CSLI_Announcement_of_Opportunity.pdf

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CUBESAT LAUNCH INITIATIVE

General Information

Solicitation Number: NNH20ZCQ001O

Reference Number: N/A beta.SAM.gov Oct 2, 2020

Response Date: Dec 16, 2020

Recovery and Reinvestment Act Action?: NO

Product Service Code:

AR22 -- R&D- Space: Science/Applications (Applied Research/Exploratory Development)

NAICS Code:

541715 - Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology)

Set-Aside Code: N/A

Internet Address:

Office Address

NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Headquarters Procurement Office, Code 210.H, Greenbelt, MD 20771

Description

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) anticipates making launch opportunities available for a limited number of CubeSats to a variety of U.S. CubeSat developers. The CubeSat Launch Initiative (CSLI) will provide or facilitate flight opportunities as secondary payloads on launches, as well as deployments from the International Space Station (ISS), currently planned for 2021-2024.

This solicitation includes two types of opportunities and is organized to provide general information and requirements applicable to any proposal, and two appendices to provide additional information and requirements unique to those opportunities.

• Appendix A applies to U.S. accredited educational organizations and non-profit organizations.

• Appendix B applies to NASA-sponsored and/or -selected CubeSat projects. For the purpose of this Announcement, a NASA-sponsored and/or -selected CubeSat is defined as a CubeSat selected and funded by NASA through a competitive process for CubeSat development or funded entirely by a NASA Center or Mission Directorate.

Respondents can submit only one CubeSat mission per proposal but may submit multiple proposals.

More information about the CSLI, including previously selected Respondents, is available at:

http://go.nasa.gov/CubeSat_initiative.

A CubeSat is a type of space research nanosatellite. The base CubeSat dimension is approximately 10x10x11 centimeters (one “Cube” or “1U”). CubeSats supported by this Launch Initiative include volumes between 1U and 12U. CubeSats of 1U, 2U, and 3U size typically have a mass of 1.33 kilograms per 1U Cube. A 6U CubeSat typically has a mass under 12 kg, and a 12U CubeSat typically has a mass under 20 kg. The final allowable mass is dependent upon the selected dispenser and the launch vehicle environments.

NASA anticipates entering into one or more agreements with selected Respondents (“Collaborators”) to support the CSLI. Participation in this Launch Initiative will be contingent upon selection by NASA and negotiation of an appropriate agreement between NASA and the Collaborator, which agreement includes standard terms and conditions for all CSLI Collaborators.

Proposed CubeSat investigations shall address an aspect of science, technology development, or education encompassed by NASA’s strategic goals and objectives as identified in the NASA 2018 Strategic Plan.

http://go.nasa.gov/CubeSat_initiative

The NASA 2018 Strategic Plan is available at:

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa_2018_strategic_plan.pdf NASA will not transfer any funds to selected Collaborators under agreements negotiated in response to this Announcement. Collaborators will be responsible for securing funding to support the development of their CubeSat payload and for any and all other costs incurred by the Collaborator to participate in the CSLI.

2.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

Agency Name: NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)

Opportunity Title: Announcement of CubeSat Launch Initiative

Response Due Date: Electronic Proposals may be received until the close date on Dec 16, 2020 at 4:30 p.m. EST via email to hq-aes@mail.nasa.gov.

Point of Contact:

If you have any questions concerning this opportunity please contact:

Ms. Sam Fonder 321-607- 2286 samantha.fonder@nasa.gov

Instrument Type(s): Refer to the Appendices for the type of collaborative agreements NASA will use under this Announcement.

Evaluation Panel: Government personnel from NASA will participate in the evaluation of proposals. All contractor personnel participating in the evaluation will be bound by conflict of interest provisions and appropriate nondisclosure requirements to protect proprietary information.

Submission Instructions: All proposals submitted in response to this Announcement shall be emailed to hq-aes@mail.nasa.gov. Proposal files shall be submitted in a single bookmarked and searchable PDF of less than 10 Mb. Paper submissions will not be accepted or reviewed. Any material submitted in response to this Announcement will not be returned. Proposals may be submitted at any time before the response date. Proposals received by the Government after the response date and time will not be considered. If a Respondent is concerned about information security during transmission, NASA has the ability to accept secure transmissions. Contact the Point of Contact listed above (Sam Fonder) for secure transmission requirements.

NASA will not issue paper copies of this Announcement. This Announcement does not constitute an obligation for NASA to begin negotiations or enter into agreements with any Respondents to carry out this activity. NASA reserves the right to select for negotiations all, some, or none of the proposals submitted in response to this Announcement. NASA will not provide any funding to Respondents for reimbursement of their proposal development costs.

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa_2018_strategic_plan.pdf mailto:samantha.fonder@nasa.gov

It is NASA’s policy to safeguard all proposals as confidential information, as provided by law.

NASA will not, without permission of the Respondent, use the proposal contents for other than evaluation purposes supporting the CSLI program.

