AST_BAA_05Jan15_Final_Version_to_DOI_-_Copy.docx

The Department of the Interior, Interior Business Center, Acquisition Services Directorate releases

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA) 15DHS-002

Agricultural Screening Tools Project

Detection Systems for Identifying Agricultural Pathogens on behalf of Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate

Full Proposals Due: Monday, 06/01/2015 For Questions Regarding This Solicitation Contact:

Russell_K_Choate@ibc.doi.gov

Published Date: 04/17/2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1. Introduction

This solicitation is a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) as contemplated in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 to provide for competitive selection of research proposals. A formal Request for Proposals (RFP), solicitation or additional information regarding this announcement will not be issued. This BAA is issued by the Department of the Interior, Interior Business Center (DOI/IBC), Acquisition Services Directorate on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science & Technology (S&T) Directorate.

DOI/IBC will not issue paper copies of this announcement. All proposals (or any other material) submitted in response to this BAA will not be returned. All proposals will be treated as sensitive competitive information and their contents will be disclosed only for the purpose of evaluation. DOI/IBC reserves the right to select for award and fund all, some, or none of the Full Proposals received in response to this solicitation. No funding for direct reimbursement of proposal development costs will be allowed. Technical and cost proposals (or any other material) submitted in response to this BAA will not be returned. However, depending on the markings on the proposal, DOI/IBC will adhere to FAR policy on handling source selection information and proprietary proposals. It is the policy of DOI/IBC to treat all proposals as sensitive competitive information and to disclose their contents only for the purposes of evaluation

The Department of Homeland Security, Science & Technology Directorate, Chemical and Biological Defense Division is the responsible agency for review/selection of Full Proposals.

1.2. Agency Name

Department of the Interior Interior Business Center Acquisition Services Directorate Division III P.O. Box 1420 Sierra Vista, AZ 85636

1.3. Research Opportunity Title

Detection Systems for Identifying Agricultural Pathogens

1.4. Program Name

Agricultural Screening Tools (AST) in the Agricultural Defense Branch, Chemical and Biological Defense Division, Science and Technology Directorate, Department of Homeland Security

1.5. Research Opportunity Number and Title

BAA15DHS-002 – Detection Systems for Identifying Agricultural Pathogens

1.6. Solicitation and Response Approach

The Department of the Interior, Interior Business Center will not issue paper copies of this announcement. The Government reserves the right to select for award and fund all, some, or none of the Full Proposals received in response to this solicitation. No funding for direct reimbursement of proposal development costs will be allowed. Proposals (or any other material) submitted in response to this BAA will not be returned. However, depending on the markings on the proposal, the Government will adhere to FAR policy on handling source selection information and proprietary proposals. All proposals will be treated as sensitive competitive information and their contents will be disclosed only for the purpose of evaluation. Offerors are to provide unclassified proposals. Documents containing sensitive information that are not suitable for uncontrolled public dissemination should be marked “For Official Use Only” (FOUO). When transmitted electronically, FOUO proposals should be sent with password protection.

Awards will take the form of contracts. In the event an Offeror or subcontractor is a Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), Department of Energy National Laboratory, or other Federally funded entity, DHS S&T will work with the appropriate sponsoring agency to issue an Interagency Agreement pursuant to the Economy Act (31 U.S.C. 1535) or other appropriate authority. Therefore, the applicable laws and regulations governing the legal vehicle used for award will depend on the legal vehicle chosen by DHS S&T. In this regard, Offerors should propose a preferred vehicle type for DHS S&T to consider for award.

A single-phase selection process will be used for this solicitation. No White Papers will be requested; a down-selection process will be conducted by the DHS using Full Proposals submitted to this BAA. A Full Proposal is limited to 20 pages, excluding the following: Formal Transmittal Letter, Cover Page, Summary of Costs and Related Information, Table of Contents and resumes/biographical information for proposed performers.

1.7. Response Dates

Full Proposals

Due: June 01, 2015

1.8. Research Opportunity Description

1.8.1 DHS Agricultural Screening Tools Project Structure and Background

The Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) on Defense of United States Agriculture and Food (HSPD-9), which defines policy for defense of U.S. agriculture and food, identifies DHS as the lead agency to coordinate federal activities to “accelerate and expand development of current and new countermeasures against intentional introduction or natural occurrence of catastrophic animal, plant, or zoonotic diseases.” DHS carries out this responsibility in close collaboration with its sector-specific agency partners (especially United States Department of Agriculture, USDA).

