SDA Solutions CSO 2025-12-19.pdf

S

Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO)

FA2518-25-S-C001

Combat Forces Command Space Domain Awareness Solutions

Acquiring Agency: Space Acquisition & Integration Office (SAIO)

Record of Revision

Revision Description Date

1. DEFINITIONS

2. GENERAL INFORMATION

2.1 BACKGROUND and AUTHORITY

2.2 KEY INFORMATION SUMMARY:

2.3 ENTERPRISE-WIDE USE AND AOI AUTHORITY

3. GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK AND OPERATIONAL GUIDANCE

3.1 GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK

3.2 The CSO CO retains enterprise oversight to:

3.3 OPERATIONAL GOVERNANCE GUIDANCE

4. CSO APPROACH

4.1 APPLICABILITY

4.2 MULTI-AOI EXECUTION FRAMEWORK

5. ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND COMMUNICATIONS

5.1 ENTERPRISE-LEVEL POINTS OF CONTACT

5.2 AOI-LEVEL POINTS OF CONTACT

5.3 AOI-Specific Email Guidance:

5.4 SUBMISSION AND INQUIRY RULES

6. SUBMISSION INFORMATION

6.1 SUBMISSION OVERVIEW:

6.2 RECEIPT CONFIRMATION:

6.3 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION:

6.4 TWO- OR THREE-PHASED SUBMISSION PROCESS:

6.5 SUBMISSION PROCESS OVERVIEW:

6.6 PHASE I – POWERPOINT AND WHITE PAPER:

6.7 PHASE II – PITCH SESSION:

6.8 PHASE III – FULL PROPOSAL:

6.9 Evaluation And Selection Process:

7. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

7.1 DATA RIGHTS

7.2 FOREIGN PARTICIPATION

7.3 CYBERSECURITY REQUIREMENTS

7.4 NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS

7.5 PROCUREMENT INTEGRITY, STANDARDS OF CONDUCT, ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS, AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ... 15

7.6 DEBRIEFINGS

7.7 GOVERNMENT-FURNISHED PROPERTY (GFP)

7.8 BASE SUPPORT / NETWORK ACCESS

8. ENTERPRISE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK

8.1 APPLICABILITY

8.2 EVALUATION PHASES

8.3 EVALUATION FACTORS

8.4 EVALUATION TEAMS

8.5 DOCUMENTATION & RECORDS

8.6 ENTERPRISE CONSISTENCY REQUIREMENT

9. ATTACHMENT 1: PHASE I POWERPOINT BRIEFING & QUAD CHART FORMAT

9.1 PURPOSE

9.2 QUAD CHART REQUIREMENTS

9.3 POWERPOINT BRIEFING REQUIREMENTS

9.4 SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

10. ATTACHMENT 2: PHASE I WHITE PAPER FORMAT

10.1 PURPOSE

10.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

10.3 CONTENT GUIDANCE

10.4 PROHIBITED CONTENT

10.5 CLASSIFIED SUBMISSIONS

10.6 SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

11. ATTACHMENT 3: PHASE II PITCH SESSION FORMAT

11.1 OVERVIEW

11.2 The Government may:

11.3 PITCH SESSION FORMAT

11.4 REQUIRED CONTENT

11.5 OPERATIONAL APPLICABILITY:

12. ATTACHMENT 4: PHASE III TECHNICAL PROPOSAL & PWS FORMAT

12.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW

12.2 COVER SHEET REQUIREMENTS

12.3 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

12.4 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

12.5 MILESTONES AND SCHEDULE

12.6 TECHNICAL APPROACH

12.7 DELIVERABLES AND OUTCOMES

12.8 MAJOR PROGRAM MILESTONES

12.9 GOVERNMENT SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS

12.10 DATA RIGHTS ASSERTIONS

12.11 PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS) REQUIREMENTS

13. ATTACHMENT 5: PHASE III PRICE PROPOSAL FORMAT

13.1 PRICE PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

13.2 PRICE PROPOSAL CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

14. ATTACHMENT 6: EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS

14.1 EVALUATION CATEGORIES

14.2 PHASE-BY-PHASE EVALUATION PROCESS

15. ATTACHMENT 7 – AREAS OF INTEREST (AOIS)

15.1 PURPOSE:

15.2 AOI ENTERPRISE TEMPLATE (FOR FUTURE AOIs)

1. DEFINITIONS

• Area of Interest (AOI): A specific announcement posted under this CSO seeking innovative commercial solutions aligned to mission needs, which may result in the award of a commercial contract. AOIs may be issued at any time during the CSO period of availability. Open and/or Closed AOIs may be issued under this CSO to request submission of solution briefs, pitches, and/or proposals. Also, it may include specific terms that apply to that AOI.

• Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO): A competitive, open solicitation method used by United States Space Force (USSF), Combat Forces Command and executed by the USSF SpOC SAIO to identify innovative technologies that support defense objectives.

• Innovative: Any new technology, process, or business practice—or novel application of an existing one—that enhances military effectiveness and supports U.S. national security.

• Nontraditional Defense Contractor: An entity not currently performing and has not performed, for at least the one-year period preceding the solicitation of sources by the Department of Defense (DoD), any contract or subcontract for the DoD that is subject to full coverage under the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS). This includes many small businesses.

• Small Business: A business that meets the size standards and criteria set forth in 13 C.F.R. § 121 and 15 U.S.C. § 632.

2. GENERAL INFORMATION

2.1 BACKGROUND and AUTHORITY

2.1.1 The United States Space Force (USSF), through Combat Forces Command and its SAIO, is issuing this Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) in accordance with DFARS 212.70 Defense Commercial Solutions Opening. SAIO, on behalf of Combat Forces Command, is pursuing this acquisition to enhance USSF warfighting missions through innovative commercial software solutions.

2.1.2 Under the CSO, SAIO may competitively award proposals received in response to a general solicitation, similar to a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA), to acquire innovative commercial products, technologies, or services based on a review of solutions by scientific, technological, or other subject matter expert peers within Combat Forces Command.

2.1.3 Under this CSO, all products, technologies, and services shall be treated as commercial items; products, technologies and services do not have to be “commercially available” to be submitted in response to this solicitation. If the solution meets the requirements of the regulation, the solution is treated as commercial whereby the Contracting Officer will utilize commercial procedures to develop and execute the resultant award.

