BAA_15F06718R0006603.pdf

UNCLASSIFIED

Federal Bureau of Investigation

THE HIGH-VALUE DETAINEE INTERROGATION GROUP (HIG)

ADVANCING THE RESEARCH AND PRACTICE OF

INTELLIGENCE INTERVIEWING AND INTERROGATION

Broad Agency Announcement

April 2018

Contracting Officer:

Mr. Rajendra Soni

Engineering Research Facility

Quantico, Virginia 22135

Email: rvsoni@fbi.gov

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. General Information on Funding Opportunity

1.2. Background

1.3. Research Efforts

1.4. Past BAA Efforts

1.5. Research Objective

1.6. Submitting Organizations/Eligible Applicants

2. APPROACH

2.1. Phase I – White Paper

2.1.2. White Paper Preparation

2.1.3. White Paper Format and Layout

2.1.4. White Paper Submission

2.1.5. White Paper Evaluation

2.2. Phase II – Request for Proposal (RFP)

2.2.1. Formatting and Layout

2.2.1.1 Volume I – Technical/Management Plan (20 page limit)

2.2.1.1.1 Tab 1 – Technical Approach/Factors (10 page limit)

2.2.1.1.2 Tab 2 – Management Plan (10 page limit)

2.2.1.2 Volume II – Statement of Work (15 page limit)

2.2.1.3 Volume III – Past Performance (5 page limit)

2.2.1.4 Volume IV - Cost (no page limit)

2.2.2. Proposal Submission

2.2.3. Proposal Evaluation

2.2.4. Award Notices

3. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

4. POINTS OF CONTACT

4.1. Contracting Officer (CO)

4.2. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

5. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

6. SECURITY

6.1. Security Requirements

7. PUBLICATION NOTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

8. GENERAL INFORMATION

8.1. Eligibility

8.1.1. Offerors Located Within the United States

8.1.1.1. DOJ Residency Requirement

8.2. Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical Considerations

8.3. Subcontracting

8.4. System for Award Management

8.5. Submission Information and FOIA

9. FAR CLAUSES/PROVISIONS

10. ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS

11. NOTIFICATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST REGARDING PERSONNEL

12. ACRONYMS

APPENDIX A: SELECTED HIG-SPONSORED PUBLICATIONS BY YEAR

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. General Information on Funding Opportunity

The High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG), Federal Bureau Investigation (FBI), selects its research efforts through the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process subsequent to the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d) (2) (i) and 35.016 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), which provides for the acquisition of basic and applied research and that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement through the competitive selection of proposals. This is an unrestricted solicitation. Contracts and grants and other assistance agreements made under BAAs are for scientific study and experimentation directed towards advancing the state of the art and increasing knowledge or understanding.

The use of the BAA solicitation allows a wide range of innovative ideas and concepts. The BAA will appear on the Federal Business Opportunities, FedBizOpps, website, http://www.fbo.gov/. The North American Industry Classification System Code for this acquisition is 541720, Research and Development in the Social Sciences and Humanities.

Contracts based on responses to this BAA are considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of 41 CFR “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984.” (FAR website is https://acquisition.gov/far).

The FBI anticipates making, but is not obligated to make, multiple awards under this BAA.

The amount of resources made available under this BAA will depend on the quality of the proposals received. Award decisions are subject to the availability of funds and the FBI may choose to not execute any award under this BAA due to unavailability of funds or other factors. Due to Government budget uncertainties, (1) No specific dollars have been reserved for total awards under this BAA, and (2) No award floor or ceiling thresholds have been established for individual awards under this BAA.

The purpose of this BAA is to provide for the competitive selection of research proposals for social and behavioral science research to deepen our understanding of the complex social and behavioral processes underpinning intelligence interviewing and interrogation.

Offerors will not conduct research for the HIG in HIG facilities.

1.2. Background

The mission of the HIG is to deploy the nation’s best available interrogation resources against detainees identified as having potential information regarding terrorist attacks against the United States and its allies. The HIG brings together an experienced team of professionals and subject matter experts from various Government agencies and an international and an interdisciplinary team of researchers, in the field of interrogation practices and techniques.

In order to accomplish its operational mission, the HIG research mandate is to study and evaluate whether the interrogation practices and techniques in Army Field Manual 2-22.3, when employed by departments and agencies outside the military, “provide an appropriate means of acquiring the intelligence necessary to protect the Nation and, if warranted, to recommend any additional or different guidance for other departments or agencies” (Executive Order 13491). The HIG Research Program serves as the locus for advancing the science and practice of interrogation within the United States government.

1.3. Research Efforts

The HIG Research Program is the premier provider and trusted source for the state of the art and science of interrogation. The HIG supports research and development of an effective, science-based model of interrogation. To this end, the HIG Research Program commissions basic and applied science and field validation/effectiveness studies to rigorously examine current and new approaches to interrogation. The program incorporates new insights and methods based on rigorous science to ensure practitioners are equipped with knowledge from the behavioral and social sciences that will make them better interrogators, interviewers and debriefers.