NASA does not intend to publicly disclose properly identified proprietary information that it obtains in response to this solicitation. To the full extent that it is protected pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act and other laws and regulations, information identified by a Respondent as “Proprietary or Confidential” will be kept confidential.

NASA reserves the right to amend or withdraw this Announcement at any time and for any reason.

3.0 ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

U.S. organizations meeting the requirements set forth in the Appendices are eligible to submit proposals in response to this Announcement.

All proposals will be screened by NASA to determine their compliance with the Eligibility (Section 3.0 of each Appendix) and Proposal Instructions (Section 5.0 of each Appendix) of this Announcement. Proposals that do not comply may be declared noncompliant and rejected without further review. A submission compliance checklist is provided in Section 5.0 of each Appendix. This checklist provides Respondents a list of the compliance items that NASA will confirm before evaluating a Proposal.

Refer to the appendices for specific eligibility information.

4.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION

4.1 Evaluation and Selection Process

Proposals deemed to be compliant with this Announcement will be assessed by the Selection Recommendation Committee (SRC) against the evaluation criteria, which are outlined in Section 4.2 of each Appendix, and NASA programmatic factors. Respondents should be aware that NASA may request clarification of a specific point or points in a proposal during the evaluation and selection process. Such requests and each Respondent’s response shall be in writing.

The SRC members will independently assess the proposals according to the evaluation criteria outlined in Section 4.2 of each Appendix. Afterward, the SRC will develop a final prioritization (ranking) of proposals based on its assessment of the proposals.

The SRC will produce a prioritized (ranked) list of Appendix A and Appendix B proposed CubeSat investigations. This list will be provided to the Selection Authority for selection purposes.

4.2 Evaluation Criteria

Refer to the Appendices for specific evaluation criteria.

4.3 Selection Notification

NASA will notify all Respondents of the results of the evaluation and prioritization process.

After the completion of the evaluation and prioritization process, NASA will begin negotiations with the selected Respondent in priority order from the SRC. The purpose of the negotiations is to define the terms and conditions of the agreement, to support collaborators’ participation in the project, and to align the recommended proposals with the anticipated launch manifest. The Selection Authority will make the final selection of those approved for this opportunity after the completion of the negotiation process.

The Selection Authority shall be the Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations.

5.0 PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Proposals shall comply with the following requirements.

Page Limitations

Proposal Section Total Pages

Proposal Cover Page 1

Proposal Title Page 1

Points of Contact 1

Proposal Abstract 750 words

Proposal Detail 10 (5 pages for NASA-sponsored and/or NASA-selected CubeSats)

Appendices A and B

Resumes No Page Limit

Compliance Documents No Page Limit

Additional Documentation No Page Limit

Pages in excess of the page limitations for each section will not be considered or evaluated.

A page is defined as one (1) sheet of 8½ x 11 inches using a minimum of 12-point font size for text and 8-point font size for graphs.

Files shall be submitted in a single bookmarked and searchable PDF of less than 10 Mb.

There is no limit on documentation for the appendices. This enables proposals to include current documentation in its current format without altering or creating any new documents.

The Proposal shall include the following sections, in this order:

Proposal Cover Page: Title of Announcement and Proposal Contact Information. An optional graphic image may be included.

Proposal Title Page: Title and Notice of Restriction on Use and Disclosure of Proposal Information, if any; CubeSat Mission Parameters and CubeSat Project Details Tables (see appendices for Table format)

Points of Contact: List contact information for all Points of Contact (POCs), including a Technical POC. For each POC, provide:

a. Name

b. Title

c. Address

d. Phone

e. Fax

f. Email

Proposal Abstract: Executive summary describing the prominent and distinguishing features of the proposed CubeSat.

Proposal Detail: The proposal shall contain sufficient information to enable reviewers to determine whether it complies with the eligibility information (Section 3.0 of each Appendix) and to assess the proposal based on the evaluation criteria (Section 4.2 of each Appendix). The proposal shall also include appropriate detail as specified in each Appendix to this solicitation.

Proposal Appendices A and B:

• Resumes o Resumes shall be included for key personnel. In general, resumes shall be limited to no more than 2 pages each.

• Compliance Documents o Include any documents necessary to supplement the proposal text and satisfy the requirements of the compliance checklist (refer to the appropriate Appendix).

• Additional documentation o Include any documentation in the Appendix that validates or supports the proposal, such as plans for the remaining CubeSat development, technical risks, and mitigation plans for those risks.

NASA Point of Contact:

Ms. Sam Fonder Launch Services Program Executive 321-607-2286 samantha.fonder@nasa.gov mailto:samantha.fonder@nasa.gov

APPENDIX A

EDUCATIONAL AND NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION CUBESAT MISSIONS

A-1.0 INTRODUCTION

The CubeSat Launch Initiative (CSLI) provides flight opportunities for a limited number of CubeSats available to U.S. non-profit organizations and U.S. accredited educational organizations. CSLI provides flight opportunities as secondary payloads on launches, as well as deployments from the International Space Station (ISS), currently planned for 2021–2024.