Pursuant to this mission, the Chemical and Biological Defense Division (CBD) seeks technologies to prevent and protect against any infectious disease attack on our Agricultural resources. The Agricultural Defense Branch (Ag), as part of the CBD, has the mission to conduct risk-based agricultural threat countermeasure development; to accelerate and expand the development of current and new medical and diagnostic countermeasures to detect, and prevent the spread of, an intentional introduction or natural occurrence of a catastrophic foreign animal, emerging, or zoonotic disease in coordination with internal and external stakeholders. The Agricultural Screening Tools Project supports the latter part of the above Ag mission.

The threat of terrorist or unintentionally introduction of a foreign animal, emerging, or zoonotic disease on the U.S. economy is of great concern in the United States. There are vulnerabilities that create the need to perform surveillance and monitoring of endemic and foreign animal diseases rapidly, accurately, and economically using a single diagnostic sample. Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) 9 dictates research to “expand development of common screening and inspection procedures for agriculture and food items entering the United States and to maximize effective domestic inspection activities for food items within the United States” in an effort to reduce vulnerabilities.

This BAA seeks to provide sound scientific techniques related to supporting development and deployment of diagnostic and screening technologies for surveillance and detection efforts to protect against any high-consequence livestock pathogens. Both laboratory based approaches and field deployable approaches will be considered although preference will be granted to field deployable solutions.

DHS Agricultural Defense Mission –

The Agricultural Defense mission is to conduct risk-based agricultural threat countermeasure development; to accelerate and expand the development of current and new medical and diagnostic countermeasures to detect, and prevent the spread of, an intentional introduction or natural occurrence of a catastrophic foreign animal, emerging, or zoonotic disease in coordination with internal and external stakeholders.

Agricultural Screening Tools Project Mission Distinctive –

The mission of this project is the development of screening systems to aid in protecting the U.S. public health, food supply and livestock. Specific areas that are being addressed include: 1) veterinary medical countermeasures to detect, control, and eradicate foreign or endemic animal diseases; 2) screening tools that can be used to inspect packages or people entering the U.S. for agricultural threats. Tools developed must provide rapid detection of multiple agents prioritized as the highest risk agents[footnoteRef:1] for use in a national laboratory network or portable and rugged enough for use in the field by local/state/federal diagnosticians. [1: FAZD Center, Texas A&M University, “Protecting agricultural infrastructure: defining the needs and requirements for agricultural screening tools,” Report from the Agricultural Screening Tools Workshop, November 2010, Washington, DC]

1.8.2. DHS Agricultural Screening Tools Project Objectives

The programmatic objectives of the Agricultural Screening Tools Project are:

· Develop field deployable tools for early detection of agricultural threats to allow for swift decisions and quarantine

· Transition tools for early detection of agricultural threats to allow for swift decisions and quarantine

· Transition tools for continued syndromic surveillance of disease to allow for continuity of business

· Enhance capabilities at the NAHLN (whose mission includes surveillance, response (surge), recovery for high consequence agricultural diseases)

1.8.3. Description of Technical Focus Areas (TFA)

The focus of this BAA is in the area of Agricultural Defense, specifically Agricultural Screening Tools (AST), for the purpose of enhancing our national security, protect agricultural infrastructure, enhance resiliency, and ensure business continuity. Agricultural screening tools (tools that can be used to detect a potential disease or condition in an animal, group of animals, or animal product that requires confirmation) must have the ability to perform surveillance and monitoring of endemic and foreign animal diseases rapidly, accurately, and economically using a single diagnostic sample is highly desirable. A multiplex approach is desirable. Further, a near term solution (12-18 months) for field deployable detection is needed. Time to detect and identify should be on the order of minutes (less than 60 minutes). Suggested target performance metrics are provided in Table 1 for a field deployable approach and Table 2 for a laboratory-based approach.

Table 1: Target Performance Metrics (Field deployable)

Sample Matrices

Oral fluids, blood, milk, meat juices, etc

Table 2: Target Performance Metrics (Laboratory-based)

Sample Matrices

Oral fluids, blood, milk, meat juices, etc

A truncated list of agricultural pathogens of concern is shown in Table 3. Many of these diseases are OIE reportable diseases and thus presence of these pathogens in U.S. herds would affect import and export activities, and thus have significant economic impacts. Note however that this list is not all inclusive and we will consider proposals related to other pathogens as long as presence of that pathogen stands to cause significant economic loss to the U.S. (>$1B/year).

