← Blueprint for proposal responses
What the USAF evaluator scores against, in your proposal’s SE volume.
AFWERX evaluation is famously fast — the rubric values clarity, traceability, and warfighter relevance over volume. Blueprint generates the SE structure that maps the USAF rubric, from a brief, in 10–15 minutes. Your team focuses on the technical innovation; the SE structure around it lands with reviewer-ready citations.
How Blueprint output maps to the AFWERX rubric.
AFWERX evaluators score against five dimensions on a standard panel:
- Warfighter relevance. Stakeholder register + ConOps grounds the work in named operators + operational scenarios.
- Technical approach. SRD + decomposition + V&V plan show the engineering path. Your team’s innovation lives in the technical narrative around them.
- Innovation. Your team’s call. Blueprint provides the structural substrate; the novel claim is yours.
- Team capability. Citable SE pack at proposal time signals Phase II maturity.
- Transition path. Phase-D readiness assessment (SRR / SDR / PDR / CDR status) is the readable form of “here’s how we get to production.”
The Citation Verifier’s ICC precision number — 80% on ARCHIPELAGO — surfaces in the run telemetry; you can quote it in the proposal’s methodology section as evidence of the SE pack’s structural integrity.
The math against AFWERX timelines.
Every AFWERX-relevant SE deliverable + the transition readiness assessment.
An AFWERX response cycle is days, not weeks. Blueprint runs alongside the technical sprint.
Iterate as the warfighter framing sharpens. The per-run cost rounds to zero.
500 runs covers an AFWERX response + the next two BAAs in the cycle.
AFWERX-specific questions.
Does Blueprint know about AFWERX-specific evaluation criteria?
Blueprint follows the NASA SE Handbook, not the AFWERX BAA specifically. The Handbook structure happens to map cleanly to the AFWERX rubric because both inherit from the same DoD systems-engineering canon. For BAA-specific phrasing (e.g., 'transition customer commitment', 'matching funds'), edit post-generation.
What about the Phase II / direct-to-Phase II SE volume?
Same pipeline, more iterations. Phase II SE volume expects deeper decomposition + a concrete PDR plan. The Phase-D readiness assessment Blueprint emits maps directly to Phase II's expected SE maturity gate.
STRATFI / TACFI / SBIR-X requirements differ. Does Blueprint cover them?
The SE structure stays consistent across variants. The BAA-specific volume requirements (page limits, formatting, supplementary forms) are post-generation editor work. Blueprint covers the content; you cover the wrapper.
Related.
- SBIR Phase I SE deliverables →
Phase I-specific SE artifact framing (overlaps with AFWERX at the structural level).
- PDR-ready artifacts in a day →
PDR readiness — the transition-path evidence AFWERX rubrics value.
- ← Back to: Blueprint for proposal responses