CALL FOR SOLUTIONS

Integrated Financial Management Tool: Program-to-Budget-to-Execution Data Integration and Workflow Solution

Project Number FM&C_26_01

Army Open Solicitation (AOS) Number W9128Z-25-S-A002

Call for Solution Title Integrated Financial Management Tool:

Program-to-Budget-to-Execution Data Integration and Workflow Solution

Issued By Army Contracting Command – Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG), Digital Capabilities Contracting Center of Excellence (DC3oE)

Submission Instructions To respond to this Call for Solution, please refer to Section 6 of this Call for Solution

*Solution Briefs Due Date/Time (Suspense)

13 APR 2026 at 1100 Eastern Daylight Time

(EDT)

Point of Contracts (POCs) for Solution Brief Submission

Contracting/Agreements Officer:

Christopher Fisher, christopher.m.fisher24.civ@army.mil

Contract Specialist:

Samantha Hannah samantha.l.hannah2.civ@army.mil

Note 1: Please advise the Contracting Office as soon as possible via the Microsoft Forms link if your organization intends to submit a Solution Brief in response to this Call for Solution. The Forms link can be found in the “Links” section of the SAM.gov posting.

Note 2: Any submissions received by the Contract/Agreement Officer after the suspense date/time listed above will be deemed late and not evaluated. It is the sole responsibility of the offeror to ensure that its submission is received in the inbox listed above before the deadline specified.

1. BACKGROUND.

The U.S. Army Financial Management & Comptroller mission is focused on reforming the Army's financial processes to improve performance and purchasing power through transparent program and budget formulation and execution in compliance with financial laws, regulations, and policies while inspiring trust with Military and Civilian leaders, Congress, and the American taxpayer.

Currently, the Army's financial management processes operate across multiple disconnected systems and data sources, creating significant challenges in visibility, decision-making, and traceability across the program-to-budget-to-execution lifecycle.

These systems do not communicate effectively with one another, resulting in manual processes, limited visibility into financial decisions, and an inability to trace the impact of programming decisions through budget formulation and into execution phases. The lack of automation and AI-driven processes exacerbate inefficiencies, leaving critical opportunities for process improvement and data-driven decision-making unutilized.

The lack of an integrated tool that can consolidate data from these disparate sources prevents leadership from having a comprehensive view of financial decisions and their cascading effects across the organization. This capability gap hinders the Army's ability to efficiently manage funds from the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) phase through budget development and into execution, including the development and monitoring of spend plans at the subcommand level.

There is a critical need for a mature, commercially available solution that can integrate existing Army financial data sources and provide enhanced visibility, workflow management, and decision support capabilities across the entire financial management lifecycle.

2. PROBLEM STATEMENT.

The Army requires a mature, commercially available financial management integration and analysis tool that can consolidate data from multiple existing Army financial systems and provide comprehensive visibility and workflow capabilities across the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) to budget to execution lifecycle.

The specific challenge is the inability to seamlessly connect programming decisions to budget formulation and execution activities, resulting in:

Limited visibility into how programming decisions impact budget allocation and execution

Manual processes for data consolidation and analysis across disconnected systems

Inability to trace financial decisions and their impacts throughout the financial lifecycle

Lack of integrated workflow capabilities for managing financial processes from programming through execution

Insufficient decision modeling capabilities to analyze scenarios such as Unfunded Requirement (UFR) impacts and trade-off analyses

The Army seeks a solution that can:

Integrate data from existing Army financial systems without requiring the development of new systems.

Provide data organization and analysis capabilities that elevate information to a more visible and actionable layer

Enable workflow management across programming, budget, and execution phases with functionality that replaces manual processes.

Support decision codification and traceability throughout the financial lifecycle

Facilitate decision modeling and scenario analysis, particularly for UFRs and fund reallocation decisions

Track fund movement and execution at the subcommand level

Support specific functional modules including budget development, spend plan creation, funds control, Congressional marks integration, and UFR management

Support a user base consisting of up to 5,000 users, across 39 locations including Major Army Commands and subordinate activities.

