AI Tools to Accelerate Acquisition RFI 02172026.docx

UNCLASSIFIED

Current and Emerging Artificial Intelligence Tools to Support Air Force Mobility Aircraft Acquisition Activities - Request for Information (RFI)

Description TITLE: Current and Emerging Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools to Accelerate Air Force Mobility Aircraft Acquisition Activities.

KEYWORDS: Artificial Intelligence (AI), Generative AI (Gen AI), Machine Learning (ML), Department of War (DoW), Acquisition, Acquisition Reform, Accelerating Acquisition

POC: AFLCMC/WL

OBJECTIVE: The Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC), Air Force Life Cycle Management Center/Mobility Aircraft Directorate (AFLCMC/WL) seeks vendor capability information in support of market research. This RFI is to understand (1) the current and emerging Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS), Government Off the Shelf (GOTS) high Technology Readiness Level (TRL) AI tools (ex. TRL range 7-9), and field-ready tools (e.g., Impact Level (IL) IL 5/6 certified or scheduled certification), and (2) tool impact on process/methodology that can be used independently and/or as part of a larger continuum of tools in support of upcoming PEO Mobility procurement activities across aircraft platform lifecycles that will result in accelerating fielding and supporting the best aircraft mobility capabilities to our Warfighters.

DESCRIPTION: PEO Mobility is seeking industry input to identify current and emerging AI tools that can improve the full life cycle Acquisition process to efficiently deliver high-quality hardware and software capabilities faster to the Warfighter. To accomplish this task, we are seeking to leverage, to the maximum extent feasible, AI capabilities for all phases of PEO Mobility’s portfolio of programs, spanning the entirety of the acquisition lifecycle. PEO Mobility understand that these tools are continually maturing. PEO Mobility may use AI automation to periodically monitor vendor-provided documentation and Uniform Resource Locators (URL) for updates, changes, or new capabilities.

This RFI seeks tools that can deliver measurable improvements to the acquisition process in the near term. The information gathered will inform PEO Mobility staff about which AI tools and their impact on process/methodology are available for each phase and task across the Adaptive Acquisition Framework (AAF) and their demonstrated effectiveness, enabling recommendations for implementation across the PEO Mobility portfolio to accelerate change. To assist vendors, this RFI includes a notional scenario titled “PEO Mobility Enterprise Connectivity in a Contested Environment” that describes the organization’s specific AI needs.

Areas of specific interest include but are not limited to:

· Efficiency in Acquisition: Reducing time, manpower, and cost throughout the acquisition lifecycle.

· AI Capabilities: Exploring existing, rapidly deployable AI tools and their specific use cases in accelerating acquisitions and product support planning.

· Data Handling & Security: Understanding how data is used, secured, and trained in these models, as well as data rights, development environments, and security levels supported.

· Performance Monitoring: Assess program risks, evaluate cost, schedule, and technical performance, and gauge development progress.

· Knowledge Sharing & Automation: Capture/share knowledge, automate testing processes, and ultimately reduce workload for acquisition staff while improving efficiency.

· Practical Applications: Ability to generate, review, and edit acquisition-related and project support documentation, analyze proposals, and assess program performance.

· Costing Models: Rough order of magnitude cost model (i.e. enterprise or per license model, tokens or other).

· Overall Improvement: Aiming to reduce workload, increase efficiency, and improve knowledge sharing within program offices, process improvements and examples where the capability has accelerated acquisitions.

· Integrable & Customizable: Can work with existing desktop applications, other AI platforms, and be customized to fit diverse government/program office requirements at different levels of classification and other tools available or used by the vendor. Ability to integrate into workflow automation including CI/CD pipelines (continuous integration, continuous delivery). These are also called DevOps or DevSecOps pipelines.

· Interaction with Existing Government Ecosystem: Interoperability with existing government data, artifacts, and toolchains via APIs/plugins; support for common data standards/formats (DoW Data Strategy); integration with existing tools for Requirements Management (RM), Application of Lifecycle Management (ALM), Product Lifecycle Management (PLM), Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) and DevSecOps; includes Supply Chain Management (read-only vs read-write behavior), Configuration Management (permissions/change control and traceability, audit/provenance logging), Security (operation at required classification levels), Reliability (performance/scalability and failure/rollback handling), Operability/Maintainability (cross-domain options and human-in-the-loop controls).

· Tool Development Maturity: Assessed TRL and is it ready for rapid or immediate use.

· Product Roadmap: Where is the tool now and where is it going.

SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS: Interested parties are requested to provide information within the “Response Form” included as an attachment to this RFI. It is highly recommended that respondents draft their responses outside of the Response Form and then copy and paste responses into the form to avoid loss of data. Open data fields are limited to 2,000 characters. All instructions for uploading supporting attachments (e.g., drawings, illustrations) will be provided in the PEO Mobility RFI Response Form. Please refer to that document for detailed guidance on submitting attachments. Responses are due no later than 1600 EST on 20 March 2026. Late submissions will not be accepted or reviewed. Please send responses electronically to Debra Zides, debra.zides.2.ctr@us.af.mil and Capt Jason Kyles, jason.kyles.1@us.af.mil. Unclassified questions may be submitted directly via email.

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) ONLY to identify AI capabilities to accelerate PEO Mobility Acquisition activities and increase the Acquisition’s Workforce efficiency in a deliberate and secure manner by leveraging advancements in AI. The information provided in the RFI is subject to change and is not binding on the Government. The Air Force has not made a commitment to procure any of the items discussed, and release of this RFI should not be construed as such a commitment or as authorization to incur cost for which reimbursement would be required or sought. All submissions become Government property.

PROPRIETARY INFORMATION AND DISCLOSURE: Any submission in response to this RFI constitutes consent for that submission to be reviewed by Government personnel, Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) contractor employees, and Advisory & Assistance Services (A&AS) contractor employees supporting AFLCMC/WL who have signed appropriate Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs), unless the respondent clearly objects in writing to the release of this information to FFRDC and/or A&AS contractor employees in a cover letter accompanying the submission. All Government and DoW contractor personnel reviewing RFI responses understand their responsibility for the proper use and protection of proprietary information from unauthorized disclosure.

Notional Acquisition AI Tool Application Scenario: PEO Mobility Enterprise Connectivity in a Contested Environment The following scenario is provided as a notional, illustrative example to support market research and inform future acquisition planning. It does not represent a formal requirement or solicitation and is intended solely to help respondents demonstrate how their AI capabilities could address representative lifecycle acquisition challenges faced by PEO Mobility and staff. The acquisition lifecycle scenario has been deconstructed into three phases: requirements definition through contract award, procurement through fielding, and product support/sustainment.

Scenario Overview (Notional):

Recent exercises and Congressional testimony have highlighted the importance of enhancing connectivity across the United States Air Force (USAF) mobility fleet to ensure interoperability, operational tempo and readiness in contested environments. For the purposes of this RFI, respondents are asked to consider a hypothetical initiative to address mission requirements, enable interoperability, and ensure security, focused on real-time data exchange between aircraft, ground stations, and Joint Force assets.

To frame execution of this effort, the DoW’s AAF provides six flexible, tailorable pathways to deliver capability at speed while managing risk in contested, software-intensive, and integrated mission environments (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: The DoW Adaptive Acquisition Framework (AAF) The AAF enables PEO program teams to select and tailor acquisition pathways based on urgency, maturity, and risk. It emphasizes iterative delivery, early prototyping, continuous user feedback, integrated test and evaluation, cybersecurity and data protection, open architectures, and product support/sustainment planning from the outset. Respondents should explain how their AI tools enable this approach (e.g., requirements and architecture modeling, digital thread and configuration management, DevSecOps pipelines, automated test and evaluation, risk management framework (RMF) support, interoperability validation, and sustainment analytics) to support evidence-based decisions across the lifecycle.

For additional insights into the AAF, please consult the DAU website (https://aaf.dau.edu/).

Specific to software development and acquisition, the DoW has published a guidebook that defines DevSecOps implementation activities, as shown in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: the DoW DevSecOps Model For additional insights into DevSecOps, please consult the DoW’s Enterprise DevSecOps Activities & Tools Guidebook (https://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Library/DevSecOpsActivitesToolsGuidebook.pdf ).

Respondents should use this notional scenario to illustrate how their solutions could accelerate the acquisition, integration, and product support/sustainment of advanced connectivity capabilities for USAF mobility aircraft, supporting rapid global mobility and Joint Force operations.

