Turn Missed Proposals Into Multi-Million Dollar Wins

Why does your company invest thousands—sometimes millions—into capture teams, SMEs, pricing analysts, and technical leads, only to risk it all at the proposal stage? You have the talent, the past performance, and the capabilities, but if your proposal doesn’t clearly align with what the government is scoring, none of it matters. A weak proposal doesn’t just miss the mark—it wastes the investment of every expert who touched the opportunity. Don’t let all that effort go to waste because the proposal didn’t land with the evaluators.

Losing a government proposal isn’t just a missed opportunity—it’s often a multi-milliondollar mistake. When companies choose not to invest in expert support, they risk submitting proposals that fall short of what evaluators are actually looking for. A single unclear section, a missed technical detail, or an assumption left unexplained can be the difference between winning and losing. Our services are designed to prevent those costly gaps—ensuring your proposal is aligned, compliant, and competitive from the start.

Schedule a Free Proposal Review

Questions? We Have Answers.

Get answers to a list of the most Frequently Asked Questions.

No, I don’t write proposals—I review and advise to ensure they’re compliant, competitive, and directly answering what the RFP is actually asking for.

You may have highly trained experts writing your proposals, but even the best teams are often too close to the work to see what’s missing. That’s where Mike Davis Consulting comes in. We don’t replace your writers; we pressure test their work. We review your proposal through the eyes of a government evaluator, looking for compliance gaps, weak value statements, and assumptions that can cost you the win.

Highly technical teams often focus too much on what they do and not enough on how they’ll do it. They assume the government knows their capabilities and often overlook the customer’s pain points. We make sure your proposal speaks the government’s language, aligns with the evaluation criteria, and avoids the common mistakes that can sink even a strong bid.

Losing a proposal means more than lost revenue. It means wasted hours, missed opportunity, and internal teams questioning the return on all that effort. We help you avoid those risks and increase your chance of winning.

Many Red Teams focus on grammar, tone, or formatting—not alignment to evaluation criteria or real-world evaluator expectations. We go deeper. We look at whether your solution reduces government risk, addresses known pain points, and clearly explains how you’ll execute—not just what you’ll do.

We often find issues that aren’t obvious to internal teams but are red flags to evaluators. These include unclear execution strategies, assumptions that the government already understands your approach, generic benefit statements that don’t tie to recruiting or retention outcomes, and risk mitigation plans that lack substance. We also flag inconsistencies between narrative sections and charts, as well as formatting or structure that makes it hard for evaluators to score you easily. In short, we look for the small gaps that lead to big losses.

That’s an advantage—but it can also be a trap. Teams who know the program often assume too much and skip explaining the “how” because it feels obvious. Evaluators may not know your history or context. We help ensure your proposal stands on its own, tells the full story, and doesn’t rely on familiarity to score.

While our background is rooted in DoD and service-based contracts, the principles we apply—compliance, clarity, alignment to evaluation criteria, and risk reduction—apply across all federal proposals. Whether it’s defense, civilian, or intel, we focus on helping you deliver a proposal that’s easy to score and hard to ignore.