3. REQUIRED AND DESIRED SOLUTION ATTRIBUTES.

Required Attributes:

System Integration & Data Management:

Must integrate with, extract data from, and write to as applicable, the following Army financial systems, and any additional applicable system that is later identified:

o CPROBE - Command Program Optimization and Budget Evaluation o IRMIS - Integrated Resource Management Information System o P&R FORMs - Procurement and RDTE Forms o PMRT/CCAR - Program Management and Resource Tracking / Command

Cost and Resource System o GFEBS - General Fund Enterprise Business System o STANFINS - Standard Financial System o CEFFEMS - Corps of Engineers Financial Management System o ASARS - Automated Standard Army Retail Supply System

Must be an existing commercial solution—not a notional or developmental project, TRL 8 or above, or equivalent software maturity

Must consolidate data from multiple source systems into a unified analytical environment

Must maintain data integrity and traceability from source systems Must achieve an approved Army ATO prior to production deployment.

Functional Capabilities:

Must enable creation and management of spend plans using programming data Must provide workflow management capabilities across programming, budget, and execution phases Must track fund movement and execution at the subcommand level Must support funds control module functionality during execution phase Must support unfunded requirement workflow capability Must provide decision codification capabilities to document and trace financial decisions throughout the lifecycle

Modular Functionality:

Modular architecture allowing selective implementation of functional components (budget modules, UFR module, funds control, etc.)

Ability to add or modify modules without disrupting core functionality Scalable architecture to accommodate future Army financial management needs

Timeline & Deployment:

Must be capable of testing and demonstration of the creation and management of spend plans using programming data capability within 6 months of award.

Must be capable of testing and demonstration of the funds tracking, spend plan, and management capabilities within 6 months of award.

Must be capable of testing and demonstration of the remainder of the functional capabilities by within 12 months of award.

Must be deployable to Army-wide users at the completion of the above dates.

Training

Must provide role-based training for all user types delivered in at least two formats (e.g., instructor-led and self-paced); train-the-trainer program; minimum 60 days post-deployment training support

Must provide user manuals, administrator guides, and quick reference materials in Government-editable formats; updated with each release

Must provide tiered support with defined response times during business hours.

Change Management Support:

Must provide change impact assessment identifying affected user groups, processes, and systems

Must provide stakeholder communication plan and templates.

Desired Attributes:

Enhanced Analytical Capabilities:

Decision modeling and scenario analysis tools, particularly for "if-then" planning related to unfunded requirements

Advanced data visualization and dashboard capabilities for leadership visibility Predictive analytics to forecast budget and execution trends Automated alerts and notifications for critical financial events or thresholds

Workflow & Process Optimization:

Automated workflow routing and approval processes Integration of Congressional marks from external systems with automated processing Capability to manage phase-out activities and sunset programs Audit trail and compliance reporting features

User Experience & Accessibility:

Intuitive user interface requiring minimal training Role-based access controls and customizable user views Mobile accessibility for leadership review and approval functions Collaborative features enabling cross-functional team coordination

Compliance with Army cybersecurity requirements

Existing ATO at the required Impact Level for the full proposed capability, or existing ATO for core components that can be extended to cover the full solution.

FedRAMP High or DoD IL5/IL6 authorizations are highly desired.

4. AWARDING INSTRUMENT

In accordance with Open Solicitation Procedures detailed within W9128Z-25-S-A0021, the Government intends to award FAR Part 12, Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) type contract(s) as a result of this Call. The Government further reserves the right to award to all, some, or none of the companies who submit proposals. This Call for Solution will utilize Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) procedures. Use of a CSO in accordance with DFARS subpart 212.70 is considered to be a competitive procedure for the purposes of 10 U.S.C. chapter 221 and FAR subpart 6.102.

1 h ps://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/c7316940150a42f39600ac8cf5b6b34d/view

5. CALL INSTRUCTIONS AND NOTES

In addition to the general guidelines included in the open solicitation, the following guidelines apply to this Call for Solution:

Offerors are responsible for monitoring SAM.gov for any amendments to this solicitation that may have updated information.

Resellers and academic research proposals are not desired.

All Solution Briefs will be valid for 180 calendar days after the submission date.

The Government may down-select potential awardees under this call for solution.

The Government reserves the right to issue multiple awards from this Call for

Solution. It similarly reserves the right to refrain from making any award.

Submittals must use a standard, readable font (i.e., not requiring magnification), as the document's readability directly impacts the Government's ability to assess the merits of the proposed solution. Offerors are strongly encouraged to use diagrams, graphics, and concise text to effectively convey complex information.