To date, the HIG has commissioned a body of scientific research on interrogation that has resulted in approximately 125 individual research projects and more than 125 publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Over the years, the HIG has supported world renowned psychologists and experimental researchers at word-class institutions within the U.S. and abroad. Equally important, this investment has led to significant scientific discoveries in the theoretical and psychological underpinnings of intelligence interviewing and interrogation — discoveries that in turn, have led to broader societal impacts for Americans and society at large. This includes the implementation of best practices in law enforcement and military operational environments, the development of an integrated process model of intelligence interviewing and interrogation, and the modernization of numerous federal training programs.

1.4. Past BAA Efforts

The program began in 2010 with a competitive and transparent solicitation for proposals on intelligence interviews, interrogations, and debriefings; since then, the FBI issued two BAAs in fiscal years (FY) 2012 and 2015. The merit review process evaluates the proposed effort for (1) overall technical merit, (2) applicability to the organizational mission, and (3) reasonableness and realism of proposed costs.

The FBI issued awards to the following organizations:

Applied Research Associates, Inc. - Examining Interrogator Processes for Establishing and Evaluating Baselines of Detainee Behavior.

Charles Sturt University - Interpreting Mode, Interpreter Presence and Language in Investigative Interviews.

Florida International University - Confirmation Bias among Interpreters in an

Interrogation Setting. Interviewing Information Sources. Twice with the Cognitive Interview: Novel Measures to Assess the Accuracy and Veracity of Witness Recollection.

Humintell – Social Influences across Cultures: The Effects of Reciprocity, Authority, and Liking on Rapport and Information Offered in Investigative Interviews.

Iowa State University - Trust Building Strategies: Facilitating Cooperation in an Interrogative Context. Countering Resistance Due to Identity and Affiliation Concerns: Secrecy as a Theoretical Framework for Eliciting Information from Non- Compliant Sources.

John Jay College/University of New York - Bringing about Change in Interrogation

Practice. Implicit Influences in Investigative Interviews: Expansion and Cross Cultural Validation.

Lancaster University - Sensemaking and Error Recovery in Protracted Suspect

Interactions: Developing an Experiment Led Training Framework.

Louisiana State University - Interpersonal and Intrapersonal Influences on Information Elicitation.

Roger Williams – Training of Science-Based Methods of Interrogation: A Follow- Up

Analysis"

Tailored Training - Programs Research to Practice Concept.

Texas A&M University - Interpreter-Facilitated Interrogations: Identifying Strategies for Maximizing Success.

US Naval Research Laboratory - HIG Research Dissemination Reports, Assessing

Effectiveness and Utility. Studying Effective Information Elicitation Techniques During Correctional Interviews.

University of Gothenburg - An Analysis of the Approaches and Tactics Used in LAPD

Perkins Operations. Training Military Intelligence Officers to Elicit Information from Small Cells of Sources.

University of Liverpool - Extending ORBIT: Interpersonal Skills, Rapport in Reducing

Resistance and Educing Information from High- Value Detainees.

University of Maryland - The Psychology of Forgiveness in the Middle East.

University of Portsmouth - Development of a Memory-Based Lie Detection Tool. The Effect of Interpreters in Eliciting Information and Cues to Deceit.

University of Texas at El Paso - Effectiveness of Army Field Manual Interrogation

Techniques through the Development of Specific Dimensions of Rapport

University of Wolverhampton - Intelligence Interviewing: Controlled Cognitive Engagement, Cross-Cultural Persuasion, and Cognitive Style.

For information on published research resulting from these efforts, please refer to Appendix A.

1.5. Research Objective

The core goal of the HIG Research program is to develop science-based and effective methods of intelligence interviewing and interrogation that are both legally and ethically sound. The long-term objectives of the HIG Research program are to:

I. Build a comprehensive program of science to research and develop improved lawful interrogation methods: develop and promote a comprehensive and holistic model of interrogation that is grounded in a robust body of empirical evidence, rigorously evaluated, and validated in the real-world.

II. Sponsor and Coordinate Interrogation Research Activities: identify and coordinate with national and international research partners in government, industry and academe whose work is relevant to interviewing and interrogation. Investing in basic and applied research is an essential strategy to ensure we are addressing critical near-term requirements and filling our future capability gaps.

III. Conduct Effectiveness Testing of Laboratory- and Field-Based Experimental Findings: evaluate the effectiveness of both the training and the use of science-based interview and interrogation methods for eliciting reliable and accurate information in the field.

IV. Disseminate Research Results To Stake-Holder Communities: move beyond the traditional academic venues (i.e., conferences, technical meetings, workshops) to package and disseminate our research findings in various accessible, plain-language formats to end-users.

