Call For Solutions - AUP - 24 Apr 26.pdf

CALL FOR SOLUTIONS

Agreed Upon Procedures and Performance Audit Testing Solution for Army Financial Management and Audit Readiness

Project Number FM&C_26_02 Army Open Solicitation (AOS) Number W9128Z-25-S-A002 Call for Solution Title Agreed Upon Procedures and Performance

Audit Testing Solution for Army Financial Management and Audit Readiness

Issued By Army Contracting Command – Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG), Division D

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)

05 May 2026 at 1600 Eastern Daylight Time

(EDT)

Point of Contracts (POCs) for Solution Brief Submission

Contracting Officer:

Alexandra Miller, alexandra.c.miller6.civ@army.mil

Contract Specialist:

Samantha Hannah samantha.l.hannah2.civ@army.mil

Note 1: 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.

Note 2: Any submissions received by the Contracting Officer after the suspense date/time listed above will be deemed late and not evaluated. It is the sole responsibility of the offeror to ensure that its submission is received in the inbox listed above before the deadline specified.

mailto:alexandra.c.miller6.civ@army.mil mailto:samantha.l.hannah2.civ@army.mil

1. BACKGROUND.

The U.S. Army Financial Management & Comptroller mission is to improve financial performance, strengthen internal controls, and achieve sustainable auditability.

2. PROBLEM STATEMENT.

Current audit efforts remain overly reliant on broad, resource-intensive testing that consistently fails to produce complete, audit-ready evidence during initial procedures.

This results in repeated follow-on testing, increased audit costs, and delays in delivering timely, decision-quality insights to leadership. The existing approach limits auditor reliance on Army-generated evidence and does not effectively target the highest-risk, highest-value areas.

To address these challenges, the Army is transitioning to a targeted, materiality-focused (substantive testing) remediation strategy aligned with the OSW consolidated audit model, prioritizing the process areas that impact the DoW consolidated financial statements.

This shift requires the deliberate use of Agreed-Upon Procedures (AUP) and performance audit work to identify persistent audit failures and/or confirm the appropriateness of corrective actions.

3. REQUIRED AND DESIRED SOLUTION ATTRIBUTES.

Procedures and Test Plans:

For identified process areas (below), develop procedures and test plans that mirror the work that would be performed under a financial statement audit. Procedures must be designed to confirm balances using Army-provided populations; the associated control environment will not be tested.

Process areas (in priority order):

• Military Payroll

• Civilian Payroll

• Procurement

• Intergovernmental Transactions

• Environmental and Disposal Liabilities

• General Equipment

• Real Property

• Operating Materials and Supplies – Munitions

Timeline:

Upon receipt of the procedures and test plans, the Army will determine the testing start date of each process area based on remediation status. All testing must be completed, and final results must be delivered no later than 31 December 2026, with interim results delivered by process area throughout the engagement. For any given process area, the Army may determine that it is not ready to support testing based on the associated remediation status.

Reporting:

The Army will provide the vendor with a template for consolidating and reporting results.

Interim results must be reported to the Army within five (5) business days of test work concluding for a sample group.

Required Attributes:

Agreed Upon Procedures (AUP) and Performance Audit Execution

• Ability to execute Agreed-Upon Procedures (AUP) engagements in accordance with AICPA Standards

• Ability to conduct Performance Audits in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS)

• Focus on targeted, fully substantive testing of high-impact financial areas

Actionable Results:

• Delivery of clear, standardized documentation including:

o Procedures performed o Evidence reviewed o Factual findings (to include root cause analysis)

• Outputs must be written in clear, plain English and include actionable steps that soldiers and civilians can complete with minimal guidance from audit coaches.

Alignment to OSW Consolidated Audit:

• Capability to support transition to a consolidated audit model by:

o Producing consistent, repeatable testing outputs o Reducing redundant testing across organizations o Increasing auditor confidence in Army-generated evidence

Experience:

• Demonstrated experience performing:

o Federal financial statement audits within the Department of War o AUP engagements o Performance audits o Experience within the Department of War environment

4. AWARDING INSTRUMENT

In accordance with Open Solicitation Procedures detailed within W9128Z-25-S-A0021, the Government intends to award FAR Part 12, Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) type contract(s) as a result of this Call. 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 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.

1 https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/c7316940150a42f39600ac8cf5b6b34d/view https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/c7316940150a42f39600ac8cf5b6b34d/view

5. CALL INSTRUCTIONS AND NOTES

In addition to the general guidelines included in the open solicitation, the following guidelines apply to this Call for Solution:

• Offerors are responsible for monitoring SAM.gov for any amendments to this solicitation that may have updated information.

• Resellers and academic research proposals are not desired.

• All Solution Briefs will be valid for 180 calendar days after the submission date.

• The Government may down-select potential awardees under this call for solution.

• The Government reserves the right to issue multiple awards from this Call for Solution.

It similarly reserves the right to refrain from making any award.

• Submittals must use a standard, readable font (i.e., not requiring magnification), as the document's readability directly impacts the Government's ability to assess the merits of the proposed solution. Offerors are strongly encouraged to use diagrams, graphics, and concise text to effectively convey complex information. For this purpose, landscape-oriented (11 x 8.5 inch) pages are permissible for visuals but will be counted toward the total page limit, which is strictly enforced. Any pages submitted beyond the maximum allowed will be removed by the Government and will not be evaluated.

• 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.

• Questions are to be sent only to the POCs listed in this Call for Solution by 28 April 2026 @ 1600 EDT. The following shall be utilized in the email subject line: "Call for Solution — FM&C_26_02".

6. SOLUTION SUBMISSION AND EVALUATION PROCESS

The Government is interested in unique and innovative solutions, including techniques to reduce costs, improve efficiency, and enhance performance. The Government will utilize up to three (3) phases for assessing solutions:

Phase 1 – Solution Brief:

For Phase 1 of this acquisition, offerors shall submit a Solution Brief. The brief is a written technical submission that must provide a detailed discussion explicitly addressing the technical merit of the commercial solution offering with respect to the problem statement defined herein, using the content guidelines in Section 6.1. Furthermore, the submission must clearly articulate how the proposed solution meets the Government's objectives and satisfies the evaluation criteria detailed in Section 6.2. All Solution Briefs will be evaluated against these criteria. Offerors are advised that the Government will not reimburse any costs incurred in the preparation or submission of a Solution Brief.

Phase 2 – Pitch Session (Unless Bypassed):

Offerors whose Phase 1 Solution Briefs that demonstrate technical merit, satisfy the minimum evaluation criteria, and are selected to proceed may be invited to participate in a Phase 2 Pitch Session. The Government reserves the right to limit the number of offerors invited to pitch. As such, an offeror’s solution may be evaluated to be of merit, however not invited to pitch.

If conducted, the Pitch Session may include a technical demonstration or challenge, and specific instructions will be provided to selected participants. The Government reserves the right to record all pitch sessions for evaluation purposes. Furthermore, the Government reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to bypass Phase 2 entirely and proceed to an award decision based on the Phase 1 submission. Unless otherwise stipulated, the Government will not reimburse offerors for any costs associated with preparing for or participating in the Pitch Session.

Phase 3 – Solution Proposal:

Following the completion of the preceding evaluation phase(s), the Government may issue an invitation to select offerors to submit a full Request for Solution Proposal (RSP). The invitation for Phase 3 will provide detailed instructions on the required format and content for the solution proposal submission. Unless otherwise stipulated, the Government will not reimburse offerors for any costs associated with preparing the Solution Proposal or engaging in any subsequent negotiations. Furthermore, offerors are advised that any potential award resulting from this solicitation is contingent upon the availability of Government funds and need.

6.1 PHASE 1 – SOLUTION BRIEF

6.1.1 SOLUTION BRIEF CONTENT

Companies responding to this Call shall submit a Solution Brief for evaluation. Submissions are to be sent via email only to the POCs listed in this Call for Solution.

Solution Briefs shall follow the below-referenced page limits and use 12-point Arial font. Any pages exceeding the limit will be removed and not evaluated. 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 of submissions.

Traditional static graphics (images, diagrams, charts, tables, etc.) embedded in the Solution Brief are acceptable and will be considered in evaluation of submissions. Tables and graphics may utilize a font size smaller than 12-point provided they remain legible. Solution Briefs are intended to be clear, concise and succinct submissions.

Solution Briefs shall include the following at a minimum:

a. Title Page (one-page limit)

i. Offeror Name, Call Title, Date, Point of Contact Name, POC Title, 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. Note: SAM registration is required for any award.