For this purpose, landscape-oriented (11 x 8.5 inch) pages are permissible for visuals but will be counted toward the total page limit, which is strictly enforced.

Any pages submitted beyond the maximum allowed will be removed by the Government and will not be evaluated.

The Government may utilize internal Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools to assist in the administrative review and analysis of proposals, such as by summarizing content or verifying compliance with solicitation requirements. However, the use of AI is strictly for support purposes; all final evaluation judgments, the assignment of ratings, best value determinations, and the ultimate source selection decision are inherently governmental functions that will be made exclusively by Government personnel. The Government is committed to protecting all offeror proprietary and source-selection sensitive information, and any AI tool used will operate in a secure environment, consistent with all applicable data protection regulations, and will not transmit data to external systems.

Questions are to be sent only to the Contracting/Agreements Officer and Specialist (POCs) listed in this Call for Solution by 06 April 2026 @ 1600 EDT.

The following shall be utilized in the email subject line: "Call for Solution —

FM&C_26_01".

6. SOLUTION SUBMISSION AND EVALUATION PROCESS

The Government is interested in unique and innovative solutions, including techniques to reduce costs, improve efficiency, and enhance performance. The Government will utilize up to three (3) phases for assessing solutions:

Phase 1 – Solution Brief:

For Phase 1 of this acquisition, offerors shall submit a Solution Brief. The brief is a written technical submission that must provide a detailed discussion explicitly addressing the technical merit of the commercial solution offering with respect to the problem statement defined herein, using the content guidelines in Section 6.1.

Furthermore, the submission must clearly articulate how the proposed solution meets the Government's objectives and satisfies the evaluation criteria detailed in Section 6.2.

All Solution Briefs will be evaluated against these criteria. Offerors are advised that the Government will not reimburse any costs incurred in the preparation or submission of a Solution Brief.

Phase 2 – Pitch Session (Unless Bypassed):

Offerors whose Phase 1 Solution Briefs that demonstrate technical merit, satisfy the minimum evaluation criteria, and are selected to proceed may be invited to participate in a Phase 2 Pitch Session. The Government reserves the right to limit the number of offerors invited to pitch. As such, an offeror’s solution may be evaluated to be of merit, however not invited to pitch.

If conducted, the Pitch Session may include a technical demonstration or challenge, and specific instructions will be provided to selected participants. The Government reserves the right to record all pitch sessions for evaluation purposes. Furthermore, the Government reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to bypass Phase 2 entirely and proceed to an award decision based on the Phase 1 submission. Unless otherwise stipulated, the Government will not reimburse offerors for any costs associated with preparing for or participating in the Pitch Session.

Phase 3 – Solution Proposal:

Following the completion of the preceding evaluation phase(s), the Government may issue an invitation to select offerors to submit a full Request for Solution Proposal (RSP). The invitation for Phase 3 will provide detailed instructions on the required format and content for the solution proposal submission. Unless otherwise stipulated, the Government will not reimburse offerors for any costs associated with preparing the Solution Proposal or engaging in any subsequent negotiations. Furthermore, offerors are advised that any potential award resulting from this solicitation is contingent upon the availability of Government funds and need.

6.1 PHASE 1 – SOLUTION BRIEF

6.1.1 SOLUTION BRIEF CONTENT

Companies responding to this Call shall submit a Solution Brief for evaluation.

Submissions are to be sent via email only to the Contracting/Agreements Officer and Specialist (POCs) listed in this Call for Solution.

Solution Briefs shall follow the below-referenced page limits and use 12-point Arial font.

Any pages exceeding the limit will be removed and not evaluated. The Government will not consider inserted textboxes/pop-ups or internet links to additional information as part of the Solution Brief and will not consider such information in its evaluation of submissions. Traditional static graphics (images, diagrams, charts, tables, etc.)

embedded in the Solution Brief are acceptable and will be considered in evaluation of submissions. Tables and graphics may utilize a font size smaller than 12-point provided they remain legible. Solution Briefs are intended to be clear, concise and succinct submissions.