2.1.4 USSF Combat Forces Command requires accurate Space Domain Awareness (SDA) data and tools to equip its Guardians. Direct and timely support to space operators is vital, achieved by adapting existing capabilities for emerging missions and ensuring SDA data is as accurate and actionable as possible. To address this operational imperative, Combat Forces Command is pursuing rapid access to commercially developed technologies that advance SDA capabilities.

2.1.5 The primary NAICS for this CSO is 541715 – R&D in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology). All AOIs issued under this CSO will be aligned under this NAICS unless otherwise specified in the applicable AOI.

2.2 KEY INFORMATION SUMMARY:

2.2.1 Estimated Funding: Up to $6M, subject to availability of funds and mission needs.

2.2.2 Contract Type: Fixed Price (FAR-based); other fixed price types may be considered based on AOI scope.

2.2.3 Set-Aside: Determined at the AOI level. Certain AOIs may be set aside for small businesses (e.g., under NAICS 541715 or other appropriate codes), while others may be competed on a full-and-open basis. Each AOI will specify its applicable set-aside status and NAICS code.

2.2.4 Period: 5 years from date of publication (with annual updates).

2.2.5 Security: Phase I submissions shall be Unclassified. Subsequent phases may require submission and/or performance at higher classification levels, as specified in the AOI and any draft or final DD Form 254.

2.3 ENTERPRISE-WIDE USE AND AOI AUTHORITY

2.3.1 This CSO is structured as an enterprise-wide vehicle authorized for use across the United States Space Force (USSF) and potentially broader Department of Defense (DoD) mission areas aligned with Space Domain Awareness (SDA). While SAIO retains overall responsibility for CSO governance, process oversight, and reporting, this CSO is intended to enable other warranted Contracting Officers within the DoD to issue and administer their own AOIs under this CSO.

2.3.2 Organizations participating under this CSO must coordinate with SAIO to ensure compliance with the overarching structure, avoid duplicative efforts, and maintain visibility into total obligations against the CSO’s estimated funding amount. Participating Contracting Officers must adhere to the standardized CSO process outlined herein, including the three-step evaluation approach (White Paper, Pitch Session, Proposal), submission formats, and evaluation guidance.

2.3.3 Each AOI must be self-contained and fully informative for industry, clearly identifying the problem set, operational context, technical needs, evaluation criteria, set-aside status, security requirements, and anticipated funding. AOIs may vary in scope, duration, and classification, but all must align with the high-level objectives of this CSO and be coordinated through SAIO prior to release. All AOIs issued under this CSO must follow the standardized evaluation process described in Section 8 – Enterprise Evaluation Framework to ensure consistency, fairness, and compliance across the enterprise.

3. GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK AND OPERATIONAL GUIDANCE

3.1 GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK

3.1.1 This Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) is established as an enterprise-wide acquisition mechanism under the authority of the Space Acquisition and Integration Office (SAIO) and administered by the designated CSO Contracting Officer (CO).

3.1.2 The CSO is intended to:

3.1.2.1 Enable multiple USSF acquisition organizations to publish and execute their own Areas of Interest (AOIs) under a common, standardized framework.

3.1.2.2 Promote rapid, innovative, and flexible acquisition of commercial solutions in support of Space Domain Awareness (SDA) and other mission priorities.

3.1.2.3 Ensure all AOIs and awards remain compliant with DFARS 212.70.

3.2 The CSO CO retains enterprise oversight to:

3.2.1 Maintain the integrity and scope of the CSO.

3.2.2 Approve all AOIs prior to publication.

3.2.3 Ensure standardized evaluation and award procedures across all AOIs.

3.3 OPERATIONAL GOVERNANCE GUIDANCE

• The following requirements apply to all AOIs published under this CSO:

3.3.1 AOI DEVELOPMENT & APPROVAL

3.3.1.1 All AOIs must clearly describe the technical problem, desired outcomes, and any constraints specific to the requirement.

3.3.1.2 AOIs shall use the format in Attachment 7 – AOI Template.

3.3.1.3 AOIs must be submitted to the CSO CO for review and approval before publication.

3.3.1.4 Approval will verify:

• Alignment with CSO scope and legal authorities.

• Compliance with DFARS 212.70 and applicable FAR/DFARS provisions.

• Funds estimation management

3.3.1.5 NAICS Alignment and RAD Applicability

• The primary NAICS for this CSO is 541715 – R&D in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology). AOIs should generally align to this NAICS to maintain the CSO’s R&D focus, which does not require a Requirements Approval Document (RAD) under DAFI 63-138 and FAR guidance.

• If an AOI sponsor determines that another NAICS is more appropriate (e.g., 541511 for software services), the AOI Contracting Officer must identify the deviation in Attachment 7 and coordinate with SAIO for approval prior to publication.

• AOIs using a NAICS outside 541715 may trigger additional approval requirements, including a RAD, if the effort is determined to be services focused.

3.3.2 AOI PUBLICATION

3.3.2.1 Approved AOIs will be posted on SAM.gov under the SDA CSO entry.

3.3.2.2 Each AOI will identify its designated AOI CO and Technical Lead.

3.3.2.3 Each AOI must include submission and evaluation instructions tailored to its scope.

3.3.3 EVALUATION & AWARD

3.3.3.1 Evaluations will follow the process in Attachment 6 – Evaluation Process.

3.3.3.2 AOI COs will be responsible for conducting all evaluation phases for their AOI(s) and documenting results in accordance with federal acquisition regulations.

3.3.3.3 The Government reserves the right to award all, some, or none of the proposed solutions.

3.3.3.4 AOI COs must apply the evaluation phases and factors described in Section 8 and ensure results are documented in accordance with enterprise standards.

