--- name: scoring-optimizer description: "Methodology for analyzing government funding program evaluation scoring tables and developing high-score strategies. Use this skill for 'scoring analysis', 'high-score strategy', 'evaluation criteria optimization', 'review preparation', 'document/presentation evaluation preparation', and other government project evaluation preparation tasks. Note: contacting reviewers and conducting actual presentations are outside the scope of this skill." --- # Scoring Optimizer — Government Funding Evaluation Scoring Strategy A skill that enhances evaluation preparation for the submission-reviewer, tech-writer, and biz-writer. ## Target Agents - **submission-reviewer** — Optimizes the proposal for maximum scoring - **tech-writer** — Aligns technical content with high-weight criteria - **biz-writer** — Aligns business content with high-weight criteria ## Scoring Analysis Framework ### Step 1: Weight Distribution Analysis ``` Map evaluation criteria by weight: - High weight (>15%): Must address thoroughly, allocate proportional content - Medium weight (10-15%): Address completely, include evidence - Low weight (<10%): Address adequately, do not over-invest ``` ### Step 2: Difficulty-Impact Matrix ``` | Criteria | Weight | Difficulty | Strategy | |----------|--------|-----------|----------| | High weight + Easy | Priority 1 | Full score target | | High weight + Hard | Priority 2 | Maximize with best evidence | | Low weight + Easy | Priority 3 | Quick win, minimal effort | | Low weight + Hard | Priority 4 | Adequate coverage only | ``` ### Step 3: Evidence Mapping ``` For each criterion: 1. What specific evidence demonstrates this? 2. Is it quantitative or qualitative? 3. Where in the proposal does it appear? 4. Can we strengthen the evidence? ``` ## Common Evaluation Categories ### Technical Excellence (typically 30-40%) ``` High-score tactics: - Clear, measurable technical objectives - Comparison tables vs. existing technology - Technology readiness level (TRL) progression - Risk mitigation plans - Team expertise matching technical needs ``` ### Business Feasibility (typically 20-30%) ``` High-score tactics: - Market size with credible sources - Specific commercialization timeline - Revenue projections with assumptions - IP strategy - Partnership/customer letters of intent ``` ### Implementation Plan (typically 15-20%) ``` High-score tactics: - Detailed milestone-based timeline - Clear role assignments - Resource allocation justification - Quality assurance plan ``` ### Budget Appropriateness (typically 10-15%) ``` High-score tactics: - Line items match technical plan exactly - Government standard rates applied - Clear justification for each cost item - Reasonable proportion across categories ``` ## Presentation Preparation (if applicable) ``` Time management: - Intro: 10% of time - Problem/Market: 15% - Technology: 30% - Business: 20% - Team/Plan: 15% - Q&A prep: 10% Key rules: - One key message per slide - Reviewers evaluate both content and presentation quality - Anticipate and prepare for tough questions - Have backup slides for detailed data ```