Federal Capability Coverage · Gap Analysis
Load your own team, a competitor’s, or one you’re assembling — up to five companies — against a specific contract pursuit or a buying office, and get a capability-area coverage read: covered, partial, gap, or honestly unknown. Holding the vehicle isn’t the same as having done the work, and this tool never lets it count as if it were.
Included with Growth and Enterprise accounts. There are two kinds of number on this page and we label every one: the corpus figures just below are real, measured against the platform’s own published figures. The product screen further down is the real tool, run over a fictional team and a fictional pursuit that’s safe to publish.
What Every Verdict Is Checked Against
A covered cell isn’t the incumbent’s word, and it isn’t “they hold the vehicle.” It’s a dollar ratio against work the government’s own record — or, where a scope document has been read, the government’s own requirement — shows a company has actually performed. Measured 4 September 2026. Capabilities and requirements are read out of the government’s own documents with AI assistance (Claude, by Anthropic); every coverage percentage, count and dollar figure is then computed from the federal record.
The Workflow
Every step below runs on the exact same evidence tables the rest of the platform reads — nothing here is a simplified demo path. It’s one screen, not three: the walkthrough is told as three steps because that’s the order you’d actually work it, not because there are three different pages.
The real tool, top to bottom: a team row against a specific contract pursuit, a stat band stating how many capability areas are covered and how much of the contract's dollar value is accounted for, then the capability-area matrix itself — each row colored Gap, Partial or Covered, showing what the work called for against what the record shows. Below the matrix, Teaming Options ranks candidates by how many open gap rows they cover — or, when the frame is entirely Unknown, how many of those unknown areas they demonstrably cover instead — weighted by dollars, split into revenue bands (Large, Mid-Cap, Small, Challenger) so a $250M prime and a $10M small business are never compared as if they were the same kind of candidate. At the very bottom, the solicitation's own extracted requirements, shown in full wherever the government's scope document has been read.
In this image: companies are fictional and dollar figures are illustrative. Agencies, buying offices and codes are the real federal record; any contract number shown is altered so it resolves to nothing.
What You Actually Get
Coverage you can check yourself. Never a verdict on who should win.
Load your team against the pursuit before you write a single line of the proposal — and see, capability area by capability area, exactly what’s covered, what’s open, and who else could close it.
Or see how the whole platform works first →Common Questions
Gap Analysis measures demonstrated capability evidence against a specific contract or buying office, capability area by capability area — and it works just as well pointed the other way: load a competitor's known team and see what the federal record says about them. Coverage is a dollar ratio, not a score. It shows what the federal record supports and stops there — no fit scores, no recommendations. You decide who to call.
Load up to five companies as your team, then point the tool at a specific contract pursuit or a buying office and run it. You get back a capability-area coverage matrix — covered, partial, gap, or unknown — plus a ranked Teaming Options list of companies that could fill what your team doesn't cover. From any contract's own profile, the tool is one click away with the target already filled in.
They're a dollar ratio against the requirement's own recorded value: under 50% is a gap (red), 50-99% is partial (yellow), 100% or more is covered (green) — plus a fourth, grey state, Unknown. Two things the colors do not mean. First, a red row doesn't mean your team can't do the work — it means the visible federal record doesn't show that work as a prime, under a code the extraction caught, inside the visible window. Second, an Incumbent or candidate figure is that company's whole portfolio-wide federal record, not what they've delivered on this specific contract. Sanity-check any hard gap against what you actually know before you act on it.
Because on that pursuit we're reading the government's own scope document — a detailed, requirement-by-requirement list — while the company we're checking is only visible to us through award descriptions, which are much coarser. Calling that a gap would be us asserting something we can't actually see. So the row goes grey and says Unknown, and it's excluded from the gap count. It is not a small gap and it is not a pass: it means our visibility isn't deep enough to judge that row yet. An Unknown row is not excluded from Teaming Options, though — if a whole screen comes back mostly grey, the tool still surfaces candidates, ranked against those unknown capability areas rather than confirmed gaps and labeled as such, because only your team knows whether you actually cover that work. This state got dramatically rarer in late August 2026 — the number of companies we can see deeply enough to call a real gap on grew by more than thirty times as we read more scope documents, so a screen that came back mostly grey before then is worth re-running. The same row can honestly change from Unknown to red later, and that's the mechanism working, not a number moving under you.