrid style. Use itemized, table-based formatting for required fields, submission documents, evaluation criteria, schedule, statuses, and fill instructions. Use concise narrative paragraphs for the overview, scope introduction, and directions to vendors. Maintain a formal, neutral procurement register. Avoid promotional clichés such as “best-in-class,” “turnkey,” “seamless,” “world-class,” and “cutting-edge” unless they are explicitly defined and evidenced.

## Style rules (humanizer v1)

These govern every prose surface in the deliverable. Never alter quotations, code, identifiers, or proper nouns to satisfy them.

- Banned vocabulary: delve, tapestry, testament, showcase, pivotal, crucial, vital, intricate, interplay, meticulous, foster, vibrant, boasts, nestled, groundbreaking, and "landscape" in the abstract sense. Banned inflation phrases: plays a vital role, underscores its importance, evolving landscape.
- Banned constructions: "not just X, but Y" negative parallelism, forced three-item lists, fake ranges ("from X to Y"), signposting ("Let's dive in"), staged staccato ("One goal. Zero compromises."), and synonym cycling. Name a thing the same way every time.
- Punctuation and structure: no em dashes in the final text (rewrite with a period, colon, or parentheses), no emoji, sentence case headings, no heading on every paragraph, no bolding cadence, no "In conclusion" wrap-up. Close on a concrete fact.
- Tone: no flattery ("Great question"), no chatbot residue ("I hope this helps"), no knowledge-cutoff hedging, no stacked hedges. Hold the register the genre calls for and vary sentence length.
- Fact integrity: every instruction to be specific carries one boundary. Use only facts present in the user's input or in a verifiable source. Do not invent details to sound human. Leave anything the user did not supply as a literal [FILL IN] slot instead of a plausible guess.
- False-positive guard: flawless grammar, a single em dash, one "however", or formal wording is not by itself an AI tell. Rewrite only where several signals cluster, and never rough the prose up on purpose.

## Final self-audit

Draft the deliverable in full, then interrogate the draft on two counts. Which passages read as obviously AI-written when checked against the style rules above? Did any line assert a fact absent from the user's input and unverifiable from the sources given? Rewrite what fails and submit only the corrected version. The audit itself never appears in your output.

## Self-verification

1. Confirm that the deliverable is an RFP for outsourcing company-wide data literacy training, not a training plan, vendor proposal, or completed business case.
2. Confirm that every required RFP item—overview, scope of work, documents to submit, evaluation criteria with weights, and schedule—is present.
3. Confirm that evaluation criteria and the schedule are rendered as tables.
4. Confirm that each unresolved project name, budget, schedule, institution, requirement, criterion, or weighting remains a clearly labeled [FILL IN] slot with a filling instruction.
5. Confirm that no facts about the procuring organization, learners, curriculum, platform, price, dates, outcomes, or contract terms were added beyond the request.
6. Confirm that no [FILL IN] slot for the company-wide data literacy training procurement was filled arbitrarily.
7. Confirm that the document does not drift into writing vendor-facing training content or selecting a vendor.
8. Confirm that FAR applicability is posed as a question and that the vehicle and set-aside fields are conditional on the answer.
9. Confirm that SAM.gov registration and NAICS code remain slots for federal work.
10. Confirm that state or local procurement authority is marked [VERIFY] rather than assigned FAR by assumption.
11. Confirm that every evidence requirement includes explicit grounding language and that unsupported legal or performance claims are absent.
12. Confirm that all items carry one and only one status: CONFIRMED, PROVISIONAL, or [FILL IN].