3.3.4 FUNDING MANAGEMENT

3.3.4.1 AOI COs must coordinate with the CSO CO to verify funding availability before award.

3.3.4.2 AOIs must state whether funding is currently available and provide a not-to-exceed value for planning.

3.3.5 COMPLIANCE & RECORDS

3.3.5.1 All awards under this CSO must be made using FAR-based contracts.

3.3.5.2 All CSO and AOI records will be maintained in accordance with USSF and DoD records management policies.

3.3.5.3 AOI COs must submit award summaries to the CSO CO for enterprise tracking within 10 business days of award.

4. CSO APPROACH

4.1 APPLICABILITY

4.1.1 This CSO seeks innovative, solutions to address Space Domain Awareness (SDA) mission challenges through advanced software engineering. The Government encourages a broad range of technical and business approaches aligned with the specific Areas of Interest (AOIs). Each AOI may describe either a narrowly scoped need or a broad strategic challenge aligned with enterprise-wide SDA priorities. All submissions in response to any AOI will be governed by this CSO unless explicitly stated otherwise within the AOI document (Attachment 7).

4.1.2 Awards made under this CSO shall be fixed-price type, FAR-based contracts. The determination of small business set-aside status will be made at the AOI level in accordance with FAR Part 19 and applicable DFARS/DAFFARS guidance. Each AOI will specify whether it is full and open competition or reserved for small business participation (e.g., under NAICS 541511, Custom Computer Programming Services, $34M size standard, or other NAICS as appropriate). The Government reserves the right to award to any combination of proposals offering the best overall value. Contract type and pricing structure may vary as appropriate to each AOI’s requirements and available funding.

4.1.3 Proposals submitted under this CSO will be evaluated using a multi-phase process, as described in Attachment 6. The Government may fund all, some, or none of the proposals received and may fund only specific parts of a proposed solution. AOI COs must apply the evaluation phases and factors described in Section 8 – Enterprise Evaluation Framework and ensure results are documented in accordance with enterprise standards.

4.1.4 The anticipated funding for this CSO is $6,000,000 over a five-year period, inclusive of all AOIs and contract awards. Initial funding availability is limited to $1.5 million for early AOIs. Future AOIs may establish different notional values depending on mission needs and budget availability.

4.1.5 The Government may choose to fund all or a portion of a proposed solution, based on mission utility and expected return on investment.

4.1.6 All formal communication between the Government and Offerors will occur via www.sam.gov and the listed points of contact in Section 6. Industry engagement may also include virtual pitch sessions or written clarifications, as determined by the evaluation phase.

4.2 MULTI-AOI EXECUTION FRAMEWORK

4.2.1 This CSO serves as an enterprise-wide acquisition vehicle managed by the Space Acquisition and Integration Office (SAIO). It is structured to enable multiple contracting organizations within the United States Space Force (USSF) to issue AOIs and conduct acquisitions under a shared, standardized framework. The SAIO CSO Contracting Officer (CO) retains overarching governance, compliance, and funding management responsibilities.

4.2.2 The CSO enables authorized Contracting Officers within designated USSF acquisition organizations to:

4.2.2.1 Develop and release AOIs under this CSO,

4.2.2.2 Conduct independent evaluations aligned with the CSO process,

4.2.2.3 Execute awards tailored to their AOI’s specific needs.

4.2.3 All AOIs must be coordinated with the CSO CO and receive formal approval prior to publication to ensure:

4.2.3.1 Alignment with DFARS 212.70 and this CSO’s purpose,

4.2.3.2 Legal sufficiency and appropriate contract structure, and

4.2.3.3 Standardized evaluation and award methodologies.

4.2.4 Each AOI must:

4.2.4.1 Clearly state the notional funding availability,

4.2.4.2 Provide an estimated not-to-exceed value for planning purposes,

4.2.4.3 Indicate whether funding is currently available or contingent.

4.2.5 AOI Ownership and Autonomy

4.2.5.1 Each AOI acts as a standalone acquisition project under the umbrella of this CSO. AOIs are expected to provide sufficient detail in their attachments to allow industry to clearly understand the Government's problem set, objectives, and anticipated evaluation approach. AOI owners (technical and acquisition) are responsible for day-to-day execution.

5. ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND COMMUNICATIONS

5.1 ENTERPRISE-LEVEL POINTS OF CONTACT

5.1.1 The CSO Contracting Officer (CO), assigned by SAIO, is the primary point of contact for all enterprise-level CSO matters. This individual:

5.1.1.1 Provides overarching guidance on CSO execution.

5.1.1.2 Approves AOIs for publication under this CSO.

5.1.1.3 Ensures compliance with DFARS 212.70and applicable FAR/DFARS clauses.

5.1.2 Enterprise CSO Contact Email: SAIO.SDA.CSO@spaceforce.mil

5.1.3 Use subject line: SDA CSO – General Question(s).

5.1.4 Material questions and answers will be posted to SAM.gov.

5.2 AOI-LEVEL POINTS OF CONTACT

5.2.1 For each approved AOI:

5.2.1.1 The designated AOI CO is the official point of contact for all AOI-specific contracting matters, including submission instructions, evaluation process questions, and award notifications.

5.2.1.2 The AOI Technical Lead is the point of contact for all technical clarifications and requirement-related discussions.

5.2.1.3 Contact information for AOI COs and Technical Leads will be listed in Attachment 7 – AOI Template.

5.3 AOI-Specific Email Guidance:

5.3.1 Use subject line: SDA CSO [AOI#] – Question(s) (e.g., AOI-2025_01).

5.3.2 All material questions and responses will be posted to SAM.gov for transparency.

5.4 SUBMISSION AND INQUIRY RULES

5.4.1 Phase I submissions shall be Unclassified. Subsequent phases may require submission and/or performance at higher classification levels, as specified in the AOI and any draft or final DD Form 254.

RESPONSIBILITIES SUMMARY

Role Primary Responsibilities

CSO CO Enterprise oversight, AOI approval, compliance enforcement.

AOI CO AOI lifecycle management, solicitation posting, evaluation oversight, award execution.

AOI

Technical Lead

Technical requirement clarification, evaluation support, post-award technical monitoring.

Offeror Proposal submission, compliance with instructions, maintenance of necessary clearances.

6. SUBMISSION INFORMATION

6.1 SUBMISSION OVERVIEW:

6.1.1 This SDA Enterprise CSO will remain open for a period of five years from posting (updated annually) or until superseded. This CSO is open for Phase I submissions in accordance with the AOIs outlined in Attachment 7. The acceptance date for Phase I submissions will be identified in each individual AOI.

