Project Taj Majal CSO Call FINAL.pdf

OVERVIEW

This Commercial Solutions Opening Call solicitation is issued in accordance with 10 USC 3458, DFARS Subpart 212.70, and DoD Class Deviation 2022-O0007 “Defense Commercial

Solutions Opening”

1. NAICS Code and Associated Description: 518210 “Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing, Web Hosting, and Related Services”

2. Federal Agency Name and Contracting Officer: Department of Air Force (DAF) Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC), Matthew Loffredo, matthew.loffredo@us.af.mil

3. Commercial Solutions Opening Title: Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) – AFLCMC Data Operation CSO, Closed, Two-Step, titled “Project Taj Majal – CSO Call 7”

4. Commercial Solutions Opening Number: FA8600-23-S-C056

5. Contracting Points of Contact (POCs): The Contracting Officer (CO) is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. Offerors shall address any questions or concerns they may have to the CO. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the CO and Contract Specialist at the e-mail addresses listed below on or before June 2, 2025, by 5:00pm Eastern Time.

5.1. Contracting Officer: Matthew Loffredo (e-mail: matthew.loffredo@us.af.mil)

5.2. Contract Specialist: Jennifer Burns (e-mail: jennifer.burns.8@us.af.mil)

5.3. Be advised that only the Contracting Officer has the authority to enter into a binding contract agreement on behalf of the United States Government.

6. CSO Call Intent: To ensure this CSO remains accessible to both traditional and non-traditional vendors, the Government intends to maintain flexibility in the execution and pricing of future task orders that may be issued off the potential Step Two Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. While the IDIQ structure incorporates standard oversight and contracting mechanisms, individual task orders may be tailored in collaboration with vendors to align with commercial delivery models, and team structures —provided they remain compliant with governing regulations. The Government encourages innovative approaches and will support onboarding and open communication to enable successful engagement across a range of vendor types.

7. AFLCMC/GBH Mission and Goals: The Human Resources Systems Division (AFLCMC/GBH) is responsible for the development and sustainment of AF/A1 Human Capital Management (HCM) software. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) currently utilizes over one hundred applications and software configurations to support human resources business processes across the DAF enterprise. The Air Force's current reliance on multiple disparate HR applications and software configurations presents a critical vulnerability in today's rapidly evolving threat landscape.

7.1. The goals of AF/A1 are to:

7.1.1. To reduce the number of applications and systems within the A1 portfolio while still maintaining or exceeding today's service levels;

7.1.2. Utilize industry best practices;

mailto:matthew.loffredo@us.af.mil mailto:matthew.loffredo@us.af.mil mailto:jennifer.burns.8@us.af.mil

7.1.3. Leverage cloud-based commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) HCM Software as a Service (SaaS) platforms; and

7.1.4. Minimize custom coding, data conversion and migration, system interfaces, and system sustainment.

7.2. The AFLCMC/GBH Contracting Office, in support of AF/A1 at JBSA Randolph AFB, Texas, seeks through this initial announcement to invite industry to submit a solution brief through the current CSO. The CSO can be found at SAM.gov Contract Opportunities with Notice ID FA8600-23-S-C056.

8. CSO Call Purpose: This is a Closed, Two-Step CSO Call. This competitive combined synopsis/solicitation is focused on identifying technologies to meet the mission of AFLCMC/GBH. The Government seeks to obtain innovative solutions or potential new capabilities to fulfill requirements, close capability gaps, or provide potential technological advancements in the capability areas listed below.

8.1. Awards resulting from this CSO will be made based on the evaluation results of a Two-Step proposal process. The Government reserves the right to award contract(s) in response to all, some, one, or none of the proposals submitted under Step Two. The Government may elect to award only part of a submitted proposal, and the Government may decide to incrementally fund awards made under this CSO. All awards are subject to the availability of funds. Step One of this CSO Call is the submission of solution briefs, and Step Two is the submission of proposals at the request of the Government along with a live Demo.

