# SERVICE-01: comparison against REQ v1

**Fictional worked result, prepared from the supplied text only.** This compares provider statements, not demonstrated capability or completed work. No price comparison, ranking, award decision or legal conclusion is made.

**Materials:** complete REQ v1 R1–R7, A v1 A:P1–P5, B v1 B:P1–P5, and C v1 C:P1–P4, at 3 September 2030, 16:00 UTC. C's referenced Appendix 1 was not supplied. There is no later B correction and no rule giving one paragraph automatic precedence over another. [Full source packet](source-packet.en.md).

The labels below are editorial readings of the text. **Stated match** means a response expressly offers the requested scope; it does not verify delivery. **Conditional** preserves a dependency. **Explicit exception** means the response states a different or excluded scope. **Not stated** means the complete supplied response does not answer the point. **Conflict** preserves incompatible statements. **Missing attachment** means only a reference was supplied, not its contents. A cell can need more than one label when a requirement has several parts.

## Complete requirement-by-response matrix

Each row below is one requirement × one response, so all 21 combinations are present. Quoted text belongs only to the response named in that row. Follow the paragraph links to check the complete surrounding text and conditions.

| Requirement | Response | Exact evidence and retained condition | Comparison with the request |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| R1 — morning on-site session | A | “12 September 2030, 10:00–11:30 UTC”; “available only if the coordinator confirms acceptance by 5 September 2030, 12:00 UTC.” [A:P1](source-packet.en.md#a-p1) | **Conditional match.** Place, date and 90-minute slot match. Acceptance deadline remains; no booking is claimed. Q-A1. |
| R1 — morning on-site session | B | “14:00 to 15:30 UTC instead of the morning slot”; “confirm whether that alternative works before we reserve it.” [B:P1](source-packet.en.md#b-p1) | **Explicit alternative.** Same location/date and 90-minute duration, different time. The coordinator has not accepted that change. Q-B1. |
| R1 — morning on-site session | C | “12 September 2030, 10:00–11:30 UTC”; “a proposed session, not a booking confirmation.” [C:P1](source-packet.en.md#c-p1) | **Stated match of proposed slot.** Place/date/duration match as an offer, not a booking. The separate capacity exception remains under R2. |
| R2 — up to 12 participants | A | “for up to 12 participants.” [A:P1](source-packet.en.md#a-p1) | **Stated match.** One group of the requested capacity; the session acceptance condition still applies. |
| R2 — up to 12 participants | B | B:P1 offers “one on-site orientation” but supplies no capacity; no other B paragraph supplies a number. [B:P1](source-packet.en.md#b-p1); [B:P2](source-packet.en.md#b-p2)–[B:P5](source-packet.en.md#b-p5) | **Not stated.** Neither 12-person support nor inability to support 12 is established. Q-B2. |
| R2 — up to 12 participants | C | “a group of up to eight participants.” [C:P1](source-packet.en.md#c-p1) | **Explicit exception.** Eight is below 12. Do not invent a second session or a group split. Q-C1. |
| R3 — all three tasks | A | “booking the room, joining a video call, and restoring the room for the next user at the end.” [A:P2](source-packet.en.md#a-p2) | **Stated match.** All three tasks are explicit. |
| R3 — all three tasks | B | “booking the room and joining a video call.” [B:P2](source-packet.en.md#b-p2) | **Partial; restoration not stated.** The complete email never adds that task. “Orientation” does not establish it. Q-B3. |
| R3 — all three tasks | C | “the booking calendar and joining a video call”; “See Appendix 1 — Session plan and support for the detailed topic list and follow-up arrangements.” [C:P2](source-packet.en.md#c-p2) | **Partial; missing attachment.** Two tasks are named. Restoration is not established by the main response, and the referenced detail was not supplied. Q-C2. |
| R4 — guide formats, pages and deadline | A | “a two-page quick-reference guide in editable DOCX and PDF by 13 September 2030, 16:00 UTC, provided the coordinator approves the topic notes by 11 September 2030, 12:00 UTC.” [A:P3](source-packet.en.md#a-p3) | **Conditional match.** All requested deliverable parts are stated, dependent on timely approval. Later approval requires a new delivery agreement. Q-A1. |
| R4 — guide formats, pages and deadline | B | “a PDF quick-reference guide the following afternoon.” [B:P2](source-packet.en.md#b-p2) | **Partial; several points not stated.** PDF guide offered, but no page count, editable DOCX or exact delivery clock time. “Following afternoon” does not establish arrival by 16:00 UTC. It does not mean DOCX is unavailable. Q-B4. |