NASA will provide integration and other services as necessary to complete the launch activity.

NASA will not transfer any funds to selected Collaborators under agreements negotiated in response to this Announcement.

A-2.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

In an effort to equitably provide launch opportunities to as many CubeSat projects as possible, NASA, via CSLI, is imposing a funding limit of $300,000 for integration and launch services of any CubeSat mission selected, regardless of size. This funding limit will generally be adequate to launch a CubeSat up to 3U in size into low-Earth orbit. If the complexity and orbit requirement for a mission exceeds this amount, the selected organization will be responsible for funding any additional costs.

Collaborators will be responsible for securing funding to support the development of their CubeSat payload and for all other costs they incur to participate in the CSLI. In addition, a Collaborator may be required to reimburse NASA for the direct costs of the integration and launch activities in the event the Collaborator fails to meet its obligations under the collaboration agreement or terminates such agreement after NASA has incurred costs associated with integration.

Response Due Date: Electronic Proposals may be received until the due date of Dec 16, 2020 at 4:30 p.m. EST via email to hq-aes@mail.nasa.gov.

Selection Notification: Selection is anticipated by April 2, 2021.

Instrument Type: Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs).

A-3.0 ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A-3.1 Eligible Applicants

U.S. organizations meeting the following requirements are eligible to submit proposals in response to Appendix A of this Announcement.

• The Respondent shall be a U.S. non-profit organization or a U.S. accredited educational organization.

A-3.2 Eligibility Requirements

CubeSats Supported. Volumes between 1U and 12U.

CubeSat Development Funding Commitment. The Respondent is responsible for securing funding to support the development of the CubeSat payload prior to submitting its proposal and for all other costs that Respondent incurs in order to support its participation in the project. Letter(s) demonstrating sufficient financial support for remaining CubeSat development activities are required.

Relevance to NASA. Each CubeSat investigation shall demonstrate a benefit to NASA by addressing goals and objectives in the 2018 NASA Strategic Plan. Specifically, each CubeSat investigation shall address an aspect of science, technology development, or education encompassed by NASA’s strategic goals and outcomes as identified in the 2018 NASA Strategic Plan. Respondents are required to provide NASA a report and data on the technology developed or demonstrated, or the scientific research that resulted from their CubeSat mission.

Merit Review. Prior to submission of proposals, each CubeSat investigation shall have passed an intrinsic merit review. In this review, the goals and objectives of the proposed investigation shall have been assessed to determine the scientific, educational or technical quality of the investigation. Also, the review shall have assessed the overall alignment of the proposed investigation in addressing one or more of the science, technology, or education goals or objectives identified in the 2018 NASA Strategic Plan. The merit review panel shall have been comprised of individuals who were not on the CubeSat project team.

Feasibility Review. Prior to submission of proposals, each CubeSat investigation shall have passed a feasibility review in which the technical implementation, including feasibility, resiliency, risk and the probability of success, were assessed. The feasibility review panel shall have been comprised of individuals who were not on the CubeSat project team.

Launch Services Program (LSP) Requirements. To enhance compatibility with a Primary payload and to provide optimal manifesting opportunities, each CubeSat payload shall fully comply with the LSP requirements as described in “Launch Services Program, Program Level Dispenser and CubeSat Requirements Document (LSP-REQ-317.01B).” If a Respondent is unsure of compliance or would like to pursue a waiver to a requirement, the proposal shall identify the requirement needing clarification or identify the specific requirement(s) the Respondent seeks to have waived, and clearly state the rationale for waiver in the proposal. Please note that requesting a waiver does not guarantee that the waiver will be approved.

A-3.3. Project Focus Area

Proposals shall identify a primary and, if appropriate, secondary focus for their CubeSat effort, i.e., whether the investigation addresses a scientific research question, a technology development/demonstration objective, or an education objective. Additional post-flight http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/627972main_LSP-REQ-317_01A.pdf

NASA-required Collaborator deliverables will depend on the CubeSat’s project focus and will be specified in the negotiated agreement. When selecting more than one focus area, note that each focus area selected shall be appropriately supported (see Section A-4.2, Evaluation Criteria).

A-4.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION

A-4.1 Evaluation and Selection Process

The Selection Recommendation Committee (SRC) may consider a variety of programmatic factors in deciding whether or not to select a proposal, including, but not limited to, available launches, Launch Service requirements waiver requests, and maintaining a programmatic and scientific balance across the sponsoring organizations. Special consideration may be given to proposals that geographically broaden program participation to states that previously have not been selected by the CubeSat Launch Initiative. Those states are: Delaware, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wyoming.

Previous CubeSat Launch Initiative selectees are encouraged to partner with and/or mentor organizations from these states.

Selected proposals from any prior announcements that resulted in a prioritization for a launch opportunity will generally take precedence over the outcome from this Announcement.

Manifest order will generally be in priority order unless critical needs dictate an earlier launch or available flight opportunities enable an earlier launch.

