Call_for_Solutions_AI_Coding_Capabilities 20260304.pdf

Call Reference Number CDAO_26-01 Army Open Solicitation (AOS) Number W9128Z-25-S-A002

Call for Solution Title AI-Enabled Software Development Coding Capabilities

Issued By Army Contracting Command – Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG), Digital Capabilities Contracting Center of Excellence (DC3oE)

Submission Instructions To respond to this Call for Solution, please refer to Section 6 of this Call for Solution

*Solution Briefs Due Date/Time (Suspense) 6 March 2026 at 1400 Eastern Standard Time (EST)

Point of Contracts (POCs) for Solution Brief Submission

Contracting/Agreements Officer:

Kristen Weiman kristen.l.weiman.civ@army.mil

Contract Specialist:

Thomas Lueddeke thomas.j.lueddeke.civ@army.mil

CALL FOR SOLUTIONS

AI-Enabled Software Development Coding Capabilities

NOTE: Please advise the Contracting Office as soon as possible via the Microsoft Forms link if your organization intends to submit a Solution Brief in response to this Call for Solution. The Forms link can be found in the “Links” section of the SAM.gov posting.

*Any submissions that are received by the Contracting/Agreements Officer after the suspense date/time listed above will be deemed late and not evaluated. It is the sole responsibility of the company to ensure that its submission is received in the email inboxes listed above before the deadline specified.

This Call for Solution may result in the Government awarding Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) contracts or non-FAR agreements In Accordance With (IAW) Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 212.70 – Defense Commercial Solutions Opening. Other Transaction (OT) that may be awarded from this Call for Solution are not subject to the FAR or its supplements, as applicable.

1.0 BACKGROUND.

The Department of War (DoW) recognizes that Artificial Intelligence (AI)-enabled software development tools have matured significantly in the commercial sector and are now widely adopted across industry for enhancing developer productivity, code quality, and speed of delivery. These tools range from AI-powered code completion assistants integrated into development environments to autonomous, agentic coding tools capable of executing multi-step engineering tasks with minimal human intervention.

The Department of War, Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office (CDAO), in coordination with the Department of the Army acting as the designated lead for this effort, is pursuing the rapid adoption of AI-enabled coding capabilities across the DoW workforce.

The objective is to equip the Department’s software developers with tools that achieve parity with the cutting-edge capabilities used in the commercial sector, enabling faster, higher-quality software delivery in support of national defense missions.

Today, the DoW’s developer workforce operates across a diverse set of environments— desktop-based, virtual desktop, and web-based—using a variety of development tools and programming languages. The Department seeks solutions that can operate within this heterogeneous environment while meeting the security and compliance standards required for Department systems and data. The Department’s existing infrastructure includes authorized cloud platforms and model serving endpoints that may be leveraged by prospective solutions.

This Call for Solutions is issued through the Army Open Solicitation (AOS) to identify commercially available AI-enabled coding tools and platforms that can be deployed at enterprise scale across the Department. The Government is interested in solutions that are commercially mature, represent the current state of the art, and can be delivered rapidly.

2.0 PROBLEM STATEMENT.

The DoW’s software development workforce currently lacks standardized, enterprise-wide access to AI-enabled coding tools that are commonplace in the commercial sector. This gap limits developer productivity, slows the delivery of mission-critical software, and places the Department at a disadvantage relative to the pace of innovation in the private sector.

The Department requires AI-enabled coding capabilities delivered through two primary modalities:

1) Integrated Development Environment (IDE)-Based Coding Assistance: AI-powered tools that integrate directly into developers’ existing code editors, providing capabilities such as intelligent code completion, code generation, inline chat-based assistance, and AI-powered code review.

2) Command-Line Interface (CLI)-Based Agentic Coding: AI-powered tools that operate in the terminal or command line, capable of performing autonomous, multi-step coding tasks including code generation, testing, debugging, refactoring, and deployment workflows with human oversight.

These capabilities must be accessible to the Department’s developer workforce across diverse computing environments, must operate within the Department’s security and compliance framework, and must be deployable at scale to achieve broad adoption. The Department seeks solutions that minimize time to delivery while maximizing capability and interoperability with existing infrastructure.