The HIG Research Program is actively seeking forward-looking research ideas to rigorously examine current and new approaches and/or develop innovative strategies to significantly advance the field of interview and interrogation science. Research conducted under this program can include a broad range of methodological and theoretical approaches including empirical studies that require primary data collection, such as controlled laboratory studies, quasi-experimental field studies, systematic field observations, surveys, comparative and observational studies, or the use of secondary data sources, such as archival data. The program strongly encourages the collection of primary data for the development and testing of theoretical models and for the development and advancement of methodologies for data collection, statistical methods, and research designs that have the potential to expand the fundamental knowledge base and advance the practice of intelligence interviewing and interrogation. This includes, but not limited to, research projects and field studies relating to:

o Development and validation of new theories and models on the factors and principles underlying interpersonal processes (e.g., social influence and persuasion strategies) on the effectiveness of intelligence interviewing and interrogation methods o Negotiation and conflict resolution in intelligence interviewing and interrogation settings o Cross-cultural considerations related to intelligence interviewing and interrogation o Cognition-based credibility and assessments of intent (e.g., past and future actions) o Computational linguistic analysis and models of credibility assessment o Neurophysiological and psychological underpinnings of rapport, persuasion and trust Topics considered out of scope for this BAA and will be excluded for consideration for funding include:

Proposals purely focused on technology development (e.g., credibility assessment tools, performance aids, etc.)

Methods relying exclusively on case studies, surveys or interviews with subject matter experts

Literature reviews and/or meta-analyses Language and socio-cultural training

The HIG highly encourages participation from transdisciplinary research teams from social and behavioral sciences, and collaborative teaming arrangements amongst multiple institutions that have the relevant expertise and facilities to execute fundamental and applied research. Please refer to Appendix A for previous, published research supported by the HIG.

1.6. Submitting Organizations/Eligible Applicants

The Government encourages nonprofit organizations, educational institutions, small businesses, small disadvantaged business concerns, and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU)/ Minority Institutions (MI), as well as large businesses, to submit requested materials for consideration. Although no portion of this announcement is set-aside for HBCUs or MIs participation, the Government encourages applications from these institutions.

Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government entities (Government/National laboratories, military or educational institutions, etc.) are subject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot submit a response to this BAA in any capacity, unless they can clearly demonstrate the work is not otherwise available from the private sector and they also provide written documentation citing the specific statutory authority (as well as, where relevant, contractual authority) establishing their eligibility to propose to Government solicitations. At the present time, the Government does not consider 15 U.S.C. 3710a to be sufficient legal authority to show eligibility. While 10 U.S.C.

2539b may be the appropriate statutory starting point for some entities, specific supporting regulatory guidance, together with evidence of agency approval, will still be required to fully establish eligibility. The Government will consider eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis; however, the burden to prove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the Offeror.

Any research using human subjects must be approved by the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) at the Offeror’s institution and the FBI prior to implementation.

FAR Subpart 25.7 – Prohibited Sources as stated in 25.701 (Restrictions Administered by the Department of the Treasury on Acquisition of Supplies or Service from Prohibited Sources) is hereby incorporated in this BAA.

Foreign participants and/or individuals may participate to the extent that such participants comply with any necessary Non-Disclosure Agreements, Security Regulations, Export Control Laws, and other governing statutes applicable under the circumstances.

Current federal employees are prohibited from participating in particular matters involving conflicting financial, employment, and representational interests (18 USC 203, 205, and 208). Once the proposals have been received, and prior to the start of proposal evaluations, the Government will assess potential conflicts of interest and will promptly notify the Offeror if any appear to exist. (Please note the Government assessment does NOT affect, offset, or mitigate the Offeror’s own duty to give full notice and planned mitigation for all potential organizational conflicts, as discussed below.) The Government is required to review and evaluate all proposals received under this BAA and to manage all selected efforts. Offeror shall carefully consider the composition of their performer team before submitting a proposal to this BAA.

If an Offeror believes that any conflict of interest exists or may exist (whether organizational or otherwise), the Offeror shall promptly raise the issue with the CO by sending Offeror's contact information and a summary of the potential conflict by email before time and effort are expended in preparing a proposal and mitigation plan. If, in the sole opinion of the Government after full consideration of the circumstances, any conflict situation cannot be effectively mitigated, the proposal may be returned without technical evaluation and withdrawn from further consideration for award under this BAA.

2. APPROACH

A two-phased proposal selection process will be utilized. Those contemplating submission of a proposal are encouraged to submit a White Paper before submitting a full proposal.

Submission of a White Paper before a full proposal allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost associated with the submission of a full proposal that may have minimal probability of being selected for funding. Costs associated with a White Paper or full proposal submission in response to this BAA are not considered allowable direct charges to any resulting award. These costs may be allowable expenses to normal bid and proposal indirect costs specified in FAR 31.205-18. An Applicant submitting a proposal is cautioned that only a Government Contracting or Grants Officer may obligate the Government to any legal instrument involving expenditure of Government funds.