Table 3. Partial List of Diseases of Concern

Influenza A

Classical Swine Fever

African Swine Fever

Foot-and-Mouth Disease

Hendra

Nipah

Rift Valley Fever

Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome

Pseudorabies – including Chinese variant

Swine Enteric Coronavirus Disease (4 virus subtypes) Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Transmissible Gastroenteritis Porcine Delta-Coronavirus Porcine Respiratory Coronavirus

Swine Brucellosis

TFA-1: Develop a pen-side agricultural screening tool. This tool needs to be simple enough to be part of the field diagnostician tool kit, easy to use and inexpensive, with minimal sample manipulation.

TFA-2: Develop a multiplex “syndromic surveillance” panel approach as an agricultural screening tool. This could be a laboratory based approach or a field deployable approach. Syndromic surveillance uses health-related data that precede diagnosis and signal a sufficient probability of a case or an outbreak to warrant further public health response[footnoteRef:2]. The regular and systematic collection, assembly and analysis of health-related data of animals in real-time would be useful for outbreak recognition and response management. [2: International Society for Disease Surveillance. Electronic Surveillance Using Hospital Inpatient and Ambulatory Clinical Care Electronic Care Health Record: Recommendations from the ISDS Meaningful Use Workgroup. 2012]

TFA-3: Develop singleplex and multiplex PCR methods for detection of swine diseases in oral fluids.

TFA-4: Develop or evaluate a commercially available transport media for safe transport and stabilization of nucleic acid (DNA/RNA) and antibodies for downstream serological testing.

1.9. Government Representatives

Science and Technology:

Angela M. Ervin, PhD Program Manager Agricultural Screening Tools Project Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate Washington, DC 20528

Business:

Department of the Interior Interior Business Center Acquisition Services Directorate Division III P.O. Box 1420 Sierra Vista, AZ 85636

2. AWARD INFORMATION

2.1. Available Amount of Funding Expected to be Awarded Through this BAA

Although subject to official fiscal appropriation and availability, it is anticipated that the Agricultural Screening Tools project will have approximately $1 Million of FY 2013 funds for award under this BAA.

2.2. Limitation of Funds

The Government reserves the right to incrementally fund contracts awarded from this BAA as provided by the FAR 52.232-22, “Limitation of Funds.” Contracts or other agreements that obligate funds that are awarded will not have an initial period of performance that exceeds 18 months from the receipt of funding by the performer. However, Offerors can propose a base year effort of up to 18 months plus option year(s).

2.3. Anticipated Number of Awards

DHS S&T expects to make one (1) to three (3) awards using FY 2013 funds.

2.4. Anticipated Award Types

Award type is anticipated to be in the form of Cost Reimbursement type contracts. However, the Government reserves the right to award Firm Fixed Price or Interagency Agreements (IAs) to appropriate parties should the situation warrant.

2.5. Anticipated Period of Performance for New Awards

The period of performance for research efforts and studies proposed should either be for a single period not to exceed 18 months, or for multiple years having one base phase (up to 18 months) with one year options. If a multi-year project is proposed, something of tangible value must be provided in the first funding phase. Funding in the first phase cannot be used for planning purposes, with the actual execution of the task to be performed in the subsequent year(s). Multi-year proposals should make recommendations and present a plan that sets forth the follow-on effort in the subsequent option years. Consideration of the funding of follow-on work in a subsequent year will be contingent upon the value of the product(s) produced by the first-phase effort. The period of performance shall commence at the date of award. Proposals that build on current or previous work in these areas are encouraged. If Offerors are extending work performed under other DHS projects or projects for other sponsors, the proposal must clearly identify the point of departure and what existing work will be brought forward and what new effort will be performed under this BAA. The final deliverable for an effort should be a prototype assay or system, final report or a publishable journal article manuscript that can be peer-reviewed, along with standard analytical method(s) and relevant data.

3. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

This BAA is open to ALL responsible sources.

Offerors may include single entities or teams from academia, private sector organizations, Government laboratories, and Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs), including Department of Energy National Laboratories and Centers.

3.1. Federally Funded Research & Development Centers

FFRDCs, including Department of Energy National Laboratories and Centers, are eligible to respond to this BAA, individually or as a team member of an eligible principal Offeror, so long as they are permitted under a sponsoring agreement between the Government and the specific FFRDC.

3.2. Nonprofit Organizations, Educational Institutions and Small Business Set Aside

The Government encourages nonprofit organizations, educational institutions, small businesses, small minority disadvantaged business (SDB) concerns, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), Minority Institutions (MI) (HBCU/MIs), women-owned businesses (WB), and Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) zone enterprises as well as large businesses, academic institutions, and Government laboratories to submit research proposals for consideration and/or to join others in submitting proposals; however, no portion of the BAA will be set-aside for these special entities pursuant to FAR Part 19.502-2, because of the impracticality of reserving discrete or severable areas of research and development in any specific requirement area.