| R4 — guide formats, pages and deadline | C | “a two-page quick-reference guide as PDF by 13 September 2030, 16:00 UTC”; “Editable source files, including DOCX, are not included.” [C:P3](source-packet.en.md#c-p3) | **Partial; explicit DOCX exception and broad/specific conflict.** Pages, PDF and deadline are stated. The DOCX exclusion conflicts with C:P1's “all requested deliverables”; do not mark the full requirement satisfied. Q-C1. |
| R5 — revision round and both windows | A | “One consolidated revision round”; “within five business days after initial guide delivery”; “within three business days after that feedback.” [A:P4](source-packet.en.md#a-p4) | **Stated match.** Both windows and their starting events are supplied. |
| R5 — revision round and both windows | B | “if you send all notes within 48 hours”; “We have not specified a return time for revised files in this email.” [B:P3](source-packet.en.md#b-p3) | **Explicit alternative condition; return window not stated.** A 48-hour feedback condition is not the requested five-business-day window. The revised-file deadline is unanswered. Q-B5. |
| R5 — revision round and both windows | C | “No revision round is included”; “the separate treatment of typo corrections is described in Appendix 1 — Session plan and support.” [C:P3](source-packet.en.md#c-p3) | **Explicit revision exception; missing typo details.** The main response excludes a revision round despite C:P1's broad claim. Do not equate an unspecified typo policy with the requested revision. Q-C1 and Q-C2. |
| R6 — 30-minute remote Q&A within 10 business days | A | “A remote follow-up Q&A is not included in this response.” [A:P4](source-packet.en.md#a-p4) | **Explicit exclusion.** This offer omits it; nothing here establishes what A could offer under a revised scope. Q-A2. |
| R6 — 30-minute remote Q&A within 10 business days | B | P4: “30-minute remote follow-up Q&A within 10 business days”; P5: “20 minutes within five business days”; “subject to both calendars having space.” [B:P4](source-packet.en.md#b-p4); [B:P5](source-packet.en.md#b-p5) | **Conflict; scheduling condition retained.** Duration differs, and P5 adds a narrower window and availability condition. Neither paragraph is appointed controlling. A confirmed 30-minute service is not established. Q-B6. |
| R6 — 30-minute remote Q&A within 10 business days | C | “See Appendix 1 — Session plan and support for the detailed topic list and follow-up arrangements.” [C:P2](source-packet.en.md#c-p2) | **Missing attachment; scope unestablished.** The main response gives no duration, window or scheduling condition. The general introduction is not a substitute for the missing arrangement. Q-C2. |
| R7 — no recording/list; coordinator distributes | A | “will not record”; “do not request a participant contact list”; “coordinator will distribute the invitations and guide.” [A:P5](source-packet.en.md#a-p5) | **Stated match.** All parts of the requested arrangement are explicit. |
| R7 — no recording/list; coordinator distributes | B | “To send invitations ourselves, we will need the participant email list.” [B:P5](source-packet.en.md#b-p5) | **Explicit distribution/list exception; recording not stated.** B proposes a different invitation route and requests a list. It does not state whether the session is recorded. No legal or privacy-compliance inference follows. Q-B7. |
| R7 — no recording/list; coordinator distributes | C | “We will not record the session or request participant contact details.”; “coordinator will send the invitations and distribute the guide.” [C:P4](source-packet.en.md#c-p4) | **Stated match.** The source belongs to C, not another provider. |

## What the comparison actually establishes

A expressly offers the requested group size, topics and revision arrangement. Its morning session and guide depend on two different coordinator deadlines: acceptance by 5 September at 12:00 UTC, and topic-note approval by 11 September at 12:00 UTC. Those conditions must travel with any description of A's offer. Its remote Q&A is expressly excluded. Calling that item merely “not stated” would lose a supplied answer; calling A incapable of offering it under any other scope would go beyond that answer.

B is not the same service with a more casual writing style. It offers an afternoon slot instead of the morning, gives 48 hours for guide feedback instead of five business days, and proposes to collect emails and send invitations itself. Its capacity, restoration topic, editable guide, page count, exact guide deadline and recording position remain unstated. The remote-Q&A paragraphs conflict on duration; the five-day statement is within the requested 10-day window, but it does not cure the 20-versus-30-minute conflict or remove the calendar condition. These are separate findings, not a single negative verdict on B's abilities.