Solution Briefs shall include the following at a minimum:

a. Title Page (one-page limit)

i. Offeror Name, Call Title, Date, Point of Contact Name, POC Title, E-Mail

Address, Phone, Address, and Call reference number. If registered in SAM.gov, include the Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code, and Unique Entity Identification (UEI) code. Note: SAM registration is required for any award.

ii. Ensure to clearly identify the Call for which the Solution Brief is submitted.

b. Executive Summary (one-page limit)

i. Provide an executive summary of the offeror and its solution.

c. High-Level Solution/Concept (eight-page limit)

i. Explain the unique technical aspects of your solution, its relevance to this Call, and how it is innovative or represents a potential capability. Highlight how the solution addresses the problem statement and required solution attributes.

ii. Describe the capabilities of your solution, its scalability, and the specific benefits it offers in relation to the objectives of this Call.

Provide a detailed explanation of the technical approach, demonstrating its feasibility and achievability. Include information about the technical team’s expertise and experience to successfully implement the proposed solution.

iii. Address how the solution will meet the Army’s hosting and security requirements, including:

a) Current authorization status: Identify any existing ATOs (specify Impact Level and authorizing authority), FedRAMP authorizations, or DoD Provisional Authorizations currently held.

b) Authorization timeline: Provide a realistic timeline and approach for achieving Army ATO, including major milestones (security control implementation, documentation, assessment, authorization decision).

iv. Indicate whether the solution includes a pilot or demonstration of existing commercial technology or involves the development of technology for defense applications. Identify the DoD Technical Readiness Level (TRL) and, if applicable, discuss the path to maturity for developmental or adapted technologies.

d. ROM/Schedule (Limit of one page for ROM, and one page for Schedule)

i. Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM): The ROM must contain the breakout of pricing. Tie pricing to milestones, where appropriate. Annotate assumptions used to develop the ROM.

ii. Notional Schedule: The notional schedule must contain a project schedule outlining major tasks, milestones, and/or timeline for delivering the proposed solution. Annotate assumptions used to develop the schedule.

e. Intellectual Property Statement/Agreement/Disclosures (no page limit)

i. The Solution Brief must identify any intellectual property associated with the proposed solution, and the associated restrictions on the Government’s use of that intellectual property. DFARS Class Deviation Clause 252.227-7992 subpart 252.227-7017(d) may be used for formatting. As needed, include a separate disclosure for each company that would be a participant of the solution/concept.

f. Non-Government Advisor Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) (Only as applicable and no page limit)

i. See Section 7 of this Call.

ii. It is the sole responsibility of industry to independently execute NDAs with disclosed Non-Government Advisor under Section 7.

g. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Analysis and Mitigation Plan (As applicable, no page limit)

i. See Section 8 of this Call.

The Government may be unable to evaluate the Solution Brief if a Company fails to submit the required contents for Phase 1. For ease of evaluation, please include ALL sections (a. through h.) in one (1) .pdf submission.

6.1.2 SOLUTION BRIEF BASIS FOR EVALUATION

The Government intends to evaluate the Solution Briefs to determine if they have technical merit and address the Government’s problem statement and required attributes. Solution Briefs submitted IAW with this Call for Solution will be evaluated against the criteria in this Section. The Government reserves the right to use external market research in the evaluation of an Offeror. The Government reserves the right to select all, some, or none of the Solution Briefs submitted IAW this Call to proceed to subsequent phases.

Evaluation criteria in this section are listed in descending order of importance:

a. Technical Merit: The Government will evaluate the Technical Merit of an Offeror’s

Solution Brief. Technical Merit is defined as the solution’s direct relevance to the Call for Solution, its ability to address the problem statement and required solution attributes, and/or its potential to provide innovative technological advancements. As part of Technical Merit, the evaluation will consider the scalability of the solution, its benefits in relation to the problem statement and required attributes of this Call, and whether the technical approach is both feasible and achievable. Additionally, the Government will assess whether the proposed solution constitutes a compelling and innovative response to the Call for Solution.

The Government is particularly interested in solutions offered by entities that have direct ownership or control over the development, innovation, and support of the proposed capability. Offerors must clearly state whether they are the original provider (i.e., the developer or manufacturer) of the capability or are acting as an intermediary, such as a reseller, integrator, or distributor. Offerors who are not the original provider must explicitly describe the value they add beyond what is available from the primary source, including but not limited to unique integration, customization, or support services. This added value must go beyond the original provider’s offering and provide a clear, quantifiable return on value to the Government, such as measurable cost savings, enhanced performance, or other tangible benefits. The Government will evaluate whether the added value justifies any additional costs or complexity introduced by the intermediary relationship.