To ensure full consideration in these programs, registration in the https://baa2.st.dhs.gov/ website, described later in this document, requires the appropriate business type selection as well as accurate up-to-date information.

3.3. Organizational Conflict of Interest

Organizational Conflict of Interest issues will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis; as outlined below. Offers who have existing contract(s) to provide scientific, engineering, technical and/or administrative support directly to the DHS S&T will receive particular scrutiny.

(a) Determination. The Government has determined that this effort may result in an actual or potential conflict of interest, or may provide one or more Offerors with the potential to attain an unfair competitive advantage.

(b) Process. If any such conflict of interest is found to exist, the Contracting Officer may (1) disqualify the Offeror, or (2) determine that it is otherwise in the best interest of the United States to contract with the Offeror and include the appropriate provisions to mitigate or avoid such conflict in the contract awarded. After discussion with the Offeror, the Contracting Officer may determine that the actual conflict cannot be avoided, neutralized, mitigated, or otherwise resolved to the satisfaction of the Government, and the Offeror may be found ineligible for award.

(c) Disclosure: The Offeror must represent, as part of its proposal and to the best of its knowledge that: (1) It is not aware of any facts which create any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest relating to the award of this contract; or (2) It has included information in its proposal, providing all current information bearing on the existence of any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest, and has included the mitigation plan in accordance with paragraph (d) of this provision.

(d) Mitigation/Waiver. If an Offeror with a potential or actual conflict of interest or unfair competitive advantage believes it can be mitigated, neutralized, or avoided, the Offeror shall submit a mitigation plan to the Contracting Officer for review. Award of a contract where an actual or potential conflict of interest exists shall not occur before Government approval of the mitigation plan.

(e) Other Relevant Information: In addition to the mitigation plan, the Contracting Officer may require further relevant information from the Offeror. The Contracting Officer will use all information submitted by the Offeror, and any other relevant information known to DHS, to determine whether an award to the Offeror may take place, and whether the mitigation plan adequately neutralizes or mitigates the conflict.

(f) Corporation Change. The successful Offeror shall inform the Contracting Officer within thirty (30) calendar days of the effective date of any corporate mergers, acquisitions, and/or divestures that may affect this provision.

(g) Flow-down. The contractor shall insert the substance of this clause in each first tier subcontract that exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold.

4. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

4.1. BAA Package Download

This BAA package may be downloaded in its entirety from the Federal Business Opportunities website https://www.fbo.gov or from https://baa2.st.dhs.gov.

Registration is not required to download the BAA package; however, a registration in https://baa2.st.dhs.gov/ is required to upload a response to the BAA.

4.2. Application and Submission Process

Submissions will not be accepted from organizations that have not registered. The application process will occur in a single stage process: submission of Full Proposals. Any organization that wishes to participate in this solicitation must register at: https://baa2.st.dhs.gov/.

(a) Submitting a Response to this BAA:

To begin the process, go to https://baa.st.dhs.gov/, and select BAA15DHS-002 from the list on the left side of the screen. Select the “Submit Proposal” link, and buttons for registration and submission will appear. Select the appropriate registration button and fill in the required fields. Once the registration process is complete, registrants should receive a control identification number via e-mail. This control number is needed to begin the proposal submission process.

To submit your proposal, select the appropriate submission button, fill out the requested fields, upload your files, and then submit. Offerors will receive confirmation of their submission via e-mail. You may revise your Full Proposal submission up until the deadline for Full Proposal submission.

No Classified Proposals (or portions of proposals) will be accepted.

The Government may use selected support contractor personnel to assist as technical advisors during the evaluation process and to support administrative functions pertaining to the receipt and evaluation of any ensuing presentations and proposals from this announcement. These support contractors will be bound by appropriate non-disclosure agreements to protect proprietary and source-selection information. They will not be permitted to release any source-selection information to third parties, including others in their organization.

Full Proposals shall be delivered via upload in accordance with instructions provided during registration.

The proposal submissions will be protected from unauthorized disclosure in accordance with FAR 15.207, applicable law, and DHS regulations. Offerors are expected to appropriately mark each page of their submission that contains proprietary information.

The DHS BAA website at https://baa2.st.dhs.gov offers electronic access to BAA solicitations, frequently asked questions (FAQs), answers to FAQs, abstracts of previously funded projects, and hyperlinks to other useful information.