2.1. Phase I – White Paper

Phase I requires Offeror to submit a White Paper that provides an overview of the proposed work, an introduction to the associated technical and management issues, and the applicability of the work to an FBI requirement. The White Paper shall describe the selected technical requirement with the proposed technical solution. The White Paper shall also contain a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost estimate associated with the technical solution.

2.1.2. White Paper Preparation

It is required that Offerors submit a White Paper prior to preparing a proposal, if selected.

The White Paper shall outline the background and methods of the proposed research. The White Paper allows Offerors to make preliminary inquiries about the need for the proposed research and availability of funds, prior to investing the time required for a detailed proposal. The CO will provide feedback to the Offeror on whether submission of a full proposal is warranted.

2.1.3. White Paper Format and Layout

The White Paper shall not exceed 10 pages, double spaced, single-sided, and in Microsoft Word format. The text pages when printed shall be 8-1/2” x 11” and 1” margins on both sides, and top and bottom. Times New Roman font type and with 12 point characters shall be used to enhance readability. Pages submitted in excess of the page limitation will not be evaluated. Titles given to the White Papers shall be descriptive of the work they cover and not be merely a copy of the title of this solicitation.

2.1.4. White Paper Submission

White Papers providing an overview of the proposed work may be submitted for consideration at any time during the term of this BAA. Offerors should note, however, that the FBI’s ability to review White Papers, provide feedback on whether a full proposal is warranted, and evaluate full proposals is limited by the availability of technical evaluation staff, contracting personnel, and available funding. Offerors seeking a FY 18 award are encouraged to submit White Papers by 3:00 p.m. ET on 30 May 2018 to maximize the potential for award this fiscal year. The following table provides dates for White paper submission.

White Paper Submission Schedule Date White Papers Due Fiscal Year (FY)* First Set 30 May 2018 FY18 Second Set 29 March 2019 FY19 Third Set 27 March 2020 FY20 *FY White Papers consideration for Phase II will be dependent of availability of funding in FY they are due.

All white papers shall be electronically submitted directly to the Contracting Officer (CO) at rvsoni@fbi.gov and cc: bewatts@fbi.gov.

2.1.5. White Paper Evaluation

The evaluation team will first determine if the White Paper is within scope of the BAA. The team will evaluate the White Papers found to be within scope to determine its overall technical value and interest to the Government. White papers will not be evaluated against each other since each is unique with no common statement of work. Offerors that submit White Papers found to be of interest may be requested to submit formal technical/management plan, statement of work, past performance, and cost proposals by a specific date. Offerors that submit a proposal without first submitting a White Paper will not be evaluated and will not be eligible for award. Offerors that submit a proposal that was not requested by the Government will not be eligible for award.

2.1.6 Questions

Questions regarding White paper submission shall be submitted in writing to the CO at rvsoni@fbi.gov and bewatts@fbi.gov by 14 May 2018, not later than 2:00PM local time.

2.2. Phase II – Request for Proposal (RFP)

Offerors invited to submit a Phase II proposal will receive a request in writing from the CO.

Phase II elaborates all items provided in Phase I – White Paper. Phase II provides the detailed discussion of the nature and scope of the research proposal necessary to enable an in-depth review of the specific technical and managerial issues and the applicability of the work to an FBI requirement.

Phase II also provides a detailed cost-element breakdown. Each of the enclosed tasking elements is anticipated as a firm fixed priced. All proposals must be UNCLASSIFIED.

It is the policy of FBI to treat all proposals as sensitive competitive information and to disclose their contents only for the purposes of evaluation.

2.2.1. Formatting and Layout

The Offeror shall submit one (1) proposal in response to this solicitation. It shall be organized and submitted as described below. Pages submitted in excess of the limitations established below will not be evaluated. Proposal organization shall be as follows:

Proposal

Section

Title Page Limits

(Double spaced)

Volume I Technical/Management

Plan

20 pages

Volume II Statement of Work 15 pages

Volume III Past Performance 5 pages

Volume IV Cost No page limit

Technical/Management Plan, Statement of Work, Past Performance, and Cost volumes shall be submitted in separate volumes, and must be valid for 180 days. Proposals must reference the BAA announcement number. Offerors are advised that only the CO is legally authorized to contractually bind or otherwise commit the Government.

Phase II proposal volumes shall include:

Cover Page. The cover page shall include the BAA Number, research topic, name and telephone number for the principal points of contact (both technical and contractual), and any other information that identifies the proposal. The cover page shall also contain a proprietary data disclosure statement for compliance with any necessary Non-Disclosure Agreements, Security Requirements, Export Control Laws, and other governing statutes, if applicable.

Table of Contents.