C gives a matching proposed morning slot and a two-page PDF deadline. It also states an eight-person cap, excludes editable files and excludes a revision round. These specifics conflict with its introductory “all requested deliverables”; the broad sentence does not erase them. Its referenced appendix is absent, so the detailed third topic, follow-up and typo policy remain unestablished. No appendix contents have been reconstructed.

**Editorial conclusion:** none of the three supplied responses supports an unqualified statement that all seven requirements are covered. The differences are now visible enough to prepare targeted questions. This is a conclusion about the completeness and consistency of these texts, not a provider ranking or a finding about who can perform the work.

## Exact clarification requests — prepared, not sent

These questions are proposed next steps, not answered facts. Requests to change an explicitly excluded or different scope are labeled as such; they do not reopen it as if the original text had said nothing.

### Alder Workshop

- **Q-A1 — Confirm the coordinator's dependencies (R1/R4).** Can the office coordinator confirm acceptance by **5 September 2030, 12:00 UTC** and approve topic notes by **11 September 2030, 12:00 UTC**? If either cannot be met, ask A for a revised proposed slot or guide delivery agreement rather than retaining the original deadline as certain.
- **Q-A2 — Request a scope addition, if R6 remains required.** A:P4 explicitly excludes remote Q&A. Can A provide a revised response adding **one 30-minute remote Q&A within 10 business days after the orientation**, stating any scheduling conditions? If not, retain the stated exclusion; do not infer that a Q&A is already included.

### Bridge Desk

- **Q-B1 — Resolve the offered slot (R1).** Can B offer **12 September 2030, 10:00–11:30 UTC** in Room Juniper? If B retains **14:00–15:30 UTC**, record it as an alternative requiring a coordinator decision, not as the requested morning session.
- **Q-B2 — Establish capacity (R2).** Can the offered single session accommodate **up to 12 participants without splitting the group or adding a session**? Please state the capacity in the response.
- **Q-B3 — Establish the third topic (R3).** Does the orientation include **restoring the room for the next user at the end**, in addition to booking and joining a call? Please add or expressly exclude that task.
- **Q-B4 — Establish the whole guide deliverable (R4).** Will B supply a **two-page guide in editable DOCX and PDF by 13 September 2030, 16:00 UTC**? Please state the page count, both formats, exact deadline and any dependency; “the following afternoon” leaves part of the requirement unanswered.
- **Q-B5 — Resolve revision conditions (R5).** Will B replace the **48-hour** feedback condition with **five business days after initial guide delivery** and return revised files within **three business days after feedback**? If not, state the alternative feedback and return windows explicitly.
- **Q-B6 — Resolve the internal Q&A conflict (R6).** Which complete follow-up arrangement is offered: P4's **30 minutes within 10 business days**, P5's **20 minutes within five business days subject to calendar space**, or a revised statement? Please replace the inconsistent paragraphs with one duration, window and scheduling condition. No paragraph is treated as controlling yet.
- **Q-B7 — Resolve recording and distribution (R7).** Can B use **coordinator-distributed invitations and guide without requesting a participant email list**? Also state whether B will **record the session**. The email request already differs from the requested arrangement; the recording point is separately unanswered.

### Cedar Learning

- **Q-C1 — Resolve the broad promise against explicit exceptions (R2/R4/R5).** Does C intend to amend its **eight-person cap, PDF-only output and excluded revision round** to offer the requested **single group up to 12, editable DOCX plus PDF, and one consolidated revision with the requested five-/three-business-day windows**? Please revise the scope or retain those exceptions explicitly, and explain how the “all requested deliverables” introduction should be read. Do not solve capacity by adding an unrequested group split.
- **Q-C2 — Supply the missing material and identify its scope (R3/R5/R6).** Please supply the referenced **Appendix 1 — Session plan and support**, identify the revision that accompanies C v1, and point to its statements about **end-of-session restoration, remote Q&A duration/window/scheduling conditions, and typo corrections**. If those points are absent, answer them directly. The appendix has not been received or reviewed, and a typo policy must not be treated as the included revision round that C:P3 expressly excludes.

## Handoff boundary

Keep REQ v1, A v1, B v1 and C v1 with this comparison. Add any later response or appendix as a separately identified input and update the affected cells and questions; do not rewrite today's missing attachment as if it had been available at the cutoff. No request above has been sent, no slot has been reserved and no provider has been selected.