For step-by-step instructions for registering your company and submitting your proposal, please refer to the “Registrations and Submissions Training Guide” which can be accessed by clicking the link at the top right corner of the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) page at https://baa2.st.dhs.gov/portal/public/Menu.action?page=baa_faq.

IMPORTANT: Before submitting a proposal for the first time, you must first register your company and user account in the system. It is recommended that the Business Official or an authorized representative designed by the Business Official be the first person to register for your company. Your company’s Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) is required during registration. (If your company is registered, other new users may register and associate their information with the company’s existing record. When registration is completed, users can submit and manage their proposals.

NOTE: To register your Full Proposal, you must log on with your credentials. Click the “Start New Proposal” button. When the Start the New Proposal page displays, pick the solicitation and topic, and then enter the title of the Full Proposal that you are submitting. When you have entered the title, click the “Add Proposal to Activity Worksheet” button. The Proposal Activity worksheet page lists your proposal in the Proposals in progress section of the page. Your Full Proposal is registered at this point.

After you have uploaded your Full Proposal documents, you must click on the “Submit Proposal” button to submit the Full Proposal; simply uploading the documents is not sufficient.

4.3. Format and Content of Full Proposals

Full Proposals

The due date for receipt of Full Proposals is 4:30 P.M. (Local Eastern Time) on June 01, 2015. Full Proposals WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED after the published due date. It is anticipated that negotiations for award will commence on or about June 16, 2015. As soon as the final proposal evaluation process is complete, the Offeror will be notified via e-mail of its selection or non-selection for an award. Full Proposals exceeding the page limit will not be evaluated.

Full Proposal Format: Volume 1 - Technical Proposal; and Volume 2 - Cost Proposal

Full proposals will consist of two volumes: a Technical Proposal volume and a Cost Proposal volume.

· Paper Size – 8.5-by-11-inch paper

· Margins – 1 inch

· Spacing – Single- or double-spaced

· Font – Times New Roman, 12 point. Text embedded within graphics or tables in the body of the Project Description Form should be legible and not smaller than 8 point.

· Number of Pages –

· Volume 1 (Technical Proposal): No more than 20 single-sided pages. Full proposals exceeding the page limit will not be evaluated. The Official Transmittal Letter, as well as the cover page, table of contents and resumes/biographical information about potential performers in the Full Proposal are not subject to the page limitation.

· Volume 2: (Cost Proposal): No page limitation.

· Copies – A proposal shall consist of one electronic file for the Technical Proposal volume and one electronic volume for Cost Proposal volume. Electronic files will be in portable document format (PDF), readable by IBM-compatible PCs. Each file size must be no more than 10 MB.

Full Proposal Content

Volume 1: Technical Proposal

Volume I of the Full Proposal shall be in the form of a Technical Proposal volume. Responsiveness to the order and content of sections listed in Volume I are important to assure thorough and fair evaluation of proposals. Nonconforming proposals may be rejected without review. The Technical Proposal must cover the following points in more detail:

· Official Transmittal Letter: This is an official transmittal letter with authorizing official signature. For an electronic submission, the letter can be scanned into the electronic proposal. The letter of transmittal shall state whether this proposal has been submitted to another government agency, other than DHS S&T, and if so, which one and when.

· Cover Page: This should include the words “Technical Proposal” and the following:

1) BAA number;

2) Title of Proposal;

3) Identity of prime Offeror and complete list of subcontractors, if applicable;

4) Technical contact (name, address, phone/fax, electronic mail address);

5) Administrative/business contact (name, address, phone/fax, electronic mail address); and,

6) Duration of effort (separately identify the basic effort and any options).

· Table of Contents

· Executive Summary: Summarize the Proposal and the expected benefits of the solution.

· Proposal: Describe the proposed work and the associated technical and management approaches/issues.

· Performance Goals: Describe the overall methodology and how it will meet the AST objectives specified in the technical description Sections 1.8.2 and 1.8.3. Identify the applicable technical focus area(s) the proposed approach addresses.

· Detailed Technical Approach: Describe the proposed technical issues and methodology to address the stated program objectives.

· Statement of Work (SOW), Schedule, and Milestones: Provide an integrated display for the proposed research, showing each task with major milestones. Include a proposed schedule for the effort (estimated dates of tasks, milestones and deliverables). Describe how each task will be performed and identify sub-tasks, if appropriate. Include a section clearly marked as the SOW you propose to undertake. It is anticipated that the proposed SOW will be incorporated as an attachment to the resultant award instrument. To this end, such proposals must include a severable self-standing SOW without any proprietary restrictions, which can be attached to the contract or agreement award.