Executive Summary: The executive summary allows the Offeror to present briefly and concisely the important aspects of its proposal volume to key management personnel. The summary shall present an organized progression of the work to be accomplished, without the technical details, such that the reader can grasp the core issues of the proposal volume. The executive summary shall not exceed two (2) pages.

The proposed page limit does not include the cover page, table of contents, and executive summary. Volume IV – Cost, shall not include an executive summary.

Each volume of the proposal shall be separately bound in a manner that shall permit the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. A cover page shall be affixed to each volume clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, BAA identification, and the Offeror's name. Each section of the volume shall be divided by Tabs (i.e. Tab 1, Tab 2, etc.) where specified.

Proposal text pages when printed shall be 8-1/2” x 11”. At least 1” margins, single-side, and in Microsoft Word format. The Times New Roman font type and with at least 12 point characters shall be used to enhance readability and evaluation.

Legible tables, charts, graphs, and figures shall be used whenever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 by 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams, and schematics; not for pages of text. For tables, charts, graphs, and figures, the font shall be no smaller than 10 point.

2.2.1.1 Volume I – Technical/Management Plan (20 page limit)

Offeror must demonstrate a thorough understanding of the requirement. The proposal shall include a discussion of the nature and scope of the research. Descriptions of available equipment, data and facilities shall be included as attachments to the research proposal.

The Offeror shall include as part of their submission:

2.2.1.1.1 Tab 1 – Technical Approach/Factors (10 page limit)

a. Scientific Approach. As much scientific detail and analysis as is necessary or useful to support the research project or projects being proposed or approaches.

- Previous relevant research. Previous scientific studies and findings relevant to the proposed work are described here. It shall be clear from this section what the research gap is and why the current proposal is a reasonable next step towards closing that gap.

- Proposed research hypotheses, methodologies (including protocols for the collection of data from human subjects), and statistical analyses.

- Program Summary. This section summarizes the above discussion in an orderly progression through the program, emphasizing the strong points of the proposed approach or approaches.

- References for the findings cited in the literature.

b. Special Scientific Factors. Description of any capabilities it has that are uniquely supportive of the research approach. The following subparagraphs are offered as possible areas to be addressed.

- Capabilities and Relevant Experience

- Previous or Current Relevant Research

- Related Government Contracts

- Facilities/Resources

c. Schedule. The schedule represents the Offeror's commitment to perform the program tasks in an orderly, timely manner. The schedule shall include both base and option years, if any.

2.2.1.1.2 Tab 2 – Management Plan (10 page limit)

The Offeror must demonstrate a thorough understanding of all the responsibilities for the following:

Staffing/Recruiting

- Address overall approach/solution for staffing projects.

- Provide recruiting employees procedures.

Retention - Provide your company’s plan to retain qualified employees.

The Offeror shall also include as part of their submission:

Organization Chart that clearly defines the program team which includes the programmatic relationship and a summary of each member’s roles and responsibilities.

Narrative discussing:

- The Offeror teaming strategy/rationale;

- The specific roles and responsibilities of the team members;

- The unique capabilities of the team members;

- The Offeror team management approach; and

Resumes of Key Personnel (5 page limit) to include the prime contractor, subcontractor, and consultant personnel to include the names, brief biography, and list of recent publications of the Offeror’s key personnel.

Documentation of previous work or experience in the field of the Offeror is especially important. These shall be limited to no more than 5 pages for each Key Personnel. At a minimum, resumes shall include the following:

- Name of key person;

- Proposed labor category;

- Education (including, in reverse chronological order, colleges and/or technical schools attended (with dates), degree(s)/certification(s) received, and major field(s) of study; and

- Experience related to the requirements of the Statement of Work

(SOW).

2.2.1.2 Volume II – Statement of Work (15 page limit)

The Statement of Work (SOW) shall be developed by the Offeror and included in the proposal provided that the SOW accurately describes the work to be performed, is enforceable, and is void of inconsistencies and may be incorporated into a resulting binding contract. Developing the SOW as a separate and distinct part of the proposal will allow the Government to incorporate it as part of the contract with minimal time and effort. If, in the Government’s opinion, the SOW does not reflect these requirements, the Government will prepare a SOW using information available in the Offeror's proposal; this process may delay the award. Do not include the Offeror’s name or any proprietary information in the

SOW.

The proposed SOW must contain a summary description of the research methodology as well as the task description, but not in so much detail as to make the contract inflexible.

The following is offered as a recommended format for the SOW. Start your SOW at Paragraph 1.0.

1.0 – Scope. Give a brief overview of the specialty area. This shall describe why it is being pursued, and what you are trying to accomplish.

2.0 – Objective. Provide an overall concise picture of the work to be accomplished. This shall include the research question to be addressed, goals to be achieved and major milestones for the effort. The key elements of this section, however, are task development and deliverables. This section shall describe in a clean-cut statement, the anticipated end result or end product of the effort. It must also be consistent with the detailed requirements.