NASA will negotiate agreements utilizing standard clauses with Respondents recommended for selection as manifest opportunities are available. A recommendation for a selection does not guarantee the availability of a launch opportunity.

A-4.2 Evaluation Criteria

A-4.2.1 Overview

The evaluation criteria and associated weighting for all proposals are as follows:

• Relevance to one or more NASA Strategic Goals or Objectives (Section 4.2.2), weighted 40%;

• Outcome of Scientific, Educational or Technical Merit Review(s) (Section

4.2.3), weighted 30%; and

• Outcome of Feasibility Review (Section 4.2.4), weighted 30%.

A-4.2.2 Relevance to one or more NASA Strategic Goals or Objectives

Each CubeSat investigation shall demonstrate a benefit to NASA by addressing goals and objectives of the 2018 NASA Strategic Plan.

Proposals shall include sufficient information and supporting details to enable the following factors to be assessed:

• Does the proposal demonstrate that the CubeSat investigation provides benefits to NASA by addressing one or more of the goals and objectives of the 2018 NASA Strategic Plan?

• Are these the same benefits that were reviewed in the merit review? If not, why not?

• Why is an orbital flight opportunity necessary or advantageous for providing these benefits to NASA?

A-4.2.3 Outcome of Scientific, Educational or Technical Merit Review(s)

Each CubeSat-supported investigation shall have passed an intrinsic merit review in which the goals and objectives of the proposed investigation were assessed to determine the scientific, educational or technical quality of the investigation and the overall alignment of the proposed investigation to addressing one or more of the science, technology, or education goals or objectives identified in the 2018 NASA Strategic Plan.

Reviewers will assess the following factors. Proposals shall include sufficient information and supporting details to allow reviewers to assess these factors. The merit review panel shall have been comprised of individuals external to the CubeSat project team.

• What was the merit review process?

• Was the merit review competitive or noncompetitive?

• What were the qualifications of the merit review committee members (if possible identify by name, title, and expertise)?

• What factors did the merit review use to assess merit?

• What was the outcome of the merit review?

• How did the Respondent respond to and/or address the findings of the merit review?

NASA is not specifying how the merit review shall be conducted. However, NASA is requiring that a determination of the merit of the CubeSat investigation be conducted prior to proposal submission.

Any supporting documentation from the merit review that is useful in supporting this assessment may be included in the proposal as an Appendix.

If the Respondent elects more than one focus area, the reviewers will evaluate the proposal based on all focus areas selected and the scores will be averaged to determine the final score.

A-4.2.4 Outcome of Feasibility Review

Each CubeSat investigation shall have passed a feasibility review in which the technical implementation, including feasibility, resiliency and the probability of success, was assessed.

Reviewers will assess the following factors. Proposals shall include sufficient information and supporting details to allow reviewers to assess these factors. The feasibility review panel shall have been comprised of individuals external to the CubeSat project team.

• What was the feasibility review process?

• What were the qualifications of the feasibility review committee members (if possible identify by name, title, and relevant expertise)?

• What factors did the feasibility review use to assess feasibility?

• How were the management team roles, experience, expertise and the organizational structure of the team assessed? Please note any past experience with CubeSat development.

• How was the technical development risk associated with the overall CubeSat mission assessed?

• If the CubeSat investigation requires critical technology development for flight readiness, how were the areas assessed and how were the plans for completing technology development assessed?

• Concerning the development of the CubeSat for flight, how was the probability of success assessed?

• What was the outcome of the feasibility review?

• How did Respondent respond to and/or address the findings of the feasibility

• Is there sufficient financial support for the development of the CubeSat payload and for all other costs incurred by Respondent to support its participation in the project?

NASA is not specifying how the feasibility review shall have been conducted.

However, NASA is requiring that a determination of the feasibility of the CubeSat investigation be conducted prior to submission of proposals. Any supporting documentation from the feasibility review that is useful in supporting the assessment, including project schedules, risk management plans and/or project development plans, may be included in the proposal as an Appendix.

A-4.2.5 CubeSat Launch Initiative Educational and Non-Profit Organization CubeSat Proposal Evaluation Rubric

Relevance to NASA

Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent

Address one or more NASA Strategic Plan Goals and

Objectives

Investigation is not relevant to current NASA goals and objectives

Investigation is somewhat relevant to NASA

Investigation is relevant to high-level NASA goals and

Investigation is relevant to specific 2018 NASA Strategic Plan goals and

Investigation is extremely relevant to specific 2018 NASA Strategic Plan goals and objectives or science or technology roadmaps

NASA Benefits were reviewed as part of Merit Review

NASA benefits were not specifically reviewed as part of the Merit Review

NASA benefits were reviewed but Merit reviewers did not adequately address

Merit reviewers adequately reviewed for relevance to

NASA

Merit reviewers determined the investigation was relevant to NASA

Merit reviewers determined the investigation was highly relevant to NASA

Orbital flight opportunity is necessary or advantageous for providing benefits to NASA

Proposal addressed the topic but orbital flight opportunity is not necessary or advantageous for mission to be beneficial to

NASA

Proposal addressed the topic but orbital flight opportunity is only minimally necessary or advantageous for mission to be beneficial to NASA

Proposal did not address the topic but an orbital flight opportunity is clearly necessary or advantageous for mission to be beneficial to NASA

Proposal addressed the topic and orbital flight opportunity is advantageous for mission to be beneficial to NASA

Proposal addressed the topic and orbital flight opportunity is necessary for mission to be beneficial to NASA

A-4.2.5 CubeSat Launch Initiative Educational and Non-Profit Organization CubeSat Proposal Evaluation Rubric

Merit Review Process - Determine scientific, education or technical quality of investigation

Was the Merit Review competitive?