9. CSO Call Deadlines:

9.1. Step One: Solution briefs will be accepted until June 12, 2025, at 5:00pm Eastern.

Solution briefs may be submitted at any time during this period. Solution briefs received after specified date and time will be considered late in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(f) and will be rejected. Interested offerors can submit clarifying questions to AFLCMC by June 2, 2025, at 5:00pm Eastern. AFLCMC will publish all received questions and AFLCMC’s responses (anticipated June 5, 2025) prior to the solution brief submission date. All submissions (questions and solution briefs) shall be made to the designated Contracting POCs below.

9.2. Step Two: In accordance with this Call, the Government will down select offerors from the Step One (Solution Briefs) to submit a Step Two proposal. The proposal due date and time will be provided in a separate issued letter. Offerors that submit a White paper will be notified as to whether they are proceeding to Step Two. The notice provided to the applicants not proceeding to Step Two will provide a rationale for the Government's decision not to advance those proposals to Step Two.

I. The following information is provided as an addendum to FAR 52.212-1, “Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Products and Commercial Services.”

10. Step One – Solution Brief Submission: Offerors are encouraged to submit solution briefs meeting objectives and focus areas described in the Statement of Work (SOW) Section 2.0. Only a single solution brief per Offeror may be submitted and all solution briefs will be reviewed. The Government reserves the right to not proceed to Step Two if solution briefs do not meet the requirements. The cost of preparing solution briefs in response to this solicitation is NOT considered an allowable direct charge to any resultant contract or agreement. Offerors shall submit their solution brief via e-mail to the Contracting POCs identified in paragraph 5.0 of this document.

10.1. Solution Brief Content: Each solution brief will include a Cover Page and Technical/Management Section. The solution brief must stand on its own merit. Do not include the following in the solution brief submittal:

10.1.1. Statements of Work or Performance Work Statements;

10.1.2. Any Proprietary Information without first coordinating with the Government Contracting POC; or

10.1.3. Marketing materials not pertinent to the objectives and focus areas of the SOW.

10.2. Cover Page: The cover page will include the following information:

10.2.1. CSO number, FA8600-23-S-C056

10.2.2. Call number and amendment number (if applicable)

10.2.3. CSO Title

10.2.4. Objectives and focus areas covered by the solution brief

10.2.5. Company Name and Information

10.2.5.1. Company Name

10.2.5.2. Business size

10.2.5.3. Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) number, if any

10.2.5.4. Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) number, if any

10.2.5.6. Company Contracting POC(s) with contact information

10.2.5.7. Company Technical POC(s) with contact information

10.3. Technical/Management Section: The technical/management section must cover the following, at a minimum:

10.3.1. Overall capabilities of company to execute proposed effort

10.3.2. “Innovative” (any technology, process, or method, including research and development, that is new, or any application that is new as of the submission date) approach to fulfill the objectives and focus areas specified on cover page or alterative areas for Government consideration

10.3.3. How effort will be organized, subcontractors or organizations that will perform portions of the technical effort, how the efforts will be managed, and any other management or administrative information deemed appropriate

10.3.4. Government property, equipment or facilities that may be required

10.3.5. Deliverables that may benefit the Government, if any

10.3.6. Technical and/or management risk associated with innovative concept

10.4. Solution Brief Format: Solution briefs will be formatted as follows:

10.4.1. The solution brief shall be limited to 10 pages, prepared and submitted in Word format.

10.4.2. Font shall be standard 12-pt font Times New Roman, and character spacing must be normal. All text, including text in tables and charts, must adhere to all font size and line spacing requirements listed herein.

10.4.3. Text shall be double-spaced with one-inch margins on all sides on 8.5 by 11-inch paper.

10.4.4. Illustrations, flowcharts, drawings, and diagrams are part of the page count, limitation.

10.4.5. All pages shall be numbered starting with the cover page being page 1.

10.4.6. The solution brief must be submitted in a searchable, readable, and virus-checked format.

10.5. Data Rights and Intellectual Property: The Offeror shall clearly identify any commercial software, proprietary tools, or pre-existing intellectual property to be used in performance of this contract. Such items must be appropriately marked and must not conflict with the Government’s intended use of deliverables.

10.5.1. Offerors are advised that the Government requires Government Purpose Rights in all contract deliverables developed with Government funding. This includes, but is not limited to, configuration workflows, test plans, migration scripts, and security controls created for the purpose of implementing and operating the Oracle Fusion Cloud (OFC) HCM SaaS solution. If any deliverables are subject to limited or restricted rights, they must be clearly identified and justified in the proposal.

10.5.2. All configuration logic, test artifacts, automation routines, interface scripts, training materials, and other technical deliverables developed specifically for the Government under this contract shall be provided with sufficient documentation and in a non-obfuscated, reviewable format. Deliverables shall not rely on proprietary tools or processes unless such tools are furnished as part of contract performance.

11. Step One – Solution Brief Down Select: The Government will evaluate solutions briefs in accordance with Section 15 (see pages 8-9). The Government intends to invite no more than five

(5) Selected Offerors to participate in Step Two by submitting full proposals. This limitation is consistent with CSO practices intended to promote efficiency, reduce proposal costs, and streamline the acquisition process. The Government reserves the right to not select any solution briefs for invitation to move to Step Two under this Call and to adjust the number of invitations to Step Two based on the quality of solution briefs received. The RFP will be issued by the Contracting Officer to the Selected Offerors, and the RFP will contain all applicable dates for Step Two.

12. Step Two – Proposal Submission: Selected Offerors invited to participate in Step Two shall submit full proposals consisting of a cover sheet and the following three (3) volumes:

Volume One – Technical Proposal, Volume Two – Pricing Volume, and Volume Three – Relevant Experience.

12.1. Volume 1 – Technical Proposal (Limit: 15 pages): The Technical Volume shall describe the Offeror’s approach to delivering an OFC HCM SaaS solution aligned with Agile and modular acquisition principles. It shall include:

12.1.1. Implementation and configuration strategy;

12.1.2. Testing methodology, including automation, regression, UAT, and security validation;

12.1.3. Data migration approach and interface integration (e.g., MilPDS, COMPASS, BCAP);

12.1.4. Security and compliance plan including STIGs, RBAC, encryption, and ATO-readiness;

12.1.5. Program Management approach, resource and schedule controls, key personnel roles;

12.1.6. Agile metrics to be tracked (e.g., sprint velocity, backlog burn-up/down, throughput);

12.1.7. Tool stack used to support Agile delivery, CI/CD, DevSecOps, test frameworks; and

12.1.8. Assumptions, dependencies, and constraints affecting execution.

12.2. The Offeror shall include any attachments to the technical volume (e.g., resumes, organizational charts, diagrams, glossary of terms). Attachments do not count toward the page limit of the technical volume.

12.3. Volume 2 – Pricing Volume (Limit: 5 pages for Pricing Narrative): The Price Volume will consist of Attachment 1 – Pricing Template and a Pricing Narrative. The Pricing Volume shall be used to establish pre-priced firm-fixed-price (FFP) Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) 0001 – 0005 for the base Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. For Step Two, the Offeror will utilize the Performance Work Statement (PWS), which will govern the issuance of the first task order under the proposed IDIQ and includes CLINs 0001 through 0005 as FFP priced modular components. Pricing shall be submitted in the price volume will form the basis for future modular task order execution.

12.3.1. The price proposal must include pricing information sufficiently detailed for a meaningful evaluation of the proposal. As this CSO Call is conducted in accordance with FAR Part 12 for commercial items, 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. The responsibility for providing adequate supporting data and attachments lies solely with the Offeror.

In addition, the Offeror shall 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, compliant with FAR/DFARS. For pricing purposes, Offerors should assume a contract start date of approximately ninety (90) days after submission of the proposal.

12.3.2. The Offeror will complete “Attachment 1 – Pricing Template” based on the instructions in Tab 1 of the Excel Spreadsheet.

12.3.3 Offerors shall complete all applicable CLIN pricing tabs in Attachment 1.

Each CLIN shall include:

12.3.3.1. Proposed labor categories;

12.3.3.2. Fully burdened hourly rates;

12.3.3.3. Estimated labor hours per Sprint or Lot;

12.3.3.4. Unit Price per Sprint or Lot; and

12.3.3.5. Total CLIN price and assumptions.

12.3.4. Unit Definitions for Pricing Volume. The following unit definitions apply to Attachment 1 – Pricing Template:

12.3.4.1. “Sprint” (Unit of Issue: Each): A Sprint is a 2-week Agile development cycle resulting in tested, working software aligned to defined user stories, and the Government’s “Definition of Done.” Each (“EA”) will be the unit of issue during the ordering period and shall reflect the labor and deliverables for one complete sprint iteration.

12.3.4.2. “Lot” (Unit of Issue: Lot). A Lot represents a 3-week milestone-based or functional delivery. A Lot typically encompasses integrated planning, configuration, testing, or handoff activities. Each “LOT” is a fixed delivery scope not tied to repeatable sprint cadence.

12.3.5. The tab for Pricing Traceability Matrix will map each Sprint or Lot unit price in Attachment 1 to:

12.3.5.1. Associated deliverables (e.g., configuration work, MVP milestone);

12.3.5.2. Labor mix and total labor hours;

12.3.5.3. Supporting assumptions and team capacity;

12.3.5.4. CLIN grouping and technical work decomposition;

12.3.5.5. Pricing alignment with Agile delivery cadence; and

12.3.5.6. The Oracle SKU reference.

12.3.6. The Offeror will provide a Pricing Narrative that consists of the following:

12.3.6.1. Basis of Estimate (BOE) per CLIN;

12.3.6.2. Justification for using Sprint (1 Each) vs Lot (1 Lot); and

12.3.6.3. Traceability of labor categories, labor hours, and assumptions.

12.4. Volume 3 – Relevant Experience (Limit: 5 pages): The Offeror will provide up to three (3) contract references relevant to OFC HCM SaaS Solutions delivery of similar size and scope. Each reference must include:

12.4.1. Contract number, scope, total value, period of performance;

12.4.2. Customer/Organization and point of contact with email and phone number;

and

12.4.3. Offerors should provide quantifiable success metrics, client references, and past project details demonstrating experience in system integration, data migration, and cloud deployment.

12.4.4. Offerors may include CPARS, award letters, or customer testimonials as appendices (not counted toward the 5-page limit)

12.5. Cover Sheet: The following information should be contained in a cover sheet attached to the proposal:

12.5.1. Full company name and address

12.5.2. CSO number, FA8600-23-S-C056

12.5.3. Point of contact, name, title, and phone number

12.5.4. CAGE code

12.5.5. UEI number

12.5.6. Will you require the use of any Government property in the performance of this work? If yes, identify.

NOTE: If an Offeror takes exceptions to the requirements called out in the announcement, the exceptions should be clearly stated in the price proposal.

12.6. Proposal Format: Proposals will be formatted as follows for any Word or PDF document submissions:

12.6.1. Fonts shall be standard 12-pt font Times New Roman, and character spacing must be normal. All text, including text in tables and charts, must adhere to all font size and line spacing requirements listed herein.

12.6.2. Text shall be double-spaced with one-inch margins on all sides on 8.5 by 11-inch paper.

12.6.3. All pages shall be numbered.

12.6.4. The proposal documents must be submitted in a searchable, readable, and virus-checked format.

12.7. Offerors who are required to submit subcontracting plans should submit subcontracting plans in accordance with FAR 19.704.

13. Live Demonstration: Offerors invited to Step Two shall participate in a live, scenario-based demonstration as a condition of evaluation. Offerors shall demonstrate their proposed OFC HCM SaaS Solutions. Demonstrations must adequately reflect the actual capabilities and configuration of their proposed solution. Offerors shall not use the live demonstration to conduct a marketing or vendor sales presentation. The demonstration shall validate:

13.1. Core HCM functionality and dashboard workflows;

13.2. Batch-processing capability (e.g., onboarding 500–1,000 users);

13.3. Data security, RBAC, and configuration transparency; and

13.4. Performance and responsiveness across roles.

13.5. Demonstrations shall:

13.5.1. Be conducted by the proposed project team members (not sales representatives)

13.5.2. Use the proposed tool stack and implementation approach submitted in the Technical Volume

13.5.3. Execute Government-provided use cases (e.g., batch onboarding of 500– 1,000 users, assignment preferences, role-based dashboards)

13.5.4. Demonstrate configuration (not customization) aligned to Agile MVP principles

13.5.5. Show end-to-end workflows with test data—not canned demos or Oracle global use cases

13.6. Demonstrations shall not:

13.6.1. Include slides or videos that promote Oracle branding, marketing differentiators, or generic capabilities

13.6.2. Be presented by business development or sales staff not named in the proposal

13.6.3. Include functionality not available or proposed for this acquisition

13.6.4. The Government may ask clarifying questions and will assess the demo based on accuracy, realism, workflow alignment, user role integration, system performance, and data security configuration.