3.0 - Background. Include any information, explanations, or constraints that are necessary in order to understand the requirements. It may include relationship to previous, current and future research. It may also include techniques previously tried and found ineffective.

4.0 - Applicable Documents. Identify appropriate unclassified documents that are applicable to the effort to be performed. This section shall include a listing of all documents used as a reference in the technical requirements and specify the exact title, revision and date.

5.0 - Technical Requirements. Provide a detailed description of tasks, which represent the work to be performed under the contract, are to be considered binding. Thus, it shall be developed in an orderly progression and in enough detail to establish the feasibility of accomplishing the overall program goals. The work effort shall be segregated into major tasks and identified in separately numbered paragraphs according to a numeric decimal system. Each numbered major task shall delineate by subtask the work to be performed.

The SOW MUST contain every task to be accomplished. The tasks must be definite, realistic, and clearly stated in performance terms. Use "shall" whenever the work statement expresses a provision that is binding. Use "shall" or "may" whenever it is necessary to express a declaration of purpose. Use "will" in cases where no contractor requirement is involved; i.e., power will be supplied by the Government.

5.1 Plan for Institutional Review Board (IRB) Protocol Review and Approvals. The Offeror shall identify an approximate schedule for protocol review, allowing time for both local IRB review at the Offeror’s institution and FBI IRB review (the FBI IRB meets on a monthly basis).

5.2 Time Line Chart by Task. Each major task identified in the SOW must appear as a separate line on the program schedule. Planned meetings, such as kick-off, presentations (including final), Technical Interchange Meetings, etc., must be included in the Time Line. The Time Line must also indicate the anticipated meeting site.

6.0 - Deliverable Items. The following are minimum requirements for deliverable items:

The Offeror shall deliver to the COR a copy of a Monthly Contract Report that clearly answers the following questions:

- What are the specific goals of your research for this month?

- What research activities related to this contract were accomplished this month?

- What was your preliminary finding, if any?

- What are your goals for the next Quarter?

- Describe any unanticipated delays, problems or disruption in the timeline for your research and how they were solved.

- Describe any requests of considerations for deviations from the proposed research plan.

A Final Report shall be delivered to the COR at least 14 days before the end of the contract period. The Report will be reviewed by the Technical Program Manager, who may request additional information and/or copies of all raw data collected. The Final Report shall include:

- Description of the scientific background and theories relevant to the work conducted;

- Protocols used for the collection of data;

- Qualitative and quantitative data analyses;

- Discussion of the meaningfulness of the data for the general advancement of the fundamental science, and for the application of the findings to intelligence interrogation contexts; and

- Limitations of the research.

Performance of research resulting from this BAA shall be fundamental (and export-controlled items are not to be involved).

7.0 - Subcontracting: Offerors shall include in the proposal any planned subcontracting of scientific or technical work. Collaborative efforts and teaming arrangements among potential performers are strongly encouraged. Specific content, communications, networking and team formations are the sole responsibility of the Offeror. A subcontracting plan shall be included as an appendix to this proposal volume and shall not be considered in the total SOW volume page count; however, this appendix containing the subcontracting plan has a separate page count of five (5) pages.

2.2.1.3 Volume III – Past Performance (5 page limit)

Describe a record of performance in providing Intelligence Interviewing and Interrogation Research as stated in the SOW including current and relevant information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in your performance. Provide past performance information regarding your company, key personnel who have relevant experience and subcontractors who will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, including references.

Past Performance Questionnaire(s) will be provided with the RFP.

2.2.1.4 Volume IV - Cost (no page limit)

The cost proposal shall be limited to the minimum number of pages necessary to satisfy the specific requirements set forth herein. Submission of volumes of computer-generated data to support the cost proposal is not necessary or desired. If computer-generated data is essential to support the cost proposal, it may be submitted as an appendix to the cost proposal volume and must be clearly cross-referenced to the material it supports in the cost proposal.

Cost proposals shall represent Offeror's best response to the BAA. Any inconsistency, whether real or apparent, between promised performance and cost or price data must be fully explained in the proposal. Failure to explain any significant inconsistencies may demonstrate Offeror's lack of understanding of the nature and scope of the work required.

Accordingly, cost proposals must be sufficient to establish the reasonableness, realism and completeness of the proposed cost. Further, any modifications made to the initial proposal must likewise be thoroughly supported in writing regardless of whether such changes are made during negotiations or at the time of a proposal revision.

Successful proposals must propose cost that is both reasonable and realistic for the proposed effort. The evaluation of proposed cost is subordinate to the technical/management plan evaluation. Also, past performance, prior research, and timely completion and cost effectiveness of prior research contracts will be considered.