6.1.2 The Government will amend the CSO to incorporate additional AOIs as needed. AOIs may be published by the CSO Contracting Officer or by authorized AOI Contracting Officers within approved USSF acquisition organizations, following the governance and approval process in Section 4.

6.1.3 The Government will not reimburse companies for costs associated with submission for any phase.

6.1.4 Submissions for all phases shall be sent to the Contracting Team’s point(s) of contact listed in the individual AOI. All submissions shall follow this filename format:

6.1.4.1 Phase I: [AOI#]Phase[#][Document Type][CompanyName][YYYYMMDD]

6.1.4.2 Example: AOI2025_01_PhaseI_WhitePaper_ABC_Corp_Inc_20251015.pdf

6.1.4.3 Maximum filename length: 50 characters

6.2 RECEIPT CONFIRMATION:

6.2.1 To ensure submissions have been received by the Government, Offerors shall send a separate email (not containing attachments) to the Contracting Team’s point(s) of contact listed in the AOI immediately after emailing a submission. Hardcopies for any phase will not be accepted.

6.3 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION:

6.3.1 Offerors shall mark each page of submissions that contains proprietary information.

Offerors may assert restrictions on the use, release, or disclosure of data/software provided during contract performance in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7013, 7014, and 7017 (available at www.acquisition.gov).

6.4 TWO- OR THREE-PHASED SUBMISSION PROCESS:

6.4.1 This CSO may be conducted in two or three phases, at the discretion of the AOI Contracting Officer.

6.5 SUBMISSION PROCESS OVERVIEW:

6.5.1 Phase I (Required): All Offerors submit PowerPoint and White Paper

6.5.2 Phase II (Optional): Selected Offerors invited to pitch sessions at Government discretion

6.5.3 Phase III (Final): Selected Offerors submit full proposal package (Technical Proposal, PWS, Price Proposal)

6.5.4 The Government reserves the right to proceed directly from Phase I to Phase III.

6.6 PHASE I – POWERPOINT AND WHITE PAPER:

6.6.1 Phase I submissions will be evaluated for each AOI in accordance with Attachments 1 and 2.

6.6.2 Acceptance dates will be listed in each AOI (Attachment 7).

6.6.3 Submissions must be succinct but technically descriptive.

6.6.4 All PowerPoints must include a Quad Chart per the template in Attachment 1.

6.6.5 Questions and answers will be posted on www.sam.gov.

6.7 PHASE II – PITCH SESSION:

6.7.1 If utilized, Phase II provides an opportunity for Offerors to present and discuss their proposed solution in greater depth following Phase I evaluation.

6.7.2 The Government may invite Offerors to participate in a virtual or in-person Pitch Session to address technical merit, operational applicability, and alignment with SDA enterprise objectives.

6.7.3 Phase II is optional, and the Government may proceed directly from Phase I to Phase III at its discretion.

6.7.4 Phase II content and evaluation criteria are described in Attachment 3.

6.8 PHASE III – FULL PROPOSAL:

6.8.1 Only by invitation from AOI CO.

6.8.2 Must follow Attachments 4–6 for format and content.

6.8.3 Offerors will have 30–45 days to submit after request.

6.8.4 Offerors must be registered in SAM.gov, meet FAR 9.1 responsibility requirements, and be eligible for award under applicable law/regulation.

6.9 Evaluation And Selection Process:

6.9.1 Each AOI submission will be evaluated independently in accordance with Section 8 - Enterprise Evaluation Framework and the detailed procedures in Attachment 6.

6.9.2 Evaluation is based on technical approach, projected timeline, and available funding.

6.9.3 Price will be assessed for fairness/reasonableness per DFARS 212.70.

6.9.4 Selections may be made at any phase; award is not guaranteed.

6.9.5 The AOI CO will notify Offerors of selection/non-selection generally within 45 days.

6.9.6 If funding is not available, selected solutions may be retained in the Government’s solution repository for up to three years for future consideration

7. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

7.1 DATA RIGHTS

7.1.1 It is the Government’s intention to acquire only the Technical Data, Computer Software, and Computer Software Documentation rights necessary to satisfy agency needs. The Government seeks to acquire the minimum rights necessary for operational use, testing, and maintenance. Offerors retain all rights to proprietary technologies and background intellectual property. Specific data rights will be negotiated based on the nature of the solution and Government operational requirements. These data rights provisions apply to all AOIs and awards under this CSO, regardless of the awarding Contracting Officer.

7.2 FOREIGN PARTICIPATION

7.2.1 Foreign firms are not eligible to participate in this CSO. The research, test data, and other deliverables under a resultant contract or agreement may contain Military Critical Technology List (MCTL) information whose export is restricted by the Export Control Act (Title 22, U.S.C.

§ 2751, et seq.) or DoDI 5000.83, Technology and Program Protection to Maintain Technological Advantage.

7.3 CYBERSECURITY REQUIREMENTS

7.3.1 In accordance with DFARS 252.204-7019 and 252.204-7020, the Contracting Officer cannot award a contract unless the successful Offeror has a current NIST SP 800-171 DoD assessment posted in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS). All AOI awards must verify compliance prior to contract award. Offerors should review CMMC 2.0 requirements and be prepared to comply if specified in the AOI or resultant contract.

7.4 NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS

7.4.1 Proprietary information submitted in any phase may be provided to non-Government advisors supporting the Government in the evaluation of Offeror submissions. All non- Government advisors must have signed non-disclosure agreements and be bound by organizational conflict of interest (OCI) restrictions. Submission under this CSO constitutes consent for such advisors to participate in evaluations.

7.5 PROCUREMENT INTEGRITY, STANDARDS OF CONDUCT, ETHICAL

CONSIDERATIONS, AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

7.5.1 The Government will review all submissions for the existence or appearance of a conflict of interest (COI). Offerors must disclose any actual or potential COI early in the process.

7.5.2 Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI): Offerors shall perform and submit an OCI analysis with their Phase III proposal in accordance with FAR 9.5 and applicable GAO/US Court of Federal Claims decisions. If an OCI exists, Offerors must submit a mitigation plan for Government review.