13.6.5. Demonstration Costs: The Government will NOT pay for any cost associated with the preparation of execution of the live demonstration. All costs incurred by the Offeror in support of the demonstration shall be at the Offeror's sole expense and will not be reimbursed directly or indirectly by the Government.

II. The following information is provided as an addendum to FAR 52.212-2, “Evaluation – Commercial Products and Commercial Services”

14. Basis for Award: The Government intends to award one (1) single award IDIQ based on a two-step evaluation approach under the CSO framework to the responsible Offeror whose proposal is determined to provide the best value to the Government based on the evaluation criteria listed in this Call.

14.1. The Government reserves the right to:

14.1.1. Negotiate with offerors to refine technical and pricing details.

14.1.2. Award some, all, or none of the proposals received based on mission requirements and the availability of Government funds.

14.1.3. Award without discussions, if determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

15. Solution Brief Evaluation: The Government will conduct a streamlined evaluation of solution briefs submitted in response to this Call to identify those vendors whose technical concepts and commercial capabilities demonstrate the greatest potential to meet or exceed the Government’s objectives described in the SOW. All solution brief evaluations are conducted independently and are based solely on the criteria stated in the SOW and 52.212-2. The Government will only evaluate information provided in the solution brief and no other sources of information will be considered. Solution briefs will be evaluated based on the following:

15.1. The Offeror’s demonstrated ability to execute the proposed solution within the operational framework in accordance with the Government’s SOW paragraph 2.1. The evaluations will consider feasibility and alignment with operational needs.

15.2. The Offeror’s approach must showcase proven methodologies while also demonstrating innovative techniques that align with the Government’s SOW paragraph 3.

Innovation will be evaluated based on uniqueness, efficiency improvements, and ability to enhance Air Force Human Resources (HR) processes.

15.3. Relevance and alignment with the Government’s desired end-state (e.g., delivery of a modular, Agile-configured Oracle Fusion Cloud HCM SaaS solution);

15.4. Demonstrated understanding of the Government’s requirements, including integration with legacy systems and secure DoD cloud environments;

15.5. Technical maturity and feasibility of approach within cost and schedule expectations;

and

15.6. Commercial viability and prior successful implementation in a similar enterprise environment.

15.7. Based on this assessment, solution briefs will be categorized into two groups:

15.7.1. Selected: Submissions that clearly demonstrate technical merit, commercial viability, and strong alignment with the Government’s modernization goals. These offerors represent the highest confidence for successful execution.

15.7.2. Not Selected: Submissions that do not meet the minimum expectations or demonstrate insufficient alignment with the stated objectives.

16. Proposal Evaluation: Down-selected Offerors will be required to submit detailed technical proposals and price volume and participate in a live demonstration of their proposed Oracle Fusion Cloud HCM SaaS Solution Capabilities. The Government will evaluate submission based on:

16.1. Volume 1 – Technical Proposal: The Offeror’s technical proposal will be evaluated based on the following criteria:

16.1.1. Implementation and Configuration: The Offeror must demonstrate the technical approach for implementation and configuration of the OFC HCM SaaS Solution Capabilities to support user requirements to include minimizing COTS product customizations/extensions. Include an overview of planned support for Air Force Business Process Re-engineering processes. The Offeror’s technical approach must include but is not limited to the following:

16.1.1.1. Comprehensive deployment plan including scheduling, resource allocation and communication strategies.

16.1.1.2. Show understanding of developing software test descriptions and the importance of these

16.1.1.3. Demonstrate a clear understanding of test concepts, including requirements, regression and basic performance testing. Testing Technical approach includes, as a minimum, a structured CV&I test phase that includes but is not limited to the following:

16.1.1.3.1. Component integration test;

16.1.1.3.2. Data management evaluation;

16.1.1.3.3. Performance evaluation test (e.g., system performance, scalability, resource utilization);

16.1.1.3.4. Cybersecurity evaluation;

16.1.1.3.5. System integration test;

16.1.1.3.6. User evaluation Test; and

16.1.1.3.7. Data Encryption and Access Control methodology.

16.1.2. Data Migration and System/Application Integrations OFC HCM: SaaS implementations will require data migration and system/application integrations from legacy/on-premise system/application to SaaS solution. Describe the technical approach to OFC HCM SaaS data migration and integrations, identify any tool recommendations to accomplish the data migration and integration tasks, and identify any unique challenges in migrating the data and associated system/application integrations.

16.2. Volume 2 – Pricing Volume: Pre-determined pricing from Attachment 1 will be utilized for task orders throughout the ordering period, including any additional CLINs that align with allowable contract types in accordance with FAR Part 12. The contract permits only FFP contract types in accordance with CSO policy and FAR Part 12. No other pricing structure, such as Labor Hour or Time-and-Materials are authorized.

16.2.1. In determining the price to be fair and reasonable, the Contracting Officer will utilize the procedures at DFARS 212.209.

16.2.2. Pricing will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 52.219-4, “Notice of Price Evaluation Preference for HUBZone Small Business Concerns.”

16.3. Volume 3 – Relevant Experience: The Government will evaluate the relevance, scope, and success of the Offeror’s prior projects in delivering Oracle Fusion Cloud HCM SaaS or similar enterprise cloud-based HR systems. Evaluation will consider the similarity in size and scope, measurable outcomes, and demonstrated success in data migration, system integration, and cloud deployment. Offerors with directly applicable experience and substantiated performance outcomes will be viewed more favorably.

17. Live Demonstration Evaluation: The live demonstration will be assessed as a critical component of the overall Technical Approach evaluation. The live demonstration will serve as a validation mechanism for the proposed technical solution’s realism, maturity, and feasibility. The demonstration will allow the Government to assess the offeror’s ability to execute end-to-end workflows, Agile MVP configurations, and integration with role-based dashboards using the actual proposed tool stack.

17.1. Observations from the demonstration will inform the evaluation of:

17.1.1. Alignment between proposed and actual capability

17.1.2. Ease of configuration (vs. customization)

17.1.3. Workflow usability, responsiveness, and role-specific functionality

17.1.4. Security configuration and RBAC fidelity

17.1.5. System performance under load scenarios

17.2. Offerors whose demonstrations fail to align with the written proposal or show reliance on undeclared customization, proprietary tooling, or canned sales configurations may be assessed with higher technical execution risk.

18. Data Rights Evaluation: The Government will evaluate Offerors’ proposed use of intellectual property and data rights assertions to ensure compatibility with the Government’s intended use, sustainment, and compliance obligations.

18.1. Evaluation will consider:

18.1.1. Whether deliverables developed with Government funds are provided with appropriate rights and sufficient documentation to enable Government use.

18.1.2. The clarity and completeness of any restrictions or markings asserted over commercial software or pre-existing intellectual property.

18.1.3. The ability to access, validate, and sustain configured capabilities without reliance on undisclosed proprietary tooling.

18.1.4. Proposals that unnecessarily restrict the Government’s use of deliverables, or fail to provide traceable access to configured capabilities, may be rated less favorably.

18.2. Use of Intellectual Property and Data Rights: The Government will not assign a separate score to intellectual property assertions. However, the clarity and breadth of proposed data rights will be considered during the risk assessment of technical execution and sustainment.

Specifically, proposals that:

18.2.1. Impede the Government’s ability to maintain, update, or rehost the configured OFC SaaS solution.

18.2.2. Rely on undisclosed proprietary tooling for configuration, testing, or integration.

18.2.3. Do not provide Government Purpose Rights in deliverables developed with Government funds; may be viewed as presenting higher lifecycle risk, potentially reducing the Government’s confidence in successful long-term adoption and sustainment.

18.2.4. Proposals that clearly delineate rights, provide documentation in a reviewable format, and enable Government portability and revalidation will be viewed as offering lower technical and programmatic risk.