Merit Review process not described

Noncompetitive and Limited internal reviewers

Noncompetitive with internal/external reviewers

Process described; internal or external competition or noncompetitive w/ highly qualified reviewers

NASA, NSF, or similar competition

Qualification of Merit

Reviewers

Merit Review conducted but merit reviewers were not qualified to assess the investigation

Merit Review consisted of one qualified reviewer

Qualified internal merit review panel

Qualified external merit review panel

Highly qualified merit review

Factors used to Assess Merit

Factors provided but they were not relevant to proposed

Factors provided but some were not relevant and/or they were only minimally relevant to proposed

Factors not specifically provided but proposal adequately assessed relevant factors

Factors provided and all were relevant to proposed

Factors provided and all were highly relevant to proposed

Outcome of Merit Review - How did proposer respond and/or address the findings

Major issues noted in Merit Review and proposer did not adequately address these issues

Minor issues noted in Merit Review and proposer did not adequately address these issues

Proposer adequately addressed some but not all of the issues noted in the Merit Review

Proposers adequately addressed all issues noted in the Merit Review

Proposers thoroughly addressed all issues noted in the Merit Review OR there were no issues to address

A-4.2.5 CubeSat Launch Initiative Educational and Non-Profit Organization CubeSat Proposal Evaluation Rubric

Feasibility Review Process - Determine feasibility, resiliency and probability of success

Feasibility Review Process

Feasibility Review process not

Noncompetitive or limited internal competition noncompetitive w highly

NASA, NSF or similar competition

Qualification of Feasibility

Feasibility Review conducted but reviewers were not qualified to assess the investigation

Feasibility Review consisted of one qualified reviewer

Qualified internal feasibility

Qualified external feasibility

Highly qualified feasibility review

Feasibility Review of management teams roles/experience, expertise and organizational structure

Reviewers expressed concerns related to team and structure that were not addressed in proposal related to team and structure that were somewhat addressed in proposal

Reviewers did not express concerns but team structure or all concerns noted by reviewers were not addressed

Reviewers determined the project has a qualified team.

Reviewers determined the project has a highly qualified team

Technical development risk assessment

Reviewers identified risks that would have significant impact on project mission that were not addressed by proposer

Reviewers identified major risks that would have significant impact on project mission and some were not

Reviewers identified moderate risks that would have moderate impact on project mission and some were not addressed by proposer

Reviewers identified minor risks that would have little impact on project mission and were not addressed by proposer

Reviewers identified risks that would have an impact on project mission and all were addressed by proposer or no risks were identified

Assessment of probability of success

Reviewers determined low probability of success and proposer did not address concerns

Reviewers determined moderate probability of success but proposer did not address

Reviewers determined high probability of success but and any issues related to success were addressed probability of success and/or any issues related to success were thoroughly addressed

Outcome of Feasibility

Review - How did proposer respond and/or address the findings

Major issues found and proposer did not address any issues noted in the Feasibility Review

Minor issues noted in

Feasibility Review and proposer did not address issues

Proposer addressed some but not all of the issues noted in the Feasibility

Proposers addressed all issues noted in the Feasibility Review

Proposers sufficiently addressed and responded to all findings noted in the Feasibility Review or there were no findings to address

A-5.0 PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Proposal Detail: The proposal shall contain sufficient information to enable reviewers to determine whether it complies with the Eligibility Information (Section A-3.0) and to assess the proposal based on the Evaluation Criteria (Section A-4.2). The proposal shall also include:

• CubeSat primary and, if appropriate, secondary focus area: scientific research question, technology development/demonstration, or education.

• CubeSat Development: schedule for remaining CubeSat development that supports a launch in 2021–2024.

• Summary of Requirement compliance or required potential waivers.

• A CubeSat Mission Parameters Table using the following format:

CubeSat Mission Parameters

Mission Name

Mass Cube Size

Desired Orbit

Acceptable Orbit Range

Is an ISS deployment acceptable

(~400 km @

51.6 degree incl.)? Yes or No

Ready for Dispenser Integration

Date

Desired Mission Life

Altitude Inclination

• A CubeSat Project Details Table using the following format:

CubeSat Project Details Focus Area(s) (e.g., science, technology, education)

Student Involvement Yes or No

NASA Funding Sponsoring Organization(s)

Collaborating Organization(s)

Yes or No Organization List International – Yes or No

• If applicable, a Launch Services Program, Program Level Dispenser and CubeSat

Requirements Document (LSP-REQ-317.01) Waiver Request Table using the following format:

Launch Services Program, Program Level Dispenser and CubeSat Requirements

Document (LSP-REQ-317.01 Rev. B) Waiver Request Table

Requirement Rationale for Waiver

• Funding Commitment: letter(s) demonstrating sufficient financial support for remaining CubeSat development.

• Note for proposals identified with an Education Focus Area: If the proposed CubeSat includes outreach components, the proposal shall include a description of the education plan.

Compliance checklist and required documents (all elements below are required)

� Respondent is a U.S. non-profit organization or an accredited U.S. educational organization

� Proposal includes demonstration of the benefits to NASA based upon the 2018 NASA Strategic Plan

� Proposal identifies a project focus area � Proposal includes a description of the merit review process and outcome including review committee membership � Proposal includes a description of the feasibility review process and outcome including review committee membership � Proposal fully complies with the Launch Services requirements or identifies any potential waivers � Proposal includes a completed Mission Parameters Table � Proposal includes a completed Project Details Table � Proposal includes a schedule for remaining CubeSat development that supports a launch in 2021–2024 � Proposal includes funding commitment information and a funding commitment letter

APPENDIX B

NASA-SPONSORED AND/OR SELECTED CUBESAT MISSIONS

B-1.0 INTRODUCTION

The CubeSat Launch Initiative (CSLI) provides flight opportunities for NASA-sponsored and/or selected missions. For the purpose of this Announcement, a NASA-sponsored and/or -selected CubeSat is defined as a CubeSat selected and funded by NASA through a competitive process for CubeSat development or is funded entirely by a NASA Center or Mission Directorate for the development of a CubeSat. The CSLI provides flight opportunities as secondary payloads on launches, as well as deployments from the International Space Station (ISS), currently planned for 2021–2024.

NASA provides integration and other services as necessary to complete the launch activity.

NASA will not transfer any funds to selected Collaborators under agreements negotiated in response to this Announcement.

B-2.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

In an effort to equitably provide launch opportunities to as many CubeSat projects as possible, NASA, via the CubeSat Launch Initiative, is imposing a funding limit of $300,000 for integration and launch services of any CubeSat mission selected, regardless of size. This funding limit will generally be adequate to launch a CubeSat up to 3U in size into low-Earth orbit. If the complexity and orbit requirement for a mission exceeds this amount, the selected organization will be responsible for funding any additional costs.

In addition, a Collaborator may be required to reimburse NASA for the direct costs of the integration and launch activities in the event the Collaborator fails to meet its obligations under the collaboration agreement or terminates such agreement after NASA has incurred costs associated with integration.

Response Due Date: Electronic proposals may be received until the due date of Dec 16, 2020 at 4:30 p.m. EST via email to hq-aes@mail.nasa.gov.

Selection Notification: Selection is anticipated by April 2, 2021.

Instrument Type(s): Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs).

B-3.0 ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

B-3.1 Eligible Applicants

U.S. organizations meeting the following requirements are eligible to submit proposals in response to Appendix B of this Announcement.

• The proposed CubeSat mission shall have been previously selected and funded by NASA through a competitive process for CubeSat development or is funded entirely by a NASA Center or Mission Directorate for the development of the CubeSat.

B-3.2 Eligibility Requirements

CubeSats Supported. Volumes between 1U and 12U.

CubeSat Development Funding Commitment. Respondent must provide documentation demonstrating NASA sponsored and/or selected the CubeSat mission through a competitive process for CubeSat development or is funded entirely by a NASA Center or Mission Directorate for the development of a CubeSat.

Potential Impact. Each CubeSat investigation must demonstrate potential to enable, enhance or otherwise influence the identified mission focus area. More specifically, each CubeSat investigation shall result in an impact on future missions, potentially validate a new or enabling technology, advance scientific measurement or have meaningful student involvement. Respondents are required to provide NASA a report and data on the technology developed or demonstrated, or the scientific research that resulted from their CubeSat mission.

Feasibility Review. Prior to submission of proposals, each CubeSat investigation shall have passed a feasibility review in which the technical implementation, including feasibility, resiliency, risk and the probability of success, was assessed. The feasibility review panel shall have been comprised of individuals who were not on the CubeSat project team.

Launch Services Program (LSP) Requirements. To enhance compatibility with a Primary payload and to provide optimal manifesting opportunities, each CubeSat payload shall fully comply with the LSP requirements as described in “Launch Services Program, Program Level Dispenser and CubeSat Requirements Document (LSP-REQ-317.01B).” If a Respondent is unsure of compliance or would like to pursue a waiver to a requirement, the proposal shall identify the requirement needing clarification or identify the specific requirement(s) the Respondent seeks to have waived, and clearly state the rationale for waiver in the proposal. Please note that requesting a waiver does not guarantee that the waiver will be approved.

B-3.3 Project Focus Area

Proposals shall identify a primary and, if appropriate, secondary focus for their CubeSat effort, i.e., whether the investigation addresses a scientific research question, a technology development/demonstration objective, or an education objective. Additional post-flight NASA-required Collaborator deliverables will depend on the CubeSat’s project focus and will be specified in the negotiated agreement. When selecting more than one focus area, note that each focus area selected shall be appropriately supported (see Section B-4.2, Evaluation Criteria).

B-4.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION

B-4.1 Evaluation and Selection Process

The Selection Recommendation Committee (SRC) may consider a variety of programmatic factors in deciding whether or not to select a proposal, including, but not limited to, available launches, Launch Service requirements waiver requests, and maintaining a programmatic and scientific balance across the sponsoring organizations.

Selected proposals from any prior announcements that resulted in a prioritization for a launch opportunity will generally take precedence over the outcomes from this Announcement.

Manifest order will generally be in priority order unless critical needs dictate an earlier launch or available flight opportunities enable an earlier launch.

NASA will negotiate agreements utilizing standard clauses with Respondents recommended for selection as manifest opportunities are available. A recommendation for a selection does not guarantee the availability of a launch opportunity.

B-4.2 Evaluation Criteria

B-4.2.1 Overview

The evaluation criteria and associated weighting for all proposals are as follows:

• Potential Impact to NASA (Section 4.2.2), weighted 60%; and

• Outcome of Feasibility Review (Section 4.2.5), weighted 40%.

B-4.2.2 Potential Impact to NASA

Each investigation shall demonstrate potential impact to NASA goals and objectives of the 2018 NASA Strategic Plan based on the focus areas selected in the CubeSat Project Details Table.

Proposals shall include sufficient information and supporting details to enable the following factors to be assessed:

• Technology Demonstration: Does the proposal demonstration enhance future missions, reveal a flaw in a potentially enhancing technology, or otherwise impact the trade space for enhancing technologies?

• Scientific Investigation: Does the proposal exhibit potential to advance a scientific measurement, possibly using a new or enabling technology, influenced by the NASA Science Plan?

• Educational Focus: Does the proposal provide for meaningful involvement of students in the project through scientific or technical design and development or hands-on work?

If the respondent elects more than one focus area, the reviewers will evaluate the proposal based on all focus areas selected and the scores will be averaged to determine the final score.

B-4.2.3 Outcome of Feasibility Review

Each CubeSat investigation shall have passed a feasibility review in which the technical implementation, including feasibility, resiliency and the probability of success, was assessed.

Reviewers will assess the following factors. Proposals shall include sufficient information and supporting details to allow reviewers to assess these factors. The feasibility review panel shall have been comprised of individuals external to the CubeSat project team.

• What was the feasibility review process?

• What were the qualifications of the feasibility review committee members (if possible identify by name, title and relevant expertise)?

• What factors did the feasibility review use to assess feasibility?

• How were the management team roles, experience, expertise and the organizational structure of the team assessed? Please note any past experience with CubeSat development.

• How was the technical development risk associated with the overall CubeSat mission assessed?

• If the CubeSat investigation requires critical technology development for flight readiness, how were the areas assessed and how were the plans for completing technology development assessed?

• Concerning the development of the CubeSat for flight, how was the probability of success assessed?

• What was the outcome of the feasibility review?

• How did Respondent respond to and/or address the findings of the feasibility

• Is there sufficient financial support for the development of the CubeSat payload and for all other costs incurred by Respondent to support its participation in the project?

NASA is not specifying how the feasibility review shall be conducted. However, NASA is requiring that a determination of the feasibility of the CubeSat investigation be conducted prior to proposal submission. Any supporting documentation from the feasibility review that is useful in supporting the assessment, including project schedules, risk management plans and/or project development plans, may be included in the proposal as an Appendix.

B-4.2.4 CubeSat Launch Initiative NASA-Sponsored/Selected CubeSat Proposal Evaluation Rubric

Potential Impact to NASA - Provides meaningfully improved performance to current state of the art or capabilities

Potential Impact to NASA for missions that denote a focus area on a Technology Demonstration

Positive or negative outcome has slight impact on future NASA missions

Outcome may have some impact on future NASA missions

May enhance future missions, reveal a flaw in a potentially enhancing technology, or otherwise impact the trade space for enhancing technologies

May significantly enhance future missions, reveal a flaw in a potentially significantly enhancing technology, or otherwise impact the trade space for significantly enhancing

May result in development of an enabling technology for future missions, reveal a flaw in a potentially enabling technology, or otherwise impact the trade space for enabling denote a focus area on a Scientific Investigation

Slight impact on NASA science or technology maturation strategic objectives

Exhibits a nominal response to NASA science objectives where outcome may have some impact on future NASA missions

Exhibits potential to advance a scientific measurement, possibly using a new or enabling technology, influenced by the NASA Science Plan

Exhibits significant potential to advance a scientific measurement, possibly using a new or enabling technology, relevant to the NASA

