ASSET Solicitation Questions and Answers_Updated for Friday 27 June 2025.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 17 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA2377-25-R-B010
About this file
This file is a Questions and Answers document for the Assessment of Sensing-Autonomy Sensor Exploitation Technologies (ASSET) solicitation. The Air Force is seeking a single award contract with an estimated $95M in funding, which is a follow-on to the previous MEAMS contract. The opportunity involves developing comprehensive tools for modeling, analyzing, and predicting mission-level effects across multiple domains including air, ground, space, and cyber, with a focus on multi-domain sensing autonomy and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities.
Key technical details include the requirement for contractors to have or be able to obtain a top-secret security clearance, flexibility in work location (government or contractor SCIF), and the ability to handle various sensing modalities from the start. The technical proposal is limited to 30 pages, with attachments like resumes and equipment descriptions not counting toward the page limit. Contractors will need to demonstrate capabilities in modeling and simulation, potentially using tools like MATLAB, Python, and AFSIM, with an emphasis on generating actionable battlespace decision insights across multiple operational domains.
View the file
Other files
Show all 18
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Contractual Q&A
| Questions and Answers - Updated for Friday 27 June 2025 | |
| Questions | CO Response |
| The Solicitation says that there’s $95M for ASSET and the AF is looking to make one award for the entire program, is that accurate? | Correct - The AF is estimating $95M in funding will be available for the ASSET effort and 1 (one) award is expected. |
| Is this a follow-on contract? // What was the previous one? | ASSET is a follow-on to the MEAMS contract (FA8650-18-C-1669). |
| Instructions state: "Additional information on prior work in this area, descriptions of available equipment, use of base support (if desired), data and facilities and resumes of personnel who will be participating in this effort should also be included as attachments to the technical proposal." - Will the Government please confirm prior work (experience/past performance), descriptions of available equipment, use of base support, data/facilities, and resumes are included as attachments - and not in the 30-page count for "discussion of the nature and scope of the research and the technical approach." | Yes - confirming. These documents are not included in the 30-page count. |
| Please confirm tables may be single spaced within the Technical/Management Proposal. | Tables may be single spaced within the Technical/Management proposal. |
| Please confirm Resumes are included as an attachment and not included in the 30-page "discussion of the nature and scope of the research and the technical approach." | Yes - confirming. Resumes are not included in the 30-page count. |
| Will submitters be penalized for leaving blank any item "not required" - in particular the LinkedIn Profile? Many professional minimize social media use or do not maintain accounts/profiles due project work sensitivity/classification/clearance. | Submitters will NOT be penalized for leaving any item "not required" blank. On the Research and Related Senior and Key Person Profile Worksheet, LinkedIn Profiles do not need to be submitted. |
| The solicitation states that the Technical/Management Proposal must be double-spaced (5.2.b). There are no instructions for the Cost/Business Proposal. May this volume be single-spaced for the inclusion of Section K? | Please keep cost/business proposals double-spaced. Section K may be single spaced. As a reminder - Cost/Business proposals have no page limitations. |
| The solicitation states that the Technical/Management Proposal must be double spaced, but states "Additional information on prior work in this area, descriptions of available equipment, use of base support (if desired), data and facilities and resumes of personnel who will be participating in this effort should also be included as attachments to the technical proposal." May the additional information being submitted as attachments be single-spaced? | Please keep the attachments double-spaced. |
| I was informed that I can still apply and have the Airforce help me get a top secret clearance (TSC) when you award me the contract. Is this correct? | The Air Force will NOT be assisting or supporting any contractor looking to obtain a top secret security clearance for this effort. To be eligible for award, contractors and/or their subcontractors must either have or be able to obtain a top-secret security clearance on their own by the contract award date. |
| Would the Government be amenable to a 10-page limit for the SOW vice the current 8-page count referenced in the RFP? | No |
| I want to confirm that submitting our proposal with only our subcontractors' fully burdened rates, provided the historical base used and clarity of escalation - is compliant with the Proposal and Submission Instructions 5.2, Section d. Cost/Business Proposal, Subsection (2) Cost Element Breakdown, Paragraph (b). | The submission of fully burdened subcontractor GSA rates would be compliant. |
Technical Q&A
| Questions and Answers - Updated for Friday 27 June 2025 | |
| Questions | PE Response |
| Also, does MEAMS support in-house contractors or is it focused on R&D at the contractor’s facility? | Yes, MEAMS does support in-house contractors. R&D is the focus at both WPAFB and the contractor’s facility. ASSET will also support in-house contractors with the R&D focused at both WPAFB and the contractor’s facility. The support provided will depend on the nature of the work being performed. |
| Will AFRL provide the winning team with a development environment and computing resources or does each team need to provide their own? | The government will provide access to the current development environment along with the computing resources. |
| We have been unable to determine if there was an Industry Day that accompanied this solicitation. Was an Industry Day held and, if so, will any of the artifacts (slides, Q&A, attendee list) be made available? If not, will there be one, if even virtual? | We did not hold a specific Industry Day for this solicitation, although some of the work under this solicitation was discussed during the Industry Day for MAINSAIL/ATOMATA. |
| Is there a requirement for the work on ASSET to be performed onsite at a government SCIF, offsite at a contractor SCIF, or at a combination of the two? | The work on ASSET can be performed onsite at a government SCIF, offsite at a contractor SCIF, or a combination of the two. |
| Can you provide any material or a list of the specific modeling tools you are currently using in the COMPASE lab? | We do not have an exhaustive list to share as the COMPASE Lab uses a variety of modeling and simulation tools, choosing the tool that best meets the needs of the specific research domain and problem for each individual research effort. When choosing a tool, we consider factors like the type of model needed, computational resources used, cost to access, ability to integrate with other tools, and validation and verification capabilities. Some examples of tools used in past COMPASE Lab research efforts are MATLAB, Python, and AFSIM. |
| Sensor Modality Scope: Should the solution handle EO/IR, SAR, RF, or multi-modal fusion from the start, or is staged expansion acceptable? | The solution needs to allow the assessment of different sensing modalities from the start. |
| Evaluation Phase Structure: Will live technical demos or offline assessments (e.g., test data challenge) be part of the downselect process? | No |
| Collaboration Tool Integration: Should integration with AFRL’s Digital Laboratory Environment (DLE) or VDL be included in Phase I? | This work is currently planned for 2025-2026. |
| Security Clearance Requirements: For TS/SCI access, can cleared subs handle specific parts, or must the prime control end-to-end TS data flows? - We have experienced DOD TS/SCI cleared subs as part of our team for DevOps. | For TS/SCI work, both cleared prime and cleared subs can support the work. |
| Reference Implementation Expectations: Do you expect delivery of an open architecture framework, or will a demonstration of modular capability suffice? | There is no formal requirement for the delivery to be an open architecture framework. |
| Can you provide material overviewing the current COMPASE capabilities? | Additional information on COMPASE can be found here: https://www.afrl.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Fact-Sheet-Display/Article/2331833/afrlry-compase/ |
| Will the government please clarify if all staff, including subcontractors, are required to have a TS/SCI to perform the work? | No, all staff is not required to have TS/SCI, but the awardee contractor must be able to staff the TS/SCI work. |
| Will you please clarify whether a specific number of Key personnel are required? | There isn’t a required number of key personnel |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .