DLA CSO Solution Brief Application.docx

DLA CSO SP4701-23-S-C001 Solution Brief Application Company Information

If you have taken foreign investment, please list any international investors:

Identify any foreign nationals working on this solution. If the offeror proposes to use a foreign national(s) [any person who is NOT a citizen or national of the United States, a lawful permanent resident, or a protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b (a) (3), as key personnel, they must be clearly identified. For foreign nationals, you must provide country of origin, the type of visa or work permit under which they are performing and an explanation of their anticipated level of involvement on this project.

Company Core Competencies:

Do you plan to team with or subcontract to another firm to execute this effort?

Company Posture

Non-Traditional DoD Contractor Status[footnoteRef:1] Choose an item. [1: “Nontraditional Defense Contractor” is defined in 10 U.S.C. § 3014

Small business status[footnoteRef:2] Choose an item. [2: “Small Business” is defined in 15 U.S.C. § 632

Non-Profit Status[footnoteRef:3] Choose an item.

Other (i.e. Traditional DoD Contractor) Choose an item. [3: “Nonprofit Research Institution” is defined in 15 USC § 3703 ]

Are you proposing a government-cost share arrangement? Choose an item.

If yes, please describe any cost-sharing arrangements you propose.

Have you previously worked with a federal entity? Choose an item.

If yes, please list the federal entities with which you have worked.

CAGE Code:

State whether the entity, if awarded a contract, would prefer a contract under 48 C.F.R. Part 12 or an other agreement under 10 U.S.C. § 4022. Note that while DLA shall consider any expressed preference, DLA shall determine, unilaterally, whether to offer any awards and, if so, by what instrument.

State whether the entity explicitly agrees with providing DLA the warranty described at paragraph B(4)(v) of the CSO or offer a greater warranty.

Solution Information On the following pages, you will provide information about your proposed solution and address the evaluation criteria from the CSO.

Note: This form duplicates the evaluation criteria from the CSO. The government will evaluate your submission in accordance with these criteria.

You may attach a one-page visual aid to your application if it is necessary to clarify the written information provided in your response. The government will not, however, evaluate this visual separately. Do not attempt to provide new information beyond the limits in the form. The aid is for architecture diagrams, pictures of hardware, process flows, etc.

IP Considerations Can you offer the minimum intellectual property rights required in the CSO? If 'No', please explain. If 'Yes', advise whether you intend to offer more rights and, if so, what.

Solution Overview Please provide a 1.5-page overview of your proposed solution. Note: we have also provided space for you to speak to each evaluation criterion individually, below. For transparency, we have shown you the government evaluation rubric. We will score your submission for each criterion based on this overview section and the supplemental sections dedicated to each criterion.

Factor A: Technical - How innovative and feasible is the solution in solving the problem?

Sub Factor 1: Feasibility Any solution must be feasible. This criterion measures whether the technology exists or is likely to be developed in the scope of this prototype effort. Considerations include, but are not limited to:

• Speed (time to value)

• Existing prototypes

• Demonstrated effectiveness

• Prior performance and subject-matter-expertise

• Relevant studies published in reputable scientific journals or by government entities

Scoring Rubric (Government Use Only)

Sub Factor 2: Responsiveness Any solution must be responsive to the problem statement.

Factor B: Importance to Agency Programs - How would the solution enhance the mission effectiveness of DLA?

Sub Factor 3: Viability Any solution must be viable within the existing technical and organizational environments. This criterion measures whether DoD could easily adopt the solution. An example of something which is not viable is a technology that has no chance of passing DoD cyber security requirements. Considerations include, but are not limited to:

· Domestic vs. international production

Sub Factor 4: Desirability Any solution must be desirable. This criterion measures whether end users are likely to adopt the offeror’s prototype solution. An example of something which is not desirable is a piece of field equipment that is so uncomfortable to carry that end users refuse to bring it into the field. Another example of something which is not desirable is a feasible, viable technology that does not meet the problem that end users are trying to solve. Considerations include, but are not limited to:

Sub Factor 5: Time-to-Impact Time-to-impact measures the time it will take to develop and deploy within the DoD against the demonstrable value it will provide DLA’s end users. Solutions that offer major impacts with quick development and deployment timelines are better than solutions with negligible impacts and long timelines. The best solutions will begin to quickly deliver major gains while still in the iterative design and development phase.

Factor C: Funds Availability - Is the fixed price proposed within the funds available?

Sub Factor 6: Rough Order Magnitude (ROM) The entity shall provide a proposed fixed price firm offer for 120 calendar days after proposal submission, which includes freight on board (FOB) destination delivery. The ROM shall include the total price to complete the solution. This information shall be utilized to determine if the price is fair and reasonable. This information can include, but is not limited to commercial price catalog or other proprietary information to help the Government assess project cost. Please utilize the next page for submitting ROM.

Considered proprietary when completed and submitted