Scenario Acquisition Activity Phases:

Phase I: Requirements Definition through Contract Award Define, analyze, and validate requirements for secure, interoperable connectivity solutions for Department of the Air Force (DAF) mobility aircraft operating in contested environments. This phase focuses on solidifying operational problems and needs, developing acquisition strategies, conducting market research, preparing solicitation documents, and evaluating proposals to select vendors capable of delivering advanced mission systems that support real-time information exchange.

Phase II: Procurement through Fielding Executing contracts and managing the development, integration, testing, and deployment and product support/sustainment of secure, interoperable connectivity solutions for USAF mobility aircraft. This phase focuses on developing capability to make sure that selected mission systems are delivered on schedule, integrated with legacy and new platforms, validated through rigorous testing in simulated contested environments, and fielded with appropriate training and support for use by military personnel.

Phase III: Product Support/Sustainment Support, maintain, and continuously improve connectivity capabilities across the mobility fleet, ensuring long-term operational availability and effectiveness in contested environments. This phase focuses on monitoring system performance, collecting operational feedback, conducting predictive maintenance, managing cybersecurity, and planning for future upgrades and technology refreshes. For software-intensive capabilities, support will use agile DevSecOps with short iterations, CI/CD, telemetry, and regular user feedback, supported by a digital thread and MBSE artifacts, to validate changes, maintain RMF compliance, and monitor and retrain AI models so performance, interoperability, and cyber resilience are preserved.

Instructions for Respondents:

Please describe how your AI tool or solution could support the objectives and activities outlined in each notional phase. Responses should be illustrative and focused on demonstrating relevant capabilities, not on proposing specific solutions for an active acquisition. Concise responses are acceptable, and vendors do not need to provide exhaustive documentation. Responses do not require proprietary or sensitive information.

Disclaimer:

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) ONLY TO IDENTIFY GENERATIVE AI CAPABILITIES TO ACCELERATE PEO MOBILITY ACQUISITION ACTIVITIES AND INCREASE ACQUISITION WORKFORCE EFFICIENCY IN A DELIBERATE AND SECURE MANNER BY LEVERAGING ADVANCEMENTS IN AI. THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE RFI IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE AND IS NOT BINDING ON THE GOVERNMENT. THE AIR FORCE HAS NOT MADE A COMMITMENT TO PROCURE ANY OF THE ITEMS DISCUSSED, AND RELEASE OF THIS RFI SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED AS SUCH A COMMITMENT OR AS AUTHORIZATION TO INCUR COST FOR WHICH REIMBURSEMENT WOULD BE REQUIRED OR SOUGHT. ALL SUBMISSIONS BECOME GOVERNMENT PROPERTY. BY RESPONDING, THE RESPONDENT CONSENTS TO THE REVIEW OF THEIR INFORMATION BY GOVERNMENT, FFRDC, AND ADVISORY & ASSISTANCE SERVICES (A&AS) CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL. PEO MOBILITY MAY USE AI AUTOMATION TO PERIODICALLY MONITOR VENDOR-PROVIDED DOCUMENTATION AND URLS FOR UPDATES, CHANGES, OR NEW CAPABILITIES.

THE GOVERNMENT MAY, AT ITS SOLE DISCRETION, POST AND/OR DISSEMINATE INFORMATION SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO THIS RFI IN A PUBLIC FORUM. THEREFORE, PROPRIETARY INFORMATION AND/OR TRADE SECRETS SHALL NOT BE INCLUDED IN RESPONSES.

PEO Mobility RFI Response Form (Word Version Below for Easier Team Editing – Final Version is an Excel Attachment)

RFI Submission Instructions:

· Respond to one or all phases that apply to your tool/solution in Section 2.

· Please keep each response concise (max 2000 characters per field).

· Use dropdowns and checkboxes where provided.

· Attach supporting documents as needed.

· Submit completed form by 20 March 2026.