If the Offeror’s solution is evaluated as not having Technical Merit, the Government reserves the right to not continue the evaluation for the remaining Evaluation Criteria, assigning an overall Solution Brief rating of ‘Not Selected for Further Consideration’.

b. Schedule: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed solution schedule, major tasks, milestones, timeline, and/or maturity path for feasibility and achievability.

c. ROM: The Government will evaluate the ROM for compliance with the Call’s instructions only. Cost and/or Price evaluation, and Fair and Reasonable Price determination, will not be performed on the ROM for Phase 1 evaluation.

d. Intellectual Property (Data Rights): The submitted IP and Data Rights assertions will be evaluated for compliance with this Call’s instructions.

6.1.3 SOLUTION BRIEF SELECTION PROCESS

Based on the evaluation, the Solution Brief will be categorized as ‘Selected for Further Consideration’ or ‘Not Selected for Further Consideration’. Selection into the next Phase will be based on the criteria listed above, Government Need, and funding availability.

Selected for Further Consideration: The submitted Solution Brief has been determined to be of technical merit, represents a feasible and achievable schedule, and included all required submittals in accordance with the Call. As such, the Government intends to invite the Company to participate in next phase should funding be available.

Not Selected for Further Consideration: The submitted Solution Brief does not represent the necessary degree of technical merit, does not represent a feasible and achievable schedule, and/or did not include all required submittals in accordance with the Call.

Offerors ‘Selected for Further Consideration’ may be invited to participate in subsequent phases, subject to the availability of funds. The Government reserves the right to limit the number of offerors invited to Phase 2 – Pitch Session (unless bypassed) and/or Phase 3 – Solution Proposal. As such, an Offeror’s solution may be evaluated as ‘Selected for Further Consideration’, however, not invited to Phase 2 and/or Phase 3.

Solution Briefs, whether selected or not selected for subsequent Phases, will be notified in writing as soon as practicable of their evaluation results.

6.2 PHASE 2 – PITCH SESSION

All Solution Briefs submitted IAW this Call will undergo a fair, impartial, and consistent evaluation in accordance with the stated criteria. The Government anticipates disparate innovative solutions in response to this Call, to include Solutions or Concepts that the Government had not previously explored. To allow flexibility in accommodating the best method for evaluating all solutions in Phase 2, the content of Sections 6.2.1 through

6.2.3 will be provided in an invitation letter to those Offerors selected to proceed to Phase 2 (unless bypassed).

6.2.1 PITCH SESSION CONTENT

See above Section.

6.2.2 PITCH SESSION BASIS OF EVALUATION

See above Section.

6.2.3 PITCH SESSION SELECTION PROCESS

See above Section.

6.3 PHASE 3 – SOLUTION PROPOSAL

The content of Sections 6.3.1 through 6.3.3 will be provided in an invitation letter to those Offerors selected to proceed to Phase 3.

6.3.1 SOLUTION PROPOSAL CONTENT

See above Section.

6.3.2 SOLUTION PROPOSAL BASIS OF EVALUATION

See above Section.

6.3.3 SOLUTION PROPOSAL SELECTION PROCESS

See above Section.

7. NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS

As stated in Section I2 of the AOS, non-Government advisors may be used in the evaluation of Solution Briefs, Pitch Sessions, and Solution Proposals, and negotiation of said Proposals. For this Call, the Government anticipates using non-Government advisor(s) from the following contractors:

No Non-Government Advisors are identified at this time. If Non-Government Advisors are deemed necessary post-Phase 1 evaluations, the Government will give advanced notice to the selected offerors.

Non-Government advisors will have signed non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) with the Government. By submitting a Solution, the Offeror understands that the Government may share proprietary Company information with the identified non-Government advisor(s) for evaluation and administrative purposes only. In addition, the Offeror further understands that it has an opportunity before submitting a Solution Brief to the Government to enter an NDA directly with the Non-Government advisor(s), and therefore waives all claims against the Government for any disclosures of proprietary information by the non-Government personnel. Such NDAs are the responsibility of