Cost proposals shall include:

a. A summary of total program cost including Base Year and Option Years, if applicable

b. An itemization of major subcontracts, if any

The Offeror shall provide a detailed description of the methods used to estimate cost, to include, at a minimum:

a. Substantiation of all rates and factors, and

b. Labor and material estimates supported by a narrative basis-of-estimate (BOE) providing sufficient detail to substantiate cost estimates.

2.2.2. Proposal Submission

Phase II will consist of a four (4) part proposal: Volume I – Technical/Management Plan, Volume II –Statement of Work, Volume III – Past Performance, and Volume IV – Cost.

Offerors shall submit one (1) printed copy of each volume.

Hand deliveries are not permitted. Proposals shall be electronically submitted via email, as well a hard copy delivered through a mail carrier. The delivery method for hard copies must be Fed Ex, UPS or another accountable mail method (i.e. a tracking number must be used).

Electronic submissions shall be submitted to: rvsoni@fbi.gov and cc: bewatts@fbi.gov.

All hard copy proposals shall be submitted in a sealed package to the address below:

Federal Bureau of Investigation Attn: Rajendra Soni Engineering Research Facility

Offerors shall be alert for any BAA amendments that may permit extensions to the proposal submission date. The FBI will treat all proposals as competitive information and will disclose their contents only for the purpose of evaluation.

2.2.3. Proposal Evaluation

The selection of one (1) or more sources for award will be based on an evaluation of each Offeror’s proposal to determine the overall merit of the proposal in response to the announcement, as well as on Government need and funding availability. Proposals shall be evaluated based on the following criteria that are in descending order of importance:

The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposal;

The potential contributions of the effort to the HIG;

Integral factors: Offeror’s capabilities, qualifications, facilities, techniques, team leader, key personnel, and experience of the proposed principal investigator, or unique combination of these factors that is critical for achieving the proposal objectives.

The metrics and/or methods proposed for determining the success of the research;

The Offeror’s record of past performance; and The fair and reasonableness of proposed cost and fee.

No other evaluation criteria will be used. The FBI reserves the right to select for award any, all, part, or none of the proposals received.

2.2.4. Award Notices

Offerors will be notified whether their proposal is recommended for award by letter submitted by email. The notification is not to be construed to mean the award of a contract is assured, as availability of funds and successful negotiations are prerequisites to any award.

The Government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this BAA, and to make awards without discussions with Offerors. The Government also reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. Additionally, the Government reserves the right to accept proposals in their entirety or to select only portions of proposals for award. In the event that the Government desires to award only portions of a proposal, negotiations may be opened with that Offeror.

If the proposed effort is inherently divisible and nothing is gained from the aggregation, Offerors shall consider submitting it as multiple independent efforts. The Government reserves the right to fund proposals in phases with options for continued work at the end of one (1) or more of the phases.

Awards under this BAA will be made to Offerors on the basis of the evaluation criteria and program balance to provide overall best value to the Government. In all cases, the Offerors need to state how they will handle sensitive information (e.g., for official use only).

3. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

Proposals that encompass a 12-month period of performance are anticipated for many of the requirements in this BAA although proposals with longer periods of performance will be considered. The Government may incrementally fund contracts that exceed 12 months.

Such long-term proposals shall contain clearly identifiable targets, goals or critical design reviews contemplated for each period of performance (with associated cost data) so that the contract(s) may be negotiated for the entire program. Long-term proposals must include either separate SOW or preferably describe a phased approach in a single SOW.

Also, the proposals must include a cost proposal for the basic contract and each option or phase proposed. Any desired period for contract option exercise shall be negotiated at the time of contract award in accordance with the option clause set forth in the contract.

4. POINTS OF CONTACT

4.1. Contracting Officer (CO)

The CO is the appointed authority to bind the Government to the extent of the authority delegated. Direction that will modify the scope, terms and conditions, funding or any other action that may modify the agreement as originally entered into with the Government must be given only from the CO.

The CO assigned is:

Mr. Rajendra Soni Engineering Research Facility

Email: rvsoni@fbi.gov

4.2. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

The CO has appointed a Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) to provide technical administration and management of the work performed under this contract. The COR does not have the authority to alter the Offeror's obligations under the contract or modify any of the expressed terms and conditions, specifications, schedule or cost of the agreement. If, as a result of technical discussions, it is desirable to alter/change contractual obligations or the Scope of Work, the CO shall issue such changes in writing.

The technical administration and management of the work performed in association with this contract will be performed by the COR. The COR will provide the overarching technical administration and management of this contract.

The COR is responsible for:

Receiving all deliverables;

Inspecting and accepting the supplies or services provided;

Offering oversight to the Offeror which clarifies the contract effort;

Filling in details or otherwise serving to accomplish the contract;

Evaluating performance; and Certifying all invoices/vouchers for acceptance of the supplies or services furnished for payment.

The COR is:

TBD upon award.

5. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Any questions or request for clarifications must be made in writing directly to the CO.