7.5.3 Responsibility: To be considered for award under Phase III, Offerors must meet the requirements of FAR 9.104, be registered in SAM, and have a satisfactory performance record.

7.6 DEBRIEFINGS

7.6.1 The Government will conduct written, post-award debriefings for Phase III upon request only, in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(l). Debriefings will address the evaluation factors contained in Attachment 6 and any AOI-specific criteria but will not include a comparison of submissions against a common PWS.

7.7 GOVERNMENT-FURNISHED PROPERTY (GFP)

7.7.1 GFP is not anticipated to be made available under any resulting contract, but determinations will be made at the AOI/award level. If provided, contractors are responsible for all associated costs (e.g., transportation, installation, rehabilitation) in accordance with FAR 45.201(b).

7.8 BASE SUPPORT / NETWORK ACCESS

7.8.1 Base access and/or network access for testing, validation, and demonstration will be determined for each award. Requirements will be specified in AOI-specific instructions or subsequent contract documentation.

8. ENTERPRISE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK

This section establishes the standardized evaluation process applicable to all Areas of Interest (AOIs) issued under this CSO. It ensures uniformity, compliance, and transparency across the enterprise while allowing each AOI to tailor its evaluation to mission-specific needs. All evaluation activities will follow DFARS 212.70 (Defense Commercial Solutions Opening) and applicable FAR/DFARS requirements for commercial acquisitions (e.g., FAR Part 12), consistent with the integrity and fairness standards in FAR Part 3. This CSO is not conducted under FAR Part 15 procedures.

8.1 APPLICABILITY

8.1.1 This evaluation framework applies to all AOIs issued under this CSO by any authorized Contracting Officer.

8.1.2 AOI-specific criteria must remain consistent with this framework and the formats in this Section 9 (Enterprise Evaluation Framework) and Attachment 6 (Evaluation and Selection Process).

8.1.3 Deviations from this framework require prior written approval from the CSO CO.

8.2 EVALUATION PHASES

8.2.1 All AOIs will use a two- or three-phase evaluation process, as determined by the AOI Contracting Officer:

8.2.2 Phase I – White Paper & PowerPoint Submission

8.2.2.1 Evaluated for Technical Merit & Applicability, Funds Availability, and feasibility against AOI objectives.

8.2.2.2 Must include a Quad Chart (Attachment 1).

8.2.3 Phase II – Pitch Session (Optional)

8.2.3.1 Conducted at Government discretion to explore technical merit, applicability, feasibility, and Funds Availability.

8.2.3.2 May require supplemental material (Attachment 3).

8.2.4 Phase III – Full Proposal

8.2.4.1 Evaluated for Technical Merit & Applicability, Importance to Agency Programs, and Price (fair and reasonable per FAR 12.209), plus compliance with Attachments 4–6.

8.2.4.2 Offerors must meet FAR 9.104 responsibility and be registered in SAM.gov.

8.2.4.3 The Government reserves the right to:

• Proceed directly from Phase I to Phase III, or

8.2.4.4 Award some, none or all of the proposal.

8.3 EVALUATION FACTORS

8.3.1 All evaluations will consider the following factors, weighted as specified in each AOI:

8.3.1.1 Technical Merit – Soundness, innovation, and potential mission impact of the proposed solution.

8.3.1.2 Relevance – Alignment with SDA and CSO objectives.

8.3.1.3 Viability & Risk – Likelihood of successful execution, including schedule and technical risk.

8.3.1.4 Price Reasonableness – Assessed in accordance with DFARS 212.70 and FAR 15.4.

8.4 EVALUATION TEAMS

8.4.1 AOI COs must establish evaluation teams with technical subject matter experts, acquisition personnel, and other stakeholders as appropriate.

8.4.2 Non-Government advisors may be used in accordance with Section 8.1.8.

8.5 DOCUMENTATION & RECORDS

8.5.1 AOI COs must document all evaluation findings and selection decisions in accordance with FAR/DFARS requirements.

8.5.2 Award decision documentation must explicitly reference how the proposed solution met the above evaluation factors.

8.5.3 All evaluation records must be provided to the CSO CO for enterprise-level tracking within 10 business days of award.

8.6 ENTERPRISE CONSISTENCY REQUIREMENT

8.6.1 To maintain integrity across all AOIs:

8.6.1.1 All AOIs must include a copy or link to this section and clearly identify any AOI-specific adjustments.

8.6.1.2 Any changes to evaluation process, factors, or scoring must be approved in writing by the CSO CO prior to AOI release.

9. ATTACHMENT 1: PHASE I POWERPOINT BRIEFING & QUAD CHART FORMAT

9.1 PURPOSE

9.1.1 The Phase I PowerPoint briefing provides the initial visual summary of the proposed solution. The Quad Chart serves as the first content slide and must concisely communicate the key elements of the offering for rapid Government assessment.

9.2 QUAD CHART REQUIREMENTS

9.2.1 Format: Landscape orientation, one page maximum.

9.2.2 Template: Must follow the Government-provided Quad Chart template (Times New Roman, font size ≥ 12 pt).

9.2.3 Placement: Quad Chart must be the first content slide after the title slide in the briefing.

9.2.4 Content Areas:

9.2.4.1 Objective – Brief problem statement and intended outcome.

9.2.4.2 Description of Effort – Summary of technical approach.

9.2.4.3 Benefits of Proposed Approach – Expected advantages and impact to AOI.

9.2.4.4 Technical Challenges/Solution Approach – Key risks and planned mitigation.

9.2.4.5 Major Milestones – By Government fiscal year and month.

9.2.4.6 ROM Price Estimate – Rough Order of Magnitude cost.

9.3 POWERPOINT BRIEFING REQUIREMENTS

9.3.1 Format: Microsoft PowerPoint (.pptx) only.

9.3.2 Length: Maximum of five (5) content slides plus title slide.

9.3.3 File Size: Not to exceed 10 MB.

9.3.4 Font: Times New Roman, font size ≥ 12 pt.

9.3.5 Content:

9.3.5.1 Visually elaborate on Quad Chart elements.

9.3.5.2 Include graphics, diagrams, or images where beneficial.

9.3.5.3 Ensure alignment with AOI-specific requirements in Attachment 7.

9.3.5.4 Security Level: Phase I submissions shall be Unclassified. Subsequent phases may require submission and/or performance at higher classification levels, as specified in the AOI and any draft or final DD Form 254.