Science Plan

Will produce a scientific measurement, or validate a new or enabling technology, identified in the current National Academies Decadal Surveys and/or NASA Science Plan denote a focus area on

Education

Nominal student participation in the project; student contributions are ancillary to the success of the project

Reasonable student participation in the project;

student contributions appear to have some impact on the success of the project

Meaningful involvement of students in the project through scientific or technical design and development or hands-on work

Student-led project or proposal demonstrates significant student participation in the project through scientific or technical design and development or hands-on work

Student-led project or proposal demonstrates significant student participation in the project through scientific or technical design and development or hands-on work plus project has the potential for scalability through partnerships, expansion to educational networks, or dissemination of widely-accessible educational materials

B-4.2.4 CubeSat Launch Initiative NASA-Sponsored/Selected CubeSat Proposal Evaluation Rubric

Feasibility Review Process - Determine feasibility, resiliency and probability of success

Feasibility Review Process

Feasibility Review process not

Noncompetitive or limited internal competition noncompetitive w highly

NASA, NSF or similar competition

Qualification of Feasibility

Feasibility Review conducted but reviewers were not qualified to assess the investigation

Feasibility Review consisted of one qualified reviewer

Qualified internal feasibility

Qualified external feasibility

Highly qualified feasibility review

Feasibility Review of management teams roles/experience, expertise and organizational structure related to team and structure that were not addressed in proposal related to team and structure that were somewhat addressed in proposal

Reviewers did not express concerns but team structure or all concerns noted by reviewers were not addressed

Reviewers determined the project has a qualified team.

Reviewers determined the project has a highly qualified team

Technical development risk assessment

Reviewers identified risks that would have significant impact on project mission that were not

Reviewers identified major risks that would have significant impact on project mission and some were not

Reviewers identified moderate risks that would have moderate impact on project mission and some were not addressed by proposer

Reviewers identified minor risks that would have little impact on project mission and were not addressed by proposer

Reviewers identified risks that would have an impact on project mission and all were addressed by proposer or no risks were identified

Assessment of probability of success

Reviewers determined low probability of success and but proposer did not address probability of success but and any issues related to success were addressed probability of success and/or any issues related to success were thoroughly addressed

Outcome of Feasibility

Review - How did proposer respond and/or address the findings

Major issues found and proposer did not address any issues noted in the Feasibility Review

Minor issues noted in

Feasibility Review and proposer did not address issues

Proposer addressed some but not all of the issues noted in the Feasibility

Proposers addressed all issues noted in the Feasibility Review

Proposers sufficiently addressed and responded to all findings noted in the Feasibility Review or there were no findings to address

B-5.0 PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Proposal Detail: The proposal shall contain sufficient information to enable reviewers to determine whether it complies with the Eligibility Information (Section B-3.0) and to assess the proposal based on the Evaluation Criteria (Section B-4.2). The proposal shall also include:

• Documentation demonstrating NASA sponsored and/or selected the CubeSat mission through a competitive process for CubeSat development.

• CubeSat primary and, if appropriate, secondary focus area: scientific research question, technology development/demonstration or education.

• CubeSat Development: schedule for remaining CubeSat development that supports a launch in 2021–2024.

• Summary of Requirement compliance or required potential waivers.

• A CubeSat Mission Parameters Table using the following format:

CubeSat Mission Parameters

Mission Name

Mass Cube Size

Desired Orbit

Acceptable Orbit Range

Is ISS deployment acceptable

(~400 km @

51.6 degree incl.)?

– Yes or No

Ready for Dispenser Integration

Date

Desired Mission Life

Altitude Inclination

• A CubeSat Project Details Table using the following format:

CubeSat Project Details Focus Area(s) (e.g., science, technology, education)

Student Involvement Yes or No

NASA Funding Sponsoring Organization(s)

Collaborating Organization(s)

Yes or No Organization List International – Yes or No

• If applicable, a Launch Services Program, Program Level Dispenser and CubeSat

Requirements Document (LSP-REQ-317.01) Waiver Request Table using the following format:

Launch Services Program, Program Level Dispenser and CubeSat Requirements

Document (LSP-REQ-317.01) Waiver Request Table

Requirement Rationale for Waiver

• Note for proposals identified with an Education Focus Area: If the proposed CubeSat includes outreach components, the proposal shall include a description of the education plan.

Compliance checklist and required documents (all elements below are required)

� Respondent is a NASA Center, a U.S. not-for-profit organization, an accredited U.S. educational organization, or U.S. commercial entity.

� Proposal includes documentation demonstrating NASA-sponsored and/or NASA-selected CubeSat mission through a competitive process for CubeSat development.

� Proposal describes potential impact to NASA � Proposal identifies a project focus area � Proposal includes a description of the feasibility review process and outcome including review committee membership � Proposal fully complies with the Launch Services requirements or identifies any potential waivers � Proposal includes a completed Mission Parameters Table � Proposal includes a completed Project Details Table � Proposal includes a schedule for remaining CubeSat development that supports a launch in 2021–2024