NAICS Code will be 541211, Offices of Certified Public Accountants. Offeror will be required to be in compliance with that NAICS Code.

ii. Ensure to clearly identify the Call for which the Solution Brief is submitted.

b. Executive Summary (one-page limit)

i. Provide an executive summary of the offeror and its solution.

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

i. Explain the unique technical aspects of your solution, its relevance to this Call, and how it is innovative or represents a potential capability. Highlight how the solution addresses the problem statement and required solution attributes.

ii. Describe the capabilities of your solution and the specific benefits it offers in relation to the objectives of this Call.

iii. Provide a detailed explanation of the technical approach, demonstrating its feasibility and achievability. Include information about the technical team’s expertise and experience to successfully implement the proposed solution.

iv. At a minimum, outline the detailed procedures for Military Payroll with the submission. While this is a High-level Solution/Concept for evaluation of Phase 1, the Government requests detailed procedures on Military Payroll for feasibility to move to phase 2/3.

d. ROM/Schedule (Limit of one page for ROM, and one page for Schedule)

i. Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM): The ROM must contain the breakout of pricing. Tie pricing to milestones (i.e proposed procedures), where appropriate.

Annotate assumptions used to develop the ROM.

ii. 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.

iii. The Government prefers a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contract type but requests industry feedback on the most effective pricing structure. The Government intends for Offerors to structure their pricing by process area (e.g., Military Payroll, Civilian Payroll, Procurement). Pricing for each area should be further broken down and tied to specific, deliverable-based milestones that align with priority sequencing, where logical. Given these parameters and the Government's preference for FFP, what alternative or specific pricing structure does your firm recommend to best support this effort?

e. CMMC Level 2 Certification - Provide Certification Details: The offeror must have a Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) 2.0 Level 2 certification. Provide the CMMC unique identifier (UID) or certificate number and certification date. The Government reserves the right to verify the offeror’s status in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS).

f. Intellectual Property Statement/Agreement/Disclosures (only as applicable and no page limit)

i. The Solution Brief must identify any intellectual property associated with the proposed solution, and the associated restrictions on the Government’s use of that intellectual property. DFARS Class Deviation Clause 252.227-7992 may be used for formatting. As needed, include a separate disclosure for each company that would be a participant of the solution/concept.

g. Non-Government Advisor Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) (Only as applicable and no page limit)

i. See Section 7 of this Call.

ii. It is the sole responsibility of industry to independently execute NDAs with disclosed Non-Government Advisor under Section 7.

h. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Analysis and Mitigation Plan (As applicable, no page limit)

i. See Section 8 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.

6.1.2 SOLUTION BRIEF BASIS FOR EVALUATION

The Government intends to evaluate the Solution Briefs to determine if they have technical merit and address the Government’s problem statement and required attributes. Solution Briefs submitted IAW with this Call for Solution will be evaluated against the criteria in this Section. The Government reserves the right to use external market research in the evaluation of an Offeror. The Government reserves the right to select all, some, or none of the Solution Briefs submitted IAW this Call to proceed to subsequent phases.

Evaluation criteria in this section are listed in descending order of importance:

a. Technical Merit: The Government will evaluate the Technical Merit of an Offeror’s

Solution Brief. Technical Merit is defined as the solution’s direct relevance to the Call for Solution, its ability to address the problem statement and required solution attributes, and/or its potential to provide innovative technological advancements. As part of Technical Merit, the evaluation will consider, its benefits in relation to the problem statement and required attributes of this Call, and whether the technical approach is both feasible and achievable. Additionally, the Government will assess whether the proposed solution constitutes a compelling and innovative response to the Call for Solution.

If the Offeror’s solution is evaluated as not having Technical Merit, the Government reserves the right to not continue the evaluation for the remaining Evaluation Criteria, assigning an overall Solution Brief rating of ‘Not Selected for Further Consideration’.

b. Schedule: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed solution schedule, major tasks, milestones, and timeline for feasibility and achievability.

c. ROM: The Government will evaluate the ROM for compliance with the Call’s instructions only. Cost and/or Price evaluation, and Fair and Reasonable Price determination, will not be performed on the ROM for Phase 1 evaluation.

d. CMMC Level 2: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s compliance in accordance with the call’s instructions in section 6.1.1.

e. Intellectual Property (Data Rights): The submitted IP and Data Rights assertions will be evaluated for compliance with this Call’s instructions.

6.1.3 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’. Selection into the next Phase will be based on the criteria listed above, Government Need, and funding availability.

Selected for Further Consideration: The submitted Solution Brief has been determined to be of technical merit, represents a feasible and achievable schedule, and included all required submittals in accordance with the Call. As such, the Government intends to invite the Company to participate in next phase should funding be available.

Not Selected for Further Consideration: The submitted Solution Brief does not represent the necessary degree of technical merit, does not represent a feasible and achievable schedule, and/or did not include all required submittals in accordance with the Call.

Offerors ‘Selected for Further Consideration’ may be invited to participate in subsequent phases, subject to the availability of funds. The Government reserves the right to limit the number of offerors invited to Phase 2 – Pitch Session (unless bypassed) and/or Phase 3 – Solution Proposal. As such, an Offeror’s solution may be evaluated as ‘Selected for Further Consideration’, however, not invited to Phase 2 and/or Phase 3. Solution Briefs, whether selected or not selected for subsequent Phases, will be notified in writing as soon as practicable of their evaluation results.

6.2 PHASE 2 – PITCH SESSION

All Solution Briefs submitted IAW this Call will undergo a fair, impartial, and consistent evaluation in accordance with the stated criteria. The Government anticipates disparate innovative solutions in response to this Call, to include Solutions or Concepts that the Government had not previously explored. To allow flexibility in accommodating the best method for evaluating all solutions in Phase 2, the content of Sections 6.2.1 through 6.2.3 will be provided in an invitation letter to those Offerors selected to proceed to Phase 2 (unless bypassed).

6.2.1 PITCH SESSION CONTENT

See above Section.

6.2.2 PITCH SESSION BASIS OF EVALUATION

6.2.3 PITCH SESSION SELECTION PROCESS

6.3 PHASE 3 – SOLUTION PROPOSAL

The content of Sections 6.3.1 through 6.3.3 will be provided in an invitation letter to those Offerors selected to proceed to Phase 3.

6.3.1 SOLUTION PROPOSAL CONTENT

6.3.2 SOLUTION PROPOSAL BASIS OF EVALUATION

See above Section.

6.3.3 SOLUTION PROPOSAL SELECTION PROCESS

See above Section.

7. NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS

As stated in Section I2 of the AOS, non-Government advisors may be used in the evaluation of Solution Briefs, Pitch Sessions, and Solution Proposals, and negotiation of said Proposals (pricing information will NOT be shared with any non-Government advisor(s)). For this Call, the Government anticipates using non-Government advisor(s) from the following contractors:

Guidehouse Inc.

1676 International Drive, Suite 800 McLean, VA 22102-3600

Non-Government advisors will have signed non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) with the Government. By submitting a Solution, the Offeror understands that the Government may share proprietary Company information with the identified non-Government advisor(s) for evaluation and administrative purposes only. In addition, the Offeror further understands that it has an opportunity before submitting a Solution Brief to the Government to enter an NDA directly with the Non-Government advisor(s), and therefore waives all claims against the Government for any disclosures of proprietary information by the non-Government personnel.

Such NDAs are the responsibility of the Offeror, and the Government shall not be a party to them. Companies shall provide a copy of the signed NDAs to the Government with submissions.

8. 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

2 Attachment titled “Army Open Solicitation_26 March 2026.pdf” on the main AOS SAM.gov posting.

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. The Offeror shall identify, at a minimum, all current contracts or financial interests that might be affected by the performance of the requirement. Additionally, the Offeror shall identify any potential conflicts of interest, as that term is defined in FAR Part 9, that the Offeror reasonably believes could arise during the performance of this contract. Offerors should be aware that the technical, financial, and operational assistance efforts anticipated under this contract may implicate budgets, priorities, or recommendations of other service or product/system acquisition of the Army or Department of War (DoW). Accordingly, Offerors should be particularly sensitive to the potential conflicts that might arise should the Offeror or its affiliates/subcontractors have any financial interest in other DoW audit contracts where the Offeror may be in a position to evaluate remediation efforts performed in this contract. The accuracy of the findings presented shall be certified to the best of their knowledge and belief by an official authorized to bind the company.

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.