9.3.5.5 For classified content, contact the AOI Contracting Officer for submission instructions.

9.4 SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

9.4.1 Submit Quad Chart and PowerPoint briefing together to the AOI Contracting Officer identified in the AOI.

9.4.2 Clearly mark file names with CSO#, AOI#, and Company Name.

9.4.3 Follow AOI-specific submission timelines in Attachment 7.

Topic #, Project Title

Objective: Clear concise (1-2 sentences) description of the goal of the effort (>12-pt font).

Description of Effort: Brief description of the technology or solution proposed (>12-pt font).

Core Concept: Brief description of the innovation or capability being proposed.

Key Technical Elements: Identify the primary technologies, methods, or tools that will be employed.

AOI Alignment: State how the approach specifically addresses one or more AOIs.

Technical Maturity: Indicate the current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and any relevant demonstration history.

Expected Benefits: Summarize key anticipated impacts to SDA mission effectiveness (e.g., accuracy, latency, interoperability). (>12-pt font)

Challenges:

* Bulleted list of technical or timeline challenges. (>12-pt font)

Major Goals and Milestones to Capability Delivery (FY):

* Bulleted list must include anticipated delivery date of functioning capability.

(>12-pt font)

Proposed Funding ($K):

10. ATTACHMENT 2: PHASE I WHITE PAPER FORMAT

10.1 PURPOSE

10.1.1 The Phase I White Paper expands upon the PowerPoint briefing and Quad Chart to provide additional narrative detail for Government evaluation. It should clearly describe the proposed solution in the context of the AOI, without introducing unrelated corporate or personnel qualifications.

10.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

10.2.1 Page Size: 8.5 x 11 inches, one-inch margins.

10.2.2 Length: Maximum of two (2) narrative pages plus cover page.

10.2.3 Format: Single-spaced, Times New Roman, font size ≥ 12 pt.

10.2.4 Submit as a PDF, file size not to exceed 10 MB.

10.2.5 Pages exceeding the limit will not be evaluated.

10.2.6 Cover Page: Must meet requirements in Attachment 4, Section 1.

10.3 CONTENT GUIDANCE

10.3.1 The White Paper must align directly with the AOI identified in Attachment 7 and should only expand upon elements presented in the PowerPoint/Quad Chart. At a minimum, include:

10.3.2 Objective – Problem statement and intended outcome.

10.3.3 Description of the Effort – Technical concept, approach, and key activities.

10.3.4 Benefits of the Proposed Approach – Operational, cost, or schedule advantages.

10.3.5 Technical Challenges – Anticipated risks and mitigation strategies.

10.3.6 Solution Approach – How the proposed concept addresses AOI needs.

10.3.7 Major Milestones – By Government fiscal year and month.

10.3.8 ROM Price Estimate – Rough Order of Magnitude cost aligned with proposed scope.

10.4 PROHIBITED CONTENT

10.4.1 Do not include:

10.4.1.1 Corporate or personnel qualifications

10.4.1.2 Past performance information

10.4.1.3 Supplemental material not requested

10.5 CLASSIFIED SUBMISSIONS

10.5.1 Phase I submissions shall be Unclassified. Subsequent phases may require submission and/or performance at higher classification levels, as specified in the AOI and any draft or final DD Form 254. For classified submissions:

10.5.1.1 Contact the AOI Contracting Officer for secure submission instructions.

10.5.1.2 Ensure classified data is handled in accordance with applicable security protocols.

10.6 SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

10.6.1 Submit the White Paper electronically to the Contracting Officer identified in the AOI.

10.6.2 Clearly mark file names with CSO#, AOI#, and Company Name.

10.6.3 Submissions must be received by the AOI-specific deadline in Attachment 7.

10.6.4 The requirement for a cover sheet is applicable for all Phase I White Papers submitted in response to new AOIs published.

11. ATTACHMENT 3: PHASE II PITCH SESSION FORMAT

11.1 OVERVIEW

11.1.1 Phase II is an optional intermediate step in the CSO evaluation process, conducted at the Government’s discretion. It provides Offerors the opportunity to present, demonstrate, and discuss their proposed concept, technology, or solution in greater depth following Phase I evaluation.

11.2 The Government may:

11.2.1 Invite Offerors to a Phase II Pitch Session based on technical merit, applicability, and alignment to the AOI.

11.2.2 Proceed directly from Phase I to Phase III without conducting a Pitch Session.

11.2.3 Request supplemental written information in addition to the live or virtual pitch.

11.3 PITCH SESSION FORMAT

11.3.1 Duration: 45 minutes for Offeror presentation, followed by Government-led Q&A. Additional time may be provided for discussion as needed.

11.3.2 Format: Virtual (preferred) or in-person, based on operational requirements, security considerations, and scheduling.

11.3.3 Submission of Materials: Offerors shall submit all supporting materials in advance of the session in accordance with Government-provided instructions. Classified material may only be presented in accordance with Government security protocols and pre-coordination.

11.4 REQUIRED CONTENT

11.4.1 The Offeror’s Pitch Session presentation shall include:

11.4.1.1 Executive Summary: Summarize the concept and how it aligns with the AOI and SDA enterprise objectives.

11.4.1.2 Technical Approach:

• Core technology or capability description.

• Innovation elements and differentiators from existing solutions.

• Demonstrations, models, or visual aids, if available.

11.5 OPERATIONAL APPLICABILITY:

11.5.1 How the solution integrates into SDA enterprise operations.

11.5.2 Scalability, adaptability, and interoperability considerations.

11.5.3 ESTIMATED PRICE/SCHEDULE:

11.5.3.1 Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) price.