· Deliverables: Provide a brief summary of all deliverables proposed under this effort, including data, and reports consistent with the objectives of the work; along with suggested due dates (calendar days after the effective date of award). This section shall be severable, i.e., it will begin on a new page and the following section shall begin on a new page. It is anticipated that the proposed detailed list and description of all deliverables will be incorporated as an attachment to the resultant award instrument. To this end, such proposals must include a severable self-standing detailed list and description of all deliverables without any proprietary restrictions, which can be attached to the contract or agreement award.

· Management Plan: Provide a brief summary of the management plan, including an explicit description of what role each participant or team member will play in the project, and their past experience in technical areas related to this proposal.

· Facilities: List the location(s) where the work will be performed, and the facilities to be used. Describe any specialized or unique facilities which directly affect the effort.

· Government-Furnished Resources: Provide a brief summary of required information and data which must be provided by the Government to support the proposed work, if any.

· Cost Summary: Summarize the projected total costs for each task in the initial period of performance and any proposed option year of the effort, including a summary of subcontracts, man hours, and consumables.

· Resumes for Key Personnel: In an appendix, provide resumes and curriculum vitae (CVs) for each of the key personnel. These resumes do not count toward the 20-page limit.

· Other DHS Support: As an appendix, provide a list of any current or pending awards or proposals with DHS that pertain to AST. This section will not count towards the 20-page limit.

· Assertion of Data Rights: Due to the nature of this research and development project, the Government will need to evaluate the deliverable in a field prototype evaluation scenario with Government personnel, such as United States Department of Agriculture. Therefore, include here a summary of any assertions to any technical data or computer software that will be developed or delivered under any resultant award. This includes any assertions to pre-existing results, prototypes, or systems supporting and/or necessary for the use of the research, results, and/or prototype. Any rights asserted in other parts of the proposal that would impact the rights in this section must be cross-referenced. If less than unlimited rights in any data delivered under the resultant award are asserted, the Offeror must explain how these rights in the data will affect its ability to deliver research data, subsystems, and toolkits for integration as set forth below. Additionally, the Offeror must explain how the program goals are achievable in light of these proprietary and/or restrictive limitations. If there are no claims of proprietary rights in pre-existing data, this section shall consist of a statement to that effect.

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall identify all technical data or computer software that the Offeror asserts will be furnished to the Government with restrictions on access, use, modification, reproduction, release, performance, display, or disclosure. Offeror's pre-award identification shall be submitted as an attachment to its offer and shall contain the following information:

Statement of Assertion. Include the following statement: “The Offeror asserts for itself, or the persons identified below, that the Government's rights to access, use, modify, reproduce, release, perform, display, or disclose only the following technical data or computer software should be restricted.”

Identification of the technical data or computer software to be furnished with restrictions. For technical data (other than computer software documentation) pertaining to items, components, or processes developed at private expense, identify both the deliverable technical data and each such item, component, or process as specifically as possible (e.g., by referencing specific sections of the proposal or specific technology or components). For computer software or computer software documentation, identify the software or documentation by specific name or module or item number.

Detailed description of the asserted restrictions. For each of the technical data or computer software identified above, identify the following information:

(i) Asserted rights. Identify the asserted rights for the technical data or computer software.

(ii) Copies of negotiated, commercial, and other non-standard licenses. Offeror shall attach to its offer for each listed item copies of all proposed negotiated license(s), Offeror's standard commercial license(s), and any other asserted restrictions other than Government purpose rights; limited rights; restricted rights; rights under prior government contracts, including SBIR data rights for which the protection period has not expired; or government’s minimum rights.

(iii) Specific basis for assertion. Identify the specific basis for the assertion. For example:

(A) Development at private expense, either exclusively or partially. For technical data, development refers to development of the item, component, or process to which the data pertains. For computer software, development refers to the development of the software. Indicate whether development was accomplished exclusively or partially at private expense.

(B) Rights under a prior government contract, including SBIR data rights for which the protection period has not expired.

(C) Standard commercial license customarily provided to the public.

(D) Negotiated license rights.

(iv) Entity asserting restrictions. Identify the corporation, partnership, individual, or other person, as appropriate, asserting the restrictions.

Previously delivered technical data or computer software. The Offeror shall identify the technical data or computer software that are identical or substantially similar to technical data or computer software that the Offeror has produced for, delivered to, or is obligated to deliver to the Government under any contract or subcontract. The Offeror need not identify commercial technical data or computer software delivered subject to a standard commercial license.

Estimated Cost of Development. The estimated cost of development for that technical data or computer software to be delivered with less than Unlimited Rights.