Questions shall be written in a manner that enables clear understanding of the Offeror’s questions or concerns. Statements expressing opinions, sentiments, or conjectures are not considered valid inquiries and will not receive a response. Further, Offerors are reminded that the FBI will not address hypothetical questions aimed at receiving a potential “evaluation decision.”

6. SECURITY

6.1. Security Requirements

All Offerors employed outside the United States, and its trust territories, are required to be identified and approved to provide support in conjunction with this effort prior to disclosure of the identified requirements associated with the procurement. Identification requirements include the individual’s complete, name, date and place of birth and citizenship.

Foreign-owned firms are advised that their participation is subject to foreign disclosure review procedures and that they should immediately contact the CO if they contemplate responding.

Based on the effort from domestic/foreign vendors additional security requirements may be required as stated below:

1. All contractor personnel working on this contract may be required, at the Government's discretion, to undergo counterintelligence focused polygraph examinations. The polygraph examinations may be prior to acceptance or at any time during the performance of the contract, and without notice.

2. Information pertaining to FBI programs, even though considered unclassified, shall only be made available to contractor employees on a need-to-know basis and shall not be otherwise disseminated without the prior written consent of the CO. Unless approved by the FBI, regardless of classification, no program-related material may leave the Government or approved contractor facility. The protection of program-related material via the Internet or any other network must ensure that individuals not associated with this task, either directly or indirectly access the program-related material.

3. Prior FBI approval is required for subcontracting. The Offeror will submit a written request for approval to the CO. The CO will submit a checklist of information to be completed by the Offeror that will be required prior to approval.

4. Any information technology system utilized to support unclassified contract performance shall be operated in accordance with FBI certification and accreditation policies and procedures. The contractor should contact Acquisition Security Unit Chief at (202) 203-1849 to coordinate the required certification and accreditation process for contract performance.

5. Individuals provided access to Law Enforcement Sensitive (LES) and

Unclassified/For Official Use Only (FOUO), to include Privacy Act; information must be processed for a Limited Background Investigation (LBI). Required forms should be obtained from NS Chief Security Officer at (571) 350-4016. All contractor personnel must complete the security processes and meet the requirements specified by the FBI Security Division for the sensitivity or classification level of the information for which they will require access. At a minimum, the following must be accomplished prior to contractors being granted access to FBI LES/FOUO information:

a. LBI

b. Sensitive Data Nondisclosure Agreement

If an individual has an existing background investigation associated with a minimum of a secret personnel security clearance and that clearance can be verified, a LBI will not be required.

6. The elements of limited dissemination of LES and FOUO, to include Privacy Act, Information on this contract relative to processing storing, and destroying information are subject to:

a. Maintaining controls to prevent the information from physically or electronically leaving the Contractor's approved space, or becoming known to persons without a need-to-know or an executed non-disclosure agreement.

b. Buildings or individual offices, where information is processed must have entrance doors that lock and that will show evidence of unauthorized entry.

c. Documents, files, and electronic representations of such, must be placed in a locked container when not in use by an authorized person. A locked container may be construed of any of the following, or reasonable facsimiles thereof:

1. Desk with a locking drawer

2. Locking file cabinet

3. GSA-approved security container

4. Locked computer

5. Office space with a locking door

d. Documents, files, media, etc. may be transmitted using the following methods:

1. U.S. Mail

2. Courier

3. Encrypted electronic mail over an FBI accredited system

4. Secure facsimile

5. Federal Express

e. Not having information on the Internet;

f. Destroying all information as though it were classified;

g. At the end of the contract, destroying, by approved methods, or conveying all program related information to the Government Customer (includes soft media, as well as documents and other materials).

7. Unauthorized disclosure of FBI information may constitute a security incident and the FBI should be informed of any unauthorized disclosure. The unauthorized disclosure of information protected by the Privacy Act could also result in criminal sanctions.

7. PUBLICATION NOTIFICATION AND APPROVAL

It is anticipated that the performance of research resulting from the BAA will be fundamental research. Products of fundamental research will be submitted to the Technical POC, to be named at the time of award, for pre-publication notification.

Research resulting from this BAA may also be non-fundamental research examining existing programs, methods, or policies. Products from such efforts are subject to pre-publication approval by the FBI and its Office of Public Affairs. The following provision will be incorporated into any resultant non-fundamental research procurement contract or other transaction:

There shall be no dissemination or publication, except within and between the Contractor and any subcontractors, of information developed under this contract or contained in the reports to be furnished pursuant to this contract without prior written approval from the FBI and its Office of Public Affairs. Prior to the initial distribution of these reports by the Contractor, the FBI and its Office of Public Affairs will identify the appropriate distribution and distribution statements.

When submitting material for written approval for open publication, the

Contractor/Awardee must submit a request for public release and include the following information:

1. Document Information: document title, document author, short plain-language description of technology discussed in the material (approx.