3.0 REQUIRED AND DESIRED SOLUTION ATTRIBUTES.

3.1 Required Attributes: The following attributes are non-negotiable and must be met for a solution to be considered:

• Development Environment Integration: The solution must provide AI-enabled coding assistance within at least one and preferably multiple of the following modalities: (a) an IDE-based tool compatible with widely-used code editors and their extension ecosystems, and/or (b) a CLI/terminal-based agentic coding tool. Solutions that address both modalities are preferred.

• Security and Compliance: The solution must be deployable in environments authorized at DoW Impact Level 5 (IL5). The solution itself, or the infrastructure upon which it operates, must hold or be capable of achieving FedRAMP High authorization and Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) IL5 Provisional Authorization (PA).

Vendors must describe all current security certifications, authorizations, and compliance postures held by the product or its underlying infrastructure, and if IL5 authorization is not currently held, must provide a credible plan and timeline to achieve it.

• Enterprise Deployment at Scale: The solution must be capable of deployment to a large-scale developer workforce (tens of thousands of users) across diverse computing environments, including desktop, virtual desktop, and web-based development environments.

• Platform Compatibility: The solution must support the operating systems and environments commonly used by the Department’s developer workforce. At a minimum, the solution must support deployment on standard enterprise desktop environments.

• Data Handling: Customer source code and data must not be used for model training or retained beyond what is necessary for immediate processing. The vendor must clearly describe data handling, retention, and privacy practices.

• Usage Metrics and Reporting: The solution must provide enterprise administrators with the ability to measure and report on AI coding tool adoption and usage, including but not limited to user activity, AI-generated code contribution metrics, and acceptance rates.

• Enterprise Administration: The solution must support centralized enterprise administration capabilities, including identity federation (e.g., Single Sign-On (SSO)/Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML)/OpenID Connect (OIDC)), user provisioning, and administrative policy controls appropriate for managing deployments across a large organization.

• Commercial Maturity: The solution must be commercially available and in active use by enterprise customers. The vendor must demonstrate that the product represents a current state-of-the-art offering in the commercial AI-assisted coding market.

3.2 Desired Attributes: The following attributes are not mandatory but would enhance the solution’s merit and will be viewed favorably during evaluation:

• Model Flexibility: The ability for the solution to integrate with customer-designated AI model endpoints, support multiple model providers, or allow customers to configure which AI models are used (“bring your own model”).

• AI Attribution and Traceability: Built-in mechanisms to indicate or attribute AI-generated code within development workflows (e.g., commit metadata, annotations, or audit trails).

• Flexible Deployment Architecture: The ability to deploy the solution within customer-managed cloud environments, on-premise infrastructure, or air-gapped/disconnected network environments, in addition to standard Software as a Service (SaaS) deployment.

• Software and Model Update Cadence: A clearly defined and responsive approach to software updates and AI model updates, including service level agreements for incorporating new model releases and security patches.

• Integration with Existing Infrastructure: The ability to integrate with Government-authorized cloud platforms, model serving endpoints, version control systems, and Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery/Deployment (CI/CD) pipelines already in use across the Department.

• Open-Source or Auditable Architecture: Solutions with open-source components or architectures that allow Government security teams to audit, inspect, and validate the tool’s behavior and data handling practices.

• Training and Adoption Support: Availability of training resources, documentation, and change management support to accelerate developer adoption across a large and diverse workforce.

4.0 AWARDING INSTRUMENT

In accordance with Army Open Solicitation Procedures detailed within W9128Z-25-S-A002 found at https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/798d833d411d4aa7aa46ceb17ab5b67e/view, the Government intends to award FAR Part 12, Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) type contract(s) as a result of this Call; however the Government also reserves the right to award Other Transaction(s) (OT) for Prototype Project(s) pursuant to 10 United States Code (U.S.C.) § 4022. The Government further reserves the right to award to all, some, or none of the companies who submit proposals. This Call for Solution will utilize Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) procedures. Use of a CSO in accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) subpart 212.70 is considered to be a competitive procedure for the purposes of 10 U.S.C. chapter 221 and FAR subpart 6.102.

5.0 CALL INSTRUCTIONS AND NOTES

https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/798d833d411d4aa7aa46ceb17ab5b67e/view

5.1 Overview of Submission Phases

The response process for this Call will generally consist of the following phases:

Phase 1: Solution Brief Offerors will submit a high-level summary of their proposed solution, addressing the Government’s objectives and requirements.