Supplemental information. When requested by the Contracting Officer, the Offeror shall provide sufficient information to enable the Contracting Officer to evaluate the Offeror’s assertions. Sufficient information must include, but is not limited to, the following:

(1) The contract number under which the data or software were produced;

(2) The contract number under which, and the name and address of the organization to whom, the data or software were most recently delivered or will be delivered; and

(3) Identification of the expiration date for any limitations on the Government’s rights to access, use, modify, reproduce, release, perform, display, or disclose the data or software, when applicable.

Ineligibility for award. An Offeror's failure to submit or complete the identifications and assertions required by this provision with its offer may render the offer ineligible for award.

This section must be severable, i.e., it will begin on a new page and the following section shall begin on a new page. It is anticipated that the proposed Assertion of Data Rights will be incorporated as an attachment to the resultant award instrument. To this end, proposals must include a severable self-standing Assertion of Data Rights without any proprietary restrictions, which can be attached to the contract or agreement award.

VOLUME 2: Cost Proposal

The Cost Proposal shall consist of a cover page and two parts, Part 1 and Part 2. Part 1 will provide a detailed cost breakdown of all costs by cost category and Part 2 will provide a Cost breakdown by task/subtask using the same task numbers in the Statement of Work. Options must be separately priced.

Cover Page: The use of the SF 1411 is optional. The words “Cost Proposal” should appear on the cover page in addition to the following information:

· BAA number;

· Title of Proposal;

· Identity of prime Offeror and complete list of subcontractors, if applicable;

· Technical contact (name, address, phone/fax, electronic mail address)

· Administrative/business contact (name, address, phone/fax, electronic mail address) and;

· Duration of effort (separately price out the basic effort and any options).

Part 1: Detailed breakdown of all costs by cost category. The Offeror should provide a total estimated price for major demonstrations and other activities associated with the program, including cost sharing, if any. The Offeror should state whether any Independent Research and Development (IR&D) program is or will be dedicated to this effort, or if IR&D is being pursued to benefit related programs as well. Any cost sharing estimates should include the type of cost share, i.e., cash or in-kind. If in-kind is proposed, the Offeror should provide a discussion of how the cost share was valued.

· Direct Labor – Individual labor category or person, with associated labor hours and unburdened direct labor rates;

· Indirect Costs – Fringe Benefits, Overhead, G&A, COM, etc. (Must show base amount and rate);

· Travel – Number of trips, destinations, durations, etc.;

· Subcontract – A cost proposal as detailed as the Offeror’s cost proposal will be required to be submitted by the subcontractor. The subcontractor’s cost proposal can be provided in a sealed envelope with the Offeror’s cost proposal or will be requested from the subcontractor at a later date;

· Consultant – Provide consultant agreement or other document which verifies the proposed loaded daily/hourly rate;

· Materials--Materials should be specifically itemized with costs or estimated costs. Where possible, indicate purchasing method, (Competition, engineering estimate, market survey, etc.);

· Other Directs Costs, particularly any proposed items of equipment or facilities. Equipment and facilities generally must be furnished by the contractor/recipient. Justifications must be provided when Government funding for such items is sought;

· Fee/Profit including fee percentage.

Part 2: Cost breakdown by task/sub-task using the same task numbers in the Statement of Work.

Part 3: Full Proposal Summary of Costs and Related Information Form (See Section 8.2 – Appendix B of this BAA). Please complete this form and provide it as an attachment to the Cost Proposal. Certified cost and/or pricing data may be required.

The Cost Proposal should be consistent with your proposed SOW. Activities such as demonstrations required to reduce the various technical risks should be identified in the SOW and reflected in the Cost Proposal. The Offeror should provide a total estimated price for the major Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) activities associated with the program.

For the Cost Proposal, the DHS BAA website system has a web form where the Offeror may enter data regarding the cost proposal. The system does not allow the Full Proposal to be submitted without completing this Cost Proposal web form. Offerors may choose to not enter information in the Cost Proposal web form since the Cost Proposal cover page, Part 1, and Part 2 will be uploaded separately. However, Offerors will still need to go to the last page of the Cost Proposal web form and hit the confirmation button noting that the Offeror has reviewed the empty web form and is submitting the web form blank.

4.4. Protection of Information Uploaded to BAA Website:

All data uploaded to https://baa2.st.dhs.gov/ is protected from public view or download. All submissions will be considered proprietary/source selection sensitive and protected accordingly. Documents may only be reviewed by the registrant, authorized Government representatives, and assigned evaluators.