11.5.3.2 Notional schedule for development, integration, testing, or demonstration within the DoD.

11.5.4 DATA RIGHTS ASSERTIONS:

11.5.4.1 Identification of any Intellectual Property (IP) involved.

11.5.4.2 Associated restrictions on Government use.

11.5.4.3 Proposed data rights consistent with DFARS 227 requirements.

11.5.5 RISK ASSESSMENT:

11.5.5.1 Key technical, schedule, and integration risks.

11.5.5.2 Mitigation strategies.

11.5.6 ENTERPRISE IMPACT:

11.5.6.1 Benefits to mission capabilities, decision-making, and SDA readiness.

11.5.6.2 Potential cross-mission or cross-service applicability.

11.5.7 GOVERNMENT ROLE IN PHASE II

11.5.7.1 Evaluation: Phase II sessions will be assessed using the evaluation factors in Attachment 6.

11.5.7.2 Non-Government Advisors: If applicable, advisors supporting the evaluation will be under Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) and bound by conflict-of-interest restrictions.

11.5.7.3 Clarifications: The Government may request follow-up information to clarify or expand on concepts discussed.

11.5.8 SELECTION PATHWAYS

11.5.8.1 Following Phase II, the Government may:

• Invite the Offeror to submit a Phase III Proposal.

• Request additional refinement or re-submission for consideration in a future AOI cycle.

• Decline advancement if the solution is determined not to meet technical, operational, or enterprise needs.

Note: The Government reserves the right to forgo Phase II and go directly to Phase III.

12. ATTACHMENT 4: PHASE III TECHNICAL PROPOSAL & PWS FORMAT

12.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW

12.1.1 The Phase III submission is the Offeror’s complete, final package for Government evaluation and potential award. It must be precise, self-contained, and directly responsive to the CSO, the applicable AOI, and any specific instructions in the Phase III Request for Proposal (RFP). All content should be tailored to the solution proposed and address enterprise-level applicability across the Space Domain Awareness (SDA) mission space. Submissions shall be provided electronically in both searchable PDF format (for the technical narrative) and Microsoft Word format (for the PWS).

Supporting files (e.g., spreadsheets, diagrams, schedules) should be provided in their native editable format.

12.2 COVER SHEET REQUIREMENTS

12.2.1 Each Phase III proposal shall include a cover sheet containing the following information:

12.2.1.1 CSO and AOI Number and AOI Title (if applicable)

12.2.1.2 Full Legal Company Name and Address

12.2.1.3 CAGE Code

12.2.1.4 Unique Entity ID Number

12.2.1.5 Business Size Classification (per NAICS 541511 or the NAICS specified in the AOI)

12.2.1.6 Socioeconomic Status (e.g., Small Business, WOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZone, etc.)

12.2.1.7 Point of Contact Information – Name, Title, Phone Number, Email Address

12.2.1.8 Date of Submission

12.3 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

12.3.1 The Technical Proposal should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate the Offeror’s understanding, feasibility, and technical merit, while maintaining clarity and conciseness. The narrative should cover:

12.4 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

12.4.1.1 Summarize the problem or need addressed by the proposed solution.

12.4.1.2 Identify the SDA mission relevance and alignment with the applicable AOI.

12.4.1.3 Provide relevant context, including prior work, related programs, or operational challenges.

12.5 MILESTONES AND SCHEDULE

12.5.1.1 Include a table or graphic showing all major milestones.

12.5.1.2 Present activities by fiscal year to match the Technical Proposal timeline.

12.6 TECHNICAL APPROACH

12.6.1.1 Describe the concept, methodology, and technologies to be applied.

12.6.1.2 Identify innovative aspects, differentiators, and advantages over existing solutions.

12.6.1.3 Address possible integration with existing USSF/Combat Forces Command/S33Z systems and workflows.

12.6.1.4 Include operational considerations (e.g., certifications, security requirements, algorithms, software development methodologies).

12.7 DELIVERABLES AND OUTCOMES

12.7.1.1 Provide a clear list of deliverables with measurable acceptance criteria.

12.7.1.2 Specify intended operational outcomes and benefits to the SDA Enterprise.

12.8 MAJOR PROGRAM MILESTONES

12.8.1.1 Present a graphic timeline of milestones by Government fiscal year and month.

12.8.1.2 Include key development, test, and delivery events.

12.9 GOVERNMENT SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS

12.9.1 Identify any Government-furnished property (GFP), facilities, data, or other support required to execute the proposed effort.

12.10 DATA RIGHTS ASSERTIONS

12.10.1 Identify any Intellectual Property (IP) involved, along with proposed data rights assertions in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7013, 7014, and 7017.

12.10.2 Provide rationale for each assertion.

Note: Phase III Technical Proposal page limits and formatting specifications will be identified in the individual Phase III RFP.

12.11 PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS) REQUIREMENTS

12.11.1 The PWS must be a standalone, contract-ready document suitable for incorporation without modification, and must exclude proprietary information. The PWS should contain:

12.11.2 OBJECTIVE

12.11.2.1 Briefly describe the overall purpose of the effort and the operational need it addresses.

12.11.3 SCOPE

12.11.3.1 Define the breadth of work to be accomplished, including AOI focus, goals, and high-level deliverables.

12.11.3.2 Identify the intended impact on SDA enterprise capabilities.

12.11.4 TASKS AND TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

12.11.4.1 Detail the specific tasks to be performed, broken down by base and option periods.

12.11.4.2 Present tasks in a logical sequence aligned with the proposed schedule.

12.11.4.3 Use binding language (“The Contractor shall…”) for mandatory requirements.

12.11.4.4 Clearly separate optional tasks from base tasks.

12.11.5 STANDARDS AND CONSTRAINTS

12.11.5.1 Reference applicable standards, security requirements, and compliance criteria.

12.11.5.2 Identify constraints such as access restrictions, export controls, or special certifications.

12.11.6 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

12.11.6.1 CROSS-REFERENCING:

• The Technical Proposal and PWS should be consistent and cross-referenced for traceability.

12.11.7 FLEXIBILITY:

12.11.7.1 The PWS should avoid excessive detail that would hinder flexibility in execution, while still providing sufficient clarity for evaluation.

12.11.8 REVIEW AND NEGOTIATION:

12.11.8.1 The Government reserves the right to modify the PWS language during negotiations prior to award.

13. ATTACHMENT 5: PHASE III PRICE PROPOSAL FORMAT

13.1 PRICE PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

13.1.1 The Price Proposal submission must include pricing information sufficiently detailed for meaningful evaluation of the proposal. For pricing purposes, Offerors should assume a contract start date of approximately ninety (90) days after submission of the proposal. The Price Proposal does not have a page limit restriction.