Section 1: Vendor Information (Required) Company Name: ___________________________ Company Website Address: _________________________ Point of Contact Name: _____________________ Point of Contact Email: _____________________ Is this tool currently available for purchase through an existing federal contract vehicle (e.g., GSA Schedule)? (Y/N): _____ If yes, please provide the contract(s) information: ___________________ Company DoW PlatformOne Experience? If yes, describe (max 2000 characters): _______________ Tool/Product Name: ________________________ Tool URL: _________________________ Tool Technology Readiness Level (TRL): ____ Tool Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Level (e.g., Level 2): _____ Tool FedRAMP designation (Authorized, Ready, In-Process, None): _____ FedRAMP Future Implementation. If none, do you have a plan to secure FedRAMP designation? (Y/N): _____ If yes, anticipated date: _____ Tool DoW Impact Level (IL) Certification Level (e.g., IL2/4/5/6): _____ IL 5/6 Future Implementation. If your tool is not currently IL5/6, do you have a plan to secure those certifications level(s)? (Y/N): _____ If yes, anticipated release date: _____ Tool Secure / “Locker” Development Environment(s). Explain how tool supports secure, isolated development environments (“lockers”) for controlled feature development, testing, and promotion of artifacts (max 2000 characters): ____________________

Tool/Product Description (max 2000 characters): ________________________ Automation and User Involvement. Explain how the tool distributes work between automated functions and human users (i.e., tasks performed automatically versus tasks that require user input, and how users interact with the tool). (Max 2000 characters): ____________

Trial License Available (if yes, indicate duration): _____________________ Section 2: Scenario-Based AI Tool Capability Response (Fill out applicable phases) Instructions: Limit each response to 2000 characters or less. Attach supporting documents if needed. Concise responses are acceptable, and vendors do not need to provide exhaustive documentation. Responses do not require proprietary or sensitive information.

Many tools only support one or two phases of the acquisition lifecycle, while others support all three in different ways. The question sets for Phases I–III are intentionally similar and may appear repetitive. This is by design. Please respond only for the phases where your tool is applicable, and answer the questions from the perspective of how the tool is used in that phase.

Phase I: Requirements Definition through Contract Award

1. Supported Activities (Select all that apply) ☐Operational Need Validation ☐Requirements Analysis ☐Stakeholder Engagement ☐Market Research/Technology Assessment ☐Risk Assessment ☐Acquisition Strategy Development ☐Solicitation Development ☐Proposal Evaluation ☐Source Selection evaluation and Award ☐Other: ________________

2. Functional Area (Select all that apply) ☐Requirements/Capability Development ☐Program Management ☐Contracting ☐Financial Management/Cost Estimating/Budget Estimation/Auditing ☐Life Cycle Logistics/Product Support Management (PSM) ☐Engineering/Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE)/Technical Management ☐Test & Evaluation ☐Security/Counterintelligence ☐Legal/Compliance

3. Potential AI Tool Type (Select all that apply) ☐Workflow Automation ☐Document Management ☐Modeling/Simulation ☐Analytics ☐Decision Support ☐Other (Max 2000 characters): ________________

4. Required Input (Data and Format) Instructions: Briefly describe the types of data and file formats your tool requires to operate (e.g., SysML models, PDF requirements, UON documents). (Max 2000 characters):_____

5. Produced Output (Data and Format) Instructions: Briefly describe the types of data and file formats your tool produces or delivers (e.g., requirements document in PDF, RFP in Word). (Max 2000 characters):________

6. Government Purpose Rights (GPR) Confirmation and Proprietary Limitations Instructions: Indicate whether outputs produced by your tool are provided with Government Purpose Rights (GPR) at a minimum. Discuss proprietary aspects and limitations on data rights.

☐Yes, all outputs provided with GPR (at a minimum) ☐No (please explain proprietary aspects and limitations on data rights): ______________________________

7. Hosting Options and Information Boundaries Instructions: Briefly describe the components of the tool and where they are hosted. For example, is the solution a SaaS solution hosted on AWS Gov. (Max 2000 characters):_____

8. Workflow/Integration Instructions: Briefly describe how your tool integrates with other systems or processes, including compatibility with existing workflows and any next-step handoff capabilities. Support your description with specific examples of open architecture capabilities and API strategies.