Phase 2: Pitch (unless bypassed) Selected offerors may be invited to present and discuss their solution in a live or virtual setting. The Government may request product demonstrations during this phase.

Phase 3: Solution Proposal Offerors advancing to this phase will be invited to submit a detailed proposal for final evaluation and potential award.

Detailed submission requirements for Phase 1 are provided in Section 6 and subsequent subsections. Evaluation criteria for Phase 1 are outlined in Section 7 and subsequent subsections. Phase 2 and/or Phase 3 submission requirements and evaluation criteria will be provided via subsequent invitation letters.

5.2 General Notes

Offerors are reminded that all awards are subject to the availability of funds and the Government reserves the right to make multiple awards, a single award, or no award as a result of this Call.

Only a Contracting or Agreements Officer has the authority to enter into, modify, or execute a binding instrument on behalf of the United States Government. All payment obligations are subject to Congressional appropriations.

In order to be eligible for award, Offerors must:

• Possess a Unique Entity ID (UEI) and be registered in the System for Award

Management (SAM) prior to award, and maintain active registration throughout the period of performance.

• Register in the prescribed government invoicing system (e.g., Wide Area Work Flow).

• Accurately represent their small business size and status as required.

• Be determined responsible by the Contracting/Agreements Officer and not be suspended, debarred, or otherwise prohibited from receiving an award.

• Disclose any actual or potential Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCIs) to the

Contracting/Agreements Officer prior to award.

The Government may utilize internal Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools to assist in the administrative review and analysis of proposals, such as by summarizing content or verifying compliance with solicitation requirements. However, the use of AI is strictly for support purposes; all final evaluation judgments, the assignment of ratings, best value determinations, and the ultimate source selection decision are inherently governmental functions that will be made exclusively by Government personnel. The Government is committed to protecting all offeror proprietary and source selection sensitive information, and any AI tool used will operate in a secure environment, consistent with all applicable data protection regulations, and will not transmit data to external systems.

Offerors are responsible for monitoring SAM.gov for any amendments or updates to this Call.

Notice to Offeror(s): The Government reserves the right to cancel this open Call, either before or after the closing date. If the Government cancels this open Call, the Government has no obligation to reimburse an offeror for any costs.

6.0 SOLUTION SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

6.1 Phase 1 – Solution Brief

6.1.1 Phase 1 – Solution Brief Content

Solution Briefs shall consist of the following sections. Each section shall not exceed the page limits identified, using 12-point Times New Roman font. For graphics, figures, tables, and diagrams, a smaller font size may be used provided the content remains clearly legible without magnification, consistent with the solicitation's requirement for a standard, readable font. The Government retains sole discretion in determining whether submitted content meets the readability standard. Offerors should ensure all submitted content is easily readable. The Government will not consider inserted textboxes/pop-ups or internet links to additional information as part of the Solution Brief and will not consider such information in its evaluation. Solution Briefs are intended to be clear and concise.

a. Title Page (one-page limit) Company Name, Title, Date, Point of Contact Name, E-Mail Address, Phone, Address, and Call reference number. If registered in SAM.gov, include the Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code and Unique Entity Identification (UEI) code. Specifically identify the Call for which the Solution Brief is submitted.

b. Executive Summary (one-page limit) Provide an executive summary of the proposed AI-enabled coding solution, including a concise description of the product(s), delivery model, and how the solution addresses the Department’s need for IDE-based and/or CLI-based AI coding capabilities.

c. High-Level Technology Solution/Concept (five-page limit)

• Describe the unique aspects of your solution and its relevance to this Call for Solutions.

• Describe the product’s AI-enabled coding capabilities, including the development environments supported, the AI models used, and the primary user interaction model.

• Explain whether the solution is a commercially available product, a product requiring adaptation for Government use, or a new capability under development.

• Describe how your solution addresses the capability gap of providing AI-enabled coding tools at enterprise scale within security-conscious environments.

• Outline the scalability of the solution, including the largest enterprise deployment currently supported and the approach to serving tens of thousands of concurrent users.

• Describe the security posture of the solution, including any certifications, authorizations, or compliance frameworks currently held or actively being pursued.

• Describe available deployment options (e.g., SaaS, customer-managed cloud, on-premise, air-gapped) and the data handling practices for customer source code.

• Describe the analytics and reporting capabilities available to enterprise administrators, including the ability to track and measure AI-generated code contributions and tool adoption.