13.1.2 Since all proposals are considered commercial items, technologies, or services, the requirements of the Truthful Cost or Pricing Data Act are not applicable. However, if the Contracting Officer determines additional information is necessary to support a determination of a fair and reasonable price, other than certified cost and pricing data may be requested.

13.1.3 The responsibility for providing adequate supporting data and attachments lies solely with the Offeror. Further, the Offeror must also bear the burden of proof in establishing reasonableness of proposed prices; therefore, it is in the Offeror’s best interest to submit a fully supportable and well-prepared price proposal.

13.1.4 The Offeror shall prepare the Price Proposal submission to include an electronic version of the pricing model in a Microsoft (MS) Excel editable format. The Excel file must:

13.1.4.1 Contain all cost elements that roll up to the total proposed price.

13.1.4.2 Show formulas in all calculation cells, with links intact where applicable.

13.1.4.3 Clearly identify base and option periods (if applicable).

13.1.4.4 Include labor category details (titles, rates, hours, and extended amounts).

13.1.4.5 Include material/equipment lists with unit prices and extended totals.

13.1.4.6 Identify any travel costs with assumptions (e.g., number of trips, duration, per diem rates).

13.1.4.7 Break out subcontractor costs, including the basis for estimate (quotes, market data).

13.1.4.8 Match all totals to the Summary Pricing Table provided in the main proposal document

13.2 PRICE PROPOSAL CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

13.2.1 The Price Proposal must contain, at a minimum:

13.2.2 SUMMARY PRICING TABLE

13.2.2.1 Total proposed price by Contract Line Item Number (CLIN), sub-CLIN (if applicable), and any separately priced Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) items.

13.2.2.2 Identification of base and option period pricing, if applicable.

13.2.3 BASIS OF ESTIMATE (BOE)

13.2.3.1 Narrative describing the estimating methodology used (e.g., prior sales data, vendor quotes, market rates).

13.2.3.2 Key assumptions (quantities, performance period, labor mix, materials).

13.2.4 LABOR AND MATERIAL BREAKDOWN (IF APPLICABLE)

13.2.4.1 Labor categories, proposed hours, and fully burdened labor rates.

13.2.4.2 Major material/equipment costs with supporting rationale.

13.2.5 SUBCONTRACTOR/PARTNER PRICING (IF APPLICABLE)

13.2.5.1 Identify subcontracted portions of work and associated costs.

13.2.5.2 Describe the basis for subcontract pricing (quotes, catalog pricing, market research).

13.2.6 SUPPORTING MARKET DATA

13.2.6.1 Evidence supporting the commerciality of the item/service (product literature, commercial price lists, historical sales data).

13.2.6.2 Documentation to demonstrate proposed prices are fair and reasonable (per FAR 12.209).

13.2.7 EXCEL PRICING MODEL (REQUIRED)

13.2.7.1 Fully functional MS Excel file with all formulas intact.

13.2.7.2 Must match the summary pricing table in totals.

13.2.7.3 Clearly labeled tabs (e.g., “Labor,” “Materials,” “Travel,” “Subcontracts,” “Summary”).

13.2.7.4 Include assumptions or notes tab explaining key pricing drivers.

13.2.8 BURDEN OF PROOF

13.2.8.1 The responsibility for providing adequate supporting data rests solely with the Offeror.

Offerors bear the burden of proof in establishing the reasonableness of their proposed prices.

Failure to provide adequate support may result in an evaluation finding of “price not reasonable,” which may render the proposal unawardable.

13.2.9 FILE NAMING AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

13.2.9.1 Price Proposals shall be submitted in accordance with the instructions provided in the Phase III Request for Proposal (RFP) for the specific AOI. As a general rule:

• File Name Format: CSO-<AOI#>-PriceProposal-<CompanyName>-<Date>

• Example: CSO-AOI2025_01-PriceProposal-ABCSystems-2025-05-15.xlsx

• Price Proposal and supporting files must be transmitted via the method specified in the AOI solicitation (e.g., secure file transfer, encrypted email).

14. ATTACHMENT 6: EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS

14.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA

14.1.1 All phase submissions will be evaluated against the following criteria, each of equal importance:

• Technical Merit/Applicability – The degree to which the proposed solution demonstrates sound engineering, meets the stated AOI objectives, and reflects technical feasibility for integration into the SDA Enterprise

• Importance to Agency Programs – The extent to which the proposed solution advances operational needs, fills critical capability gaps, or enhances mission performance

• Price – Price will be evaluated to the extent appropriate, but no award will be made unless the Government determines the price is fair and reasonable.

14.1.2 All phase submissions will be evaluated by a scientific, technological, or other subject-matter expert peer review process.

14.1.3 All phase submissions will be categorized as Recommended, Selectable, or Non-selectable as follows:

14.1.3.1 Recommended: Submissions are recommended for acceptance if sufficient funding is available and normally are displaced only by other Recommended submissions. To be categorized as “Recommended,” a white paper must meet all the following:

• Strong technical merit

• Addresses the AOI directly

• Shows high potential impact to SDA mission areas

• Project scope reasonable and feasible within expected cost/schedule boundaries

• High value for the associated cost

14.1.3.2 Selectable: submissions are recommended for acceptance if sufficient funding is available, but at a lower priority than Recommended submissions. A Selectable submission may require additional development. To ensure a diversity of approaches, a Selectable submission may be prioritized over a Recommended submission if the Selectable submission presents a unique approach unlike any of the Recommended submissions. A submission may be categorized as “Selectable” if it meets any of the following:

• Acceptable technical merit

• Relevant to the AOI but may have limitations, open questions, or lower mission impact

• Shows moderate potential impact to SDA mission areas

• Project scope reasonable and feasible within expected cost/schedule boundaries, but may need clarification or refinement

• Acceptable value for the associated cost

14.1.3.3 Not Selectable: Even if funds were available, the submission should not be funded.

Submissions may be categorized as “Not Selectable” if it meets any of the following:

• Insufficient technical merit

• Does not align with the AOI

• Shows insufficient potential impact to SDA mission areas

• Project scope unreasonable and/or infeasible within expected cost/schedule boundaries