Handling Unsolicited AI Proposals Correctly

A forty-page unsolicited proposal arrived on a joint secretary's email on a Saturday. It had a problem statement that was mostly right, an architecture that was one firm's product, and a draft implementation plan with dates that matched the coming budget speech. On Monday a section officer began lifting paragraphs into a 'department concept note'. By Thursday the concept note was being discussed as the seed of an RFP. Nobody had stamped the forty pages as vendor material. The later complaint wrote itself.

This is a guide to handling unsolicited AI proposals without pretending that India has one Department of Expenditure form that covers every body. Some organisations — certain infrastructure ministries, some state PPP cells, some PSUs — have written unsolicited or Swiss-challenge style processes. Many departments do not. GFR and your own manual still require fair competition for most buys. Absence of a special form is not a licence to run a private tender inside a public one.

The safe habit is boring. Record the receipt. Do not use the text as the specification. If the idea has merit, the department writes the need, then competes it — or, if a genuine single-source path exists, uses that path under the actual rule, in the open. Do not invent a national format in your note to make a shortcut look official.

Not legal advice. Read your organisation's unsolicited-proposal SOP if it has one, your GFR adoption, GeM terms, and vigilance instructions on cvc.gov.in.

There is no one form

Do not write 'as per DoE unsolicited proposal guidelines' unless you are citing a document that exists and applies to you. Inventing a citation is worse than saying you received a vendor pitch. Officers do this when they are embarrassed by the Saturday email. Embarrassment is not a source of law.

If your organisation has a process — a register, a committee, a challenge window — follow it. If it does not, the default is: the proposal is information. Procurement still needs a competed instrument or a defensible exception. AI does not create a new exception.

PPP-style Swiss challenge, where it exists, is a specific statutory or policy route with publication and challenge rights. It is not a vibe you can apply to a chatbot because the vendor used the word innovative.

The register that saves the later file

Every unsolicited AI packet should land in a register: date, sender, firm, DPIIT or not, whether a meeting was held, what was promised, whether any department data was shown, and where the packet is stored. That register is how you later prove you did not run a secret negotiation.

If a meeting happens, minutes go in the same register. 'Just a knowledge session' is still a meeting if a specification idea moved.

A one-page register row. Copy it even if your organisation has no fancier SOP.

Field	Why it exists	Fail if missing later
Date and channel of receipt	Provenance	You cannot show you did not invite a favourite
Packet stored as vendor material	Separates their words from yours	Your RFP reads like their PDF
Whether department data was shown	Processing may have started	An unpaid, un-DPA'd peek at live files
Ideas reused, if any, rewritten	Fairness	Product names in mandatory rows
Decision: park / compete / examine exception	A closing of the loop	A floating pitch that becomes a go-live

What you must not do

Do not paste their scope into the RFP and change the logo. That is the vendor-written specification problem with a covering letter. See the companion piece in this cluster.

Do not give them live personal data to 'prove it on our files' without a DPA, a purpose and a payment or a written volunteer processing decision. A free peek is still processing.

Do not promise them the implementation if a later tender happens. That promise is how you create a legitimate expectation you cannot honour, or a competition you have already decided.

Do not ignore the packet in a drawer and then publish a lookalike RFP six weeks later. The drawer is not a defence. The rewrite and the register are.

• Stamp vendor material on page one of their PDF.
• If the idea is good, write a one-page department need with no product names.
• Compete that need, or open an exception file under the real rule.
• Tell the sender, in writing, that a pitch is not a procurement.

When the pitch is genuinely unique

Unique marketing is not unique goods. If, after a market scan, only one firm can meet a written need, you are in PAC / single-tender territory under the rule that applies to you — in GFR 2017, look at Rule 166, not at a workshop slide. That file is harder than a competition. It should be. Unsolicited does not make it easier. It only explains how you heard about the firm.

Objections you will hear — and what to do with them

These are the lines that stall the file. Answer them in the room, then put the answer in the note. A spoken answer without paper will be forgotten by the next officer.

If we do not engage, we will miss innovation.

Engage as listeners. Take ideas. Pay for a competed discovery if you need labour. Innovation is not a reason to skip a market. The guidelines on AI governance even lean toward innovation over restraint — they still do not repeal GFR.

The vendor asked us to keep the proposal confidential from competitors.

You can decline to publish their proprietary annexures. You cannot accept a duty that stops you from competing a public need. If they will only talk under a lock that kills fairness, do not talk.

Our state PPP policy allows unsolicited projects.

Then read that policy, including publication and challenge steps, and see whether a software agent is even in its scope. Many PPP unsolicited routes were written for roads and metro, not for a noting assistant. Do not stretch a road policy over a model.

We already used their text and the bid is live.

Issue a corrigendum that rewrites exclusive nouns into functions, extend the bid date if the change is material, and put the provenance in the file. Hiding is worse than a late correction.

Forty-eight hours after the Saturday email

Speed here is a fairness tool. A packet that sits unregistered for a month becomes folklore.

1. Hour 1–3: stamp vendor material, enter the register, acknowledge without promising a buy.
2. Day 1: decide whether any department data was already shown. If yes, treat it as processing and tell the DPO.
3. Day 2: one-page department view — park, compete, or open an exception file. No product names.
4. Week 2: if compete, start the buyer-language specification from your workflow, not from their PDF.

How this shows up in the file

The file contains the packet, the acknowledgement, the register row, and the department's one-page view. If a tender follows, the provenance note says what was discarded. If nothing follows, the register still closes the loop.

If you cannot show those papers, you cannot show that the later RFP was yours.

This article is informational field guidance for Indian public institutions, not legal, procurement, security-accreditation or engineering advice. Confirm against the current Gazette, GFR, GeM term, CVC instruction, CERT-In direction, DPDP text, departmental manual and your counsel before you file it.

How to put this in the RFP, not the preamble

A P2 Procurement who searches “unsolicited proposal government” is usually drafting or scoring a bid. “Handling Unsolicited AI Proposals Correctly” belongs in eligibility, the evaluation matrix, or a numbered annexure. If it only lives in the covering note, L1 will ignore it.

An unsolicited AI pitch is not a free RFP. Record who sent it, keep it as vendor material, and rewrite any later tender in buyer language. There is no single national form to hide behind. QCBS weights are a choice you must publish before opening. Accuracy is a task plus a dataset, not a slogan. SLAs for agents must name tool-calls, human gates and log export — uptime alone is a hosting metric.

Do not let a vendor write the specification and then bid on it. Record unsolicited proposals. Pay for pilots that touch personal data. Write exit before you write go-live.

1. Move the control from the preamble into a scored or eligibility row.
2. Attach a one-page definition (accuracy, SLA, language, data handling).
3. Require an artefact in the technical bid, not a slide.
4. Extend the bid date if a corrigendum is material.
5. Minute the demo on your data, offline if you claimed air-gap.

Close this loop before the next CAB

Put “Handling Unsolicited AI Proposals Correctly” on the next change-advisory or bid-opening agenda as a single line item with an owner. If it cannot earn a line item, it will not earn a control. The owner should be a P2 Procurement, not “the vendor.”

Revisit the item when the model, the GeM term, the region, or the SI changes. “unsolicited proposal government” is not a one-time workshop. It is a watch item. Date the last check. Unsigned watch items are souvenirs.