• Provide a proposed project schedule and total estimated out-the-door price for enterprise deployment, and describe how the proposed schedule is achievable.

• Identify whether the proposed solution includes a pilot or demonstration of an existing commercial technology (identified as commercially ready and viable technology), or the development of technology for potential defense application. If development or adaptation is proposed, identify a suggested path to mature the technology. Identify aspects which may be considered proprietary.

d. Company Viability (one-page limit) Provide a brief overview of the company. Include a summary of current fundraising to date or a summary of top-line (gross sales/revenues). Provide a summary of product/solution commercialization and go-to-market strategy. Include the current number of enterprise customers and any notable deployments.

e. ROM/Schedule (Limit of one-page for ROM, and one-page for Schedule) Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM): The ROM must contain the breakout of pricing. Tie pricing to milestones, where appropriate. Annotate assumptions used to develop the ROM.

Notional Schedule: The notional schedule must contain a project schedule outlining major tasks, milestones, and/or timeline for delivering the proposed solution. Annotate assumptions used to develop the schedule.

f. Affirmation of Business Status Certification (two-page limit each, using Attachment 1 Template) Include documentation for each company that would be a participant in the solution/concept (see Attachment 1).

g. Intellectual Property Statement/Agreement/Disclosures (no page limit) As needed, include a separate disclosure for each company that would be a participant in the solution/concept. The Government may be unable to evaluate the Solution Brief if a Company fails to provide the information requested above.

h. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Analysis and Mitigation Plan (As applicable, no page limit) See Section 12.0 of this Call.

The Government may be unable to evaluate the Solution Brief if a Company fails to submit the required contents for Phase 1. For ease of evaluation, please include ALL sections (a.

through h.) in one (1) .pdf submission.

6.2 Phase 2 – Pitch

Phase 2 submission requirements and evaluation criteria will be outlined in the invitation to this phase, unless bypassed. The Government may request live product demonstrations during Phase 2.

6.3 Phase 3 – Proposal

Phase 3 submission requirements and evaluation criteria will be outlined in the invitation to this Phase.

7.0 EVALUATION CRITERIA

7.1 Phase 1 – Solution Brief Basis of Evaluation

Solution briefs correctly submitted in response to the Call will be evaluated against the below criteria. The Government reserves the right to use external market research in the evaluation of a Company’s viability. The Government reserves the right to not respond to solution briefs incorrectly submitted under this Call. The Government reserves the right to select all, some, or none of the solution submissions submitted in response to this Call.

The Government intends to evaluate the Solution Brief to determine which proposed solutions have the potential to best meet the Government’s needs utilizing the evaluation criteria below.

Solution Briefs submitted in response to this open solicitation will be evaluated using the following factors in descending order of importance: (a) Technical Merit, (b) Schedule, and

(c) Viability.

a. Technical Merit: The Government will evaluate the Company’s Solution Brief submission in accordance with Section 6.1.1(c). The Government will evaluate the proposed solution’s relevance to this Call; capability to provide AI-enabled coding assistance through IDE-based and/or CLI-based modalities; security and compliance posture; deployment flexibility and scalability; enterprise administration and analytics capabilities; model architecture and flexibility; and overall technical approach and innovation.

b. ROM/Schedule: The Government will evaluate the Company’s proposed project schedule and estimated out-the-door total cost. The Government will assess the feasibility of the proposed timeline for enterprise deployment, any phased delivery approach, and the vendor’s demonstrated ability to deliver at the proposed pace.

c. Viability: The Government will evaluate the submitted company overview, commercial maturity of the product, customer base and enterprise adoption, and if applicable, summary of product/solution commercialization and market strategy. The Government will assess the vendor’s organizational stability, financial health, and capacity to support an enterprise-scale deployment.

7.2 Phase 1 – Solution Brief Selection Process

Based on the evaluation, the Solution Brief will be categorized as “Selected for Further Consideration” or “Not Selected for Further Consideration”. The selection of one or more submissions into the next Phase will be based on the criteria listed above and funding availability. Solution Briefs considered not to have (1) sufficient merit or relevance to the topic, (2) a Government need, or (3) funds are not expected to be available, the submission may be declined without further review.

Selected for Further Consideration: The submitted Solution Brief has been determined to be of technical merit, represents an achievable schedule and viable maturity pathway.

As such, the Government intends to invite the Company to participate in the next phase should funding be available.

Not Selected for Further Consideration: The submitted Solution Brief does not represent either the necessary degree of technical merit, technical innovation, or relevance to agency priorities to warrant further proposal effort or consideration.

The Army anticipates this Call may routinely receive more Solution Briefs than resources to award. All submissions will be fairly evaluated, however, only select Solution Briefs will be invited to Phase 2 and/or Phase 3. The Government reserves the right to limit the number of Companies invited to Phase 2 and/or Phase 3. As such, a Company’s solution may be evaluated to be of merit but not invited to Phase 2 and/or Phase 3. Solution Briefs that are chosen for Phase 2 and/or Phase 3 will be notified in writing as soon as practicable. The Government reserves the right to bypass Phase 2 into Phase 3 to request a formal proposal should funding be available.

8.0 ITERATIVE PROTOTYPING

In accordance with AOS, Section F, iterative prototyping will be conducted in multiple phases, with each phase building upon the outcomes of the previous one. At the end of each phase, the Government and stakeholders will review deliverables and provide feedback, which will be incorporated into subsequent iterations. The scope of the prototype may be modified by mutual agreement to adapt the technology for additional unique and discrete purposes or mission sets, which may be identified by the Government during the prototyping process. Progress will be evaluated against predefined milestones and deliverables, and adjustments will be made as necessary to ensure continued alignment with project objectives and requirements. The iterative prototyping process may result in separate phased prototype awards or modifications to the original award, as appropriate, and will continue until all milestones to completion have been achieved to the satisfaction of the Government.

9.0 SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF PROTOTYPE

In accordance with AOS, Section G, successful completion of the prototype will be determined by the Government, through written determination by the appropriate approving official, based on the achievement of all agreed-upon deliverables, performance metrics, and acceptance criteria as outlined in the prototype agreement. The Government will conduct a final evaluation to confirm that all requirements have been met prior to considering any follow-on production activities. The Government may also, prior to full completion, transition any complete and substantive aspect of the prototype determined to provide utility into production, as appropriate.

10.0 FOLLOW-ON PRODUCTION

In accordance with AOS, Section H – Follow-On Production of a Prototype, and pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 4022, companies are advised that any prototype awarded in response to this Call may result in the award of a follow-on production contract or agreement without the use of further competitive procedures, contingent upon successful completion of the prototype and determination by the Government. The follow-on production contract or agreement may be available for use by one or more organization(s) within the Department of Defense (DoW), and the scope and magnitude of the follow-on award could be significantly larger than that of the prototype effort.

11.0 NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS

In accordance with AOS, Section I, the Government will use non-Government advisors from the following contractors with the contact information provided: None noted at this time.

As a reminder, by submitting information to the Government, the Company further understands that it had an opportunity to enter into a NDA directly with the Non- Government Advisor and therefore waives any and all claims against the Government for any disclosures of proprietary information by the non-Government personnel. Such NDAs are the responsibility of the Company, and the Government shall not be a party to them.

Companies shall provide a copy of the signed NDAs to the Government with submissions.

12.0 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST (OCI)

The Offeror shall perform an OCI analysis and submit the results of that analysis in addition to the Solution Brief submission. Specifically, the Offeror shall analyze the details of the Call and the implementation of their proposed Solution for actual or potential OCI situations associated with the performance of the Offeror, or any of the Offeror’s proposed teammates or subcontractors, under any contract or agreement the Offeror or the Offeror’s teammates or subcontractors have been or may be awarded by any federal agency or other entity. The Offeror shall describe in detail the methodology used to identify actual or potential OCI issues. The level of detail for OCI analysis may not be the same for all vendors. FAR 9.5 may be used as guidance for OCI analysis. If no conflicts are identified, a risk mitigation plan is not required; however a description of the analysis methodology, and an affirming statement that no conflicts are identified shall be included. This section will not count against submission page limits.

If the Offeror identifies any actual or potential OCIs with respect to the performance of the Offeror or the Offeror’s subcontractors or teammates, the contractor shall provide an OCI Mitigation Plan to be incorporated as an attachment to any resulting contract or agreement. Any proposed avoidance or mitigation techniques shall be consistent with FAR

9.5 and the most recent decisions of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

13.0 APPENDICES

The following documents are included as appendices to this Call for Solutions:

• Attachment 1: Affirmation of Business Status Certification Form