(Max 2000 characters):_____

9. Approach and Performance Instructions: Briefly describe the analytics and algorithms used by your tool and describe the performance. Clearly state the quantitative and qualitative measures used to characterize tool performance and how well the tool performs on these measures. (Max 2000 characters):_____

10. Trustworthiness Instructions: Below is a graphic depicting the NIST AI RMF 100-1 Characteristics of Trustworthy AI Systems. If the tool contains AI components, briefly describe overall alignment to these characteristics. Additionally, elaborate tool alignment with the Explainable & Interpretable and Fair – With Harmful Bias Managed characteristics. Explain how users can understand or interpret the outputs of your model (e.g., what information is provided to show how decisions are made, what transparency tools or documentation are available, and how users can trace or audit model results). If you do not have the bandwidth to provide a detailed explanation, please provide a URL to documentation or resources that describe your tool’s explainability features, and the government will review them.

(Max 2000 characters):_____

11. Expected Outcomes/Benefits Instructions: Briefly describe the measurable improvements your tool delivers, such as increased speed, improved accuracy, risk reduction, or other quantifiable benefits. (Max 2000 characters):_____

12. Relevant Example/Case Study Instructions: Provide a summary of a relevant example or case study demonstrating your tool’s effectiveness. You may also attach a supporting document if available. (Max 2000 characters):_____

Phase II: Procurement (Contract Execution) through Fielding

1. Supported Activities (Select all that apply) ☐Contract Management:

Formal Service Level Agreement (SLA) with infrastructure provider for service scope and Authority to Operate/Authority to Connect (ATO/ATC) inheritance.

☐System Integration:

Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF)-certified Kubernetes/service mesh; artifact repository usage; DoW Centralized Artifact Repository (DCAR) hardened containers.

☐Financial performance assessments:

Track cost/benefit and ROI improvements from automation and issue tracking.

☐Assessing development and developer maturity:

DevSecOps Maturity Model assessment per DoW DevSecOps Playbook.

☐Testing/Evaluation Unit, integration, system, performance, acceptance tests; Static Application Security Test (SAST)/Dynamic AST (DAST)/Interactive ASTIAST; compliance scans.

☐Training Development and Delivery:

Team onboarding; DevSecOps concepts/tools; secure coding practices.

☐Fielding/Deployment:

CI/CD automation; post-deployment checkout/smoke tests; rolling update/rollback; security scans; IaC/SaC configuration automation.

☐Configuration Management:

Configuration Management Database (CMDB); Git/versioning; artifact tagging; checksums and digital signatures.

☐Quality Assurance:

Test coverage measurement and reporting.

☐Data Management:

Data masking; encryption at rest and in transit.

☐Schedule Management:

Project tasking and release planning/scheduling.

☐Risk Management:

Vulnerability management; dependency/Bill of Material (BOM) checks; Information Security Continuous Monitoring planning.

☐Supplier/Vendor Coordination:

Use Cloud Service Provider (CSP) DevSecOps services and DCAR; plan authorization inheritance via SLA.

☐System Performance Verification:

Logging/telemetry pipeline; operations dashboard readiness.

☐Other: ________________

2. Functional Category (Select all that apply) ☐Requirements/Capability Development ☐Program Management ☐Contracting ☐Cost/Budget Estimation ☐Logistics/Product Support Management (PSM) ☐Engineering/Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) ☐Test & Evaluation ☐Security/Counterintelligence ☐Legal/Compliance

3. Potential AI Tool Type (Select all that apply) ☐Workflow Automation ☐Document Management ☐Modeling/Simulation ☐Analytics ☐Decision Support ☐Other: ________________

4. Required Input (Data and Format) Instructions: Briefly describe the types of data and file formats your tool requires to operate (e.g., test plans in PDF, integration requirements in Excel, training materials in Word). (Max 2000 characters):_____

5. Produced Output (Data and Format) Instructions: Briefly describe the types of data and file formats your tool produces or delivers (e.g., test reports in PDF, training completion certificates in Word, fielding status dashboards). (Max 2000 characters):_____

6. Government Purpose Rights (GPR) Confirmation Instructions: Indicate whether all outputs generated by your tool are provided with Government Purpose Rights (GPR). If not, please explain any limitations or exceptions.

☐Yes, all outputs provided with GPR ☐No (please explain): ______________________________

7. Workflow/Integration Instructions: Briefly describe how your tool integrates with other systems or processes, including compatibility with existing workflows and any next-step handoff capabilities. (Max 2000 characters):_____

8. Analytics/Algorithms Description Instructions: Briefly describe the analytics and algorithms used by your tool, including any bias mitigation strategies and explainability features. Specifically, explain how users can understand or interpret the outputs of your model (e.g., what information is provided to show how decisions are made, what transparency tools or documentation are available, and how users can trace or audit model results). If you do not have the bandwidth to provide a detailed explanation, please provide a URL to documentation or resources that describe your tool’s explainability features, and the government will review them. (Max 2000 characters):_____

9. Expected Outcomes/Benefits Instructions: Briefly describe the measurable improvements your tool delivers, such as increased speed, improved accuracy, risk reduction, or other quantifiable benefits. (Max 2000 characters):_____

10. Relevant Example/Case Study Instructions: Provide a summary of a relevant example or case study demonstrating your tool’s effectiveness. You may also attach a supporting document if available. (Max 2000 characters):_____

11. Data Rights Limitations/Vendor Lock Prevention Instructions: Briefly describe how your solution prevents vendor lock-in and any limitations on data rights associated with your tool. (Max 2000 characters):_____

Phase III: Product Support/Sustainment

1. Supported Activities (Select all that apply) ☐Product Support/Sustainment planning and governance:

Hardware product support plans; software SAP/DevSecOps model.

☐Product Support/Sustainment planning and governance:

Hardware product support plans; software SAP/DevSecOps model.

☐Maintenance and updates:

Hardware preventive/corrective repair; software patches/releases.

☐Performance monitoring and observability:

Hardware health/telemetry; software logs/metrics/traces, Service Level Objectives (SLO).

☐Cybersecurity and RMF/ATO:

Hardware STIG/vulnerability management; software continuous monitoring/cATO.

☐Configuration, interfaces, and change control:

Hardware baselines/interface control; software Git/versioning, API/schema management.

☐Reliability, availability, and resilience:

Hardware Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) analysis; software failover/rollback, Recovery Time Objective (RTO)/Recovery Point Objective (RPO).

☐Obsolescence and refresh:

Hardware End of Life (EoL)/tech insertion; software Operating System (OS)/framework/library EoL.

☐Supply chain and asset management:

Hardware spares/inventory hardware BOM; software BOM (SBOM) and license management.

☐Environment and platform operations:

Hardware support equipment/facilities; software cloud/containers, Infrastructure as Code (IaC).

☐Release, deployment, and operations management:

Hardware fielding kits/Technical Orders (TO); software CI/CD, staged rollouts, incident/change.

☐Feedback, metrics, and continuous improvement:

Hardware user/maintainer feedback; software telemetry, DevOps Research and Assessment (DORA)/ Mean-Time to Recovery (MTTR), retrospectives.

☐Documentation and training:

Hardware tech manuals and operator/maintainer training; software runbooks, release notes, Application Programming Interface (API) docs.

☐Risk management:

Hardware technical/cyber/supply chain/obsolescence/capacity; software vulnerabilities, supply chain/SBOM risk, technical debt.

☐Other: ________________

1. Functional Category (Select all that apply) ☐Program Management ☐Logistics/Product Support Management (PSM) ☐Engineering/Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) ☐Test & Evaluation ☐Security/Counterintelligence ☐Data Analytics ☐Maintenance ☐Quality Assurance ☐Legal/Compliance

2. Potential AI Tool Type (Select all that apply) ☐Workflow Automation ☐Document Management ☐Modeling/Simulation ☐Analytics ☐Decision Support ☐Other: ________________

3. Required Input (Data and Format) Instructions: Briefly describe the types of data and file formats your tool requires to operate (e.g., maintenance logs in Excel, performance data in CSV, feedback forms in PDF). (Max 2000 characters): _____

4. Produced Output (Data and Format) Instructions: Briefly describe the types of data and file formats your tool produces or delivers (e.g., performance dashboards, maintenance schedules, cybersecurity assessment reports). (Max 2000 characters) _____

5. Government Purpose Rights (GPR) Confirmation Instructions: Indicate whether all outputs generated by your tool are provided with Government Purpose Rights (GPR). If not, please explain any limitations or exceptions.