4.5. Significant Dates and Times

DHS S&T plans to review all Full Proposals in accordance with the “Anticipated Schedule of Events” set forth in the table in this section, using the evaluation criteria described in Section 5.1. A Review Panel will evaluate the Full Proposals using the criteria specified under the evaluation criteria set forth in Section 5.1. Following that review, Offerors will be notified whether or not their proposal has been selected for negotiation. It is anticipated that multiple awards may be made under this BAA.

The Government reserves the right to fund none, some, or all of the proposals received. It is the intention upon completion of proposal evaluation to notify Offerors of an initiation of negotiation for awards or rejection of their proposal. Awards will be made based on the evaluation, funds availability, and other programmatic considerations. If requested, feedback will be provided via teleconference for those Full Proposals that are not selected.

Anticipated Schedule of Events*

Anticipated Schedule of Events *

N/A

* These dates are estimates as of the date of this announcement.

4.6. Further Assistance Needed for this BAA

The applicable electronic address for all correspondence for this BAA is: Russell_K_Choate@ibc.doi.gov.

For technical assistance with using the https://baa2.st.dhs.gov/ website, submit questions to the administrators at dhsbaa@reisys.com, phone (703) 480-7676.

4.7. BAA Contractual and Technical Questions.

All contractual and technical questions regarding this BAA including the published requirements and instructions must be directed to the Contracting Officer at Russell_K_Choate@ibc.doi.gov. The program and technical staff will not acknowledge, forward, or respond to any inquiries received in any other manner concerning this BAA. Contractual questions and answers will be posted periodically under the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) section on the https://fbo.gov and https://baa2.st.dhs.gov websites.

5. EVALUATION INFORMATION

5.1. Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation of Full Proposals will be accomplished through an independent technical review using the following criteria. All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined are significantly more important than cost or price.

Criterion I: Scientific Merit: The Offeror must demonstrate understanding of the critical technology and scientific challenges required to address the desired system parameters and strategy as described elsewhere within the announcement. The research approach should be scientifically sound, practical and technically defensible. The research must contribute to scientific knowledge in the topic area and the research must enumerate potential benefits of the proposed research. The proposal shall demonstrate an awareness of the state-of-the-art. The proposal should be well-prepared with supportive information that is self-explanatory.

Criterion II: Sound Technical Approach: The proposed scientific/technical concept and methodology is clearly described and sound and includes a demonstrated understanding of related technology. The technical approach is innovative and/of has advantages over other solutions, if successfully implemented. Of importance is how the proposed technology will meet or exceed the performance requirements for this program. All critical scientific and technical issues clearly identified, and the planned development approach and risk mitigation efforts are clearly defined and feasible. Adherence to the performance metrics in Tables 1 and 2 will be evaluated (see Section 1.8.3).

Criterion III: Sound Management Approach: Presentation of a sound managerial approach to the proposed work, including a demonstrated understanding of the issues and challenges associated with achieving the goals of the topic, and a strategy to address those issues and challenges. A successful team will possess multidisciplinary expertise to address the complexity of the effort.

Criterion IV: Capability to Perform and History of Past Performance: Demonstration of a capability to perform the proposed work, including history of previous performance in developing related solutions and technologies. Proposals that utilize industry-academic partnering or utilize industry-Government partnering which enhances the development of novel S&T advances will be given favorable consideration. Specific considerations will include:

· Offeror’s knowledge of the state-of-the-art diagnostic detection systems in human or veterinary medicine and ability to work across domains to solve a research question

· Offeror’s team is sufficiently complete: key personnel are identified with the required range of competencies to execute the effort and the team includes appropriate experience

· Offeror has experience in working with Transboundary Animal Diseases (TADs)

· Offeror has experience working with biological pathogens ( list specifically by agent)

· Offeror and/or Third party test reports showing past experience in development of screening tools for pathogens (preferably Ag assays and publication grade format)

· Offeror is able to perform laboratory experiments on pathogens of interest or surrogates or has partnerships with other institutions where such work can be completed

Criterion V: Cost Realism: Presentation of accurate, well-founded and reasonable estimates of all costs related to performance of the proposed effort, including an appropriate allocation of labor resources. Members of the Evaluation panel will be looking for overall best value to the government.

Evaluation of Full Proposals will be based on an assessment of the overall best value to the government based on the aforementioned criteria. Awards will be made based upon Full Proposal evaluation, funds availability, and other programmatic considerations, including awards to lesser rated proposals where orthogonal or alternative approaches and technologies are deemed to be more technically advantageous.

NOTE: DHS S&T reserves the right to select for award and fund all, some, or none of the Full Proposals received in response to…