☐Yes, all outputs provided with GPR ☐No (please explain): ______________________________

6. Workflow/Integration Instructions: Briefly describe how your tool integrates with other systems or processes, including compatibility with existing workflows and any next-step handoff capabilities. (Max 2000 characters): _____

7. Analytics/Algorithms Description Instructions: Briefly describe the analytics and algorithms used by your tool, including any bias mitigation strategies and explainability features. Specifically, explain how users can understand or interpret the outputs of your model (e.g., what information is provided to show how decisions are made, what transparency tools or documentation are available, and how users can trace or audit model results). If you do not have the bandwidth to provide a detailed explanation, please provide a URL to documentation or resources that describe your tool’s explainability features, and the government will review them. (Max 2000 characters):_____

8. Expected Outcomes/Benefits Instructions: Briefly describe the measurable improvements your tool delivers, such as increased speed, improved accuracy, risk reduction, or other quantifiable benefits. (Max 2000 characters):_____

9. Relevant Example/Case Study Instructions: Provide a summary of a relevant example or case study demonstrating your tool’s effectiveness. You may also attach a supporting document if available. (Max 2000 characters):_____

10. Data Rights Limitations/Vendor Lock Prevention Instructions: Briefly describe how your solution prevents vendor lock-in and any limitations on data rights associated with your tool. (Max 2000 characters):_____

Section 3: Pricing Instructions: please provide a summary of your pricing approach, a rough order of magnitude cost estimate for your overall solution, and the format of your cost model. Attach a sample cost model document if available.

a. Pricing Approach (Select all that apply) ☐ Enterprise License ☐ Per User License ☐ Per Transaction/Usage ☐ Subscription ☐ Other: ________________

b. Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) Cost Estimate (Provide a summary of estimated costs for deployment and sustainment. Include assumptions or variables that may affect cost.): _____

c. Cost Model Format (Select all that apply) ☐ Excel

☐ PDF

☐ Proprietary Tool ☐ Other: ________________

d. Attach Cost Model Document (Optional: Upload supporting cost model file) File Name: _____

Section 4: Additional Comments or Attachments Please provide any additional information or upload supporting documents. (Max 2000 characters):_____

Appendix A: Acronym List

A&AS: Advisory & Assistance Services AAF: Adaptive Acquisition Framework ADM: Acquisition Decision Memorandum AFB: Air Force Base AFLCMC: Air Force Life Cycle Management Center AFLCMC/WL: Mobility Aircraft Directorate AFMC: Air Force Materiel Command AI: Artificial Intelligence API: Application Programming Interface ATC: Approval to Connect ATO: Authority to Operate AWS: Amazon Web Service BOM: Bill of Materials cATO: continuous ATO CDRL: Contract Data Requirements List CI/CD: Continuous Integration/Continuous Delivery CIO: Chief Information Officer CNCF: Cloud Native Computing Foundation CMDB: Configuration Management Data Base CNS: Capability Need Statement COTS: Commercial Off the Shelf CSP: Cloud Service Provider CSV: not defined in this paper DAF: Department of the Air Force DAU: Defense Acquisition University DCAR: DoW Centralized Artifact Repository DevSecOps: Development, Security, and Operations DORA: DevOps Research and Assessment DoW: Department of War EoL: End of Life FFRDC: Federally Funded Research and Development Center GenAI: Generative AI GOTS: Government Off the Shelf IaC: Infrastructure as Code IAST: Interactive Application Security Test IL: Impact Level IL4: DoW Impact Level 4 IL5: DoW Impact Level 5 IL6: DoW Impact Level 6 MBSE: Model Based Systems Engineering ML: Machine Learning MTTR: Mean-Time to Recovery NAICS: North American Industry Classification System NIST: National Institute of Standards and Technology OS: Operating System PEO: Program Executive Officer PMO: Program Management Office POC: Point of Contact PSM: Product Support Management R&M: Reliability and Maintainability RFI: Request for Information RFP: Request for Proposals RMF: Risk Management Framework ROM: Rough Order of Magnitude ROI: Return on Investment RPO: Recovery Point Objective RTO: Recovery Time Objective SaaS: Software as a Service SAST: Static Application Security Test SaC: Security as Code SBOM: Software Bill of Materials SLA: Service Level Agreement SLOs: Service Level Objective SOO: Statement of Objectives SOW: Statement of Work STIG: Security Technical Implementation Guide SysML: not defined in this paper TOs: Technical Orders TRL: Technology Readiness Level (1–9; 7–9 are field ready) UON: Urgent Operational Need URL: Universal Resource Location USA: United States of America USAF: United States Air Force image1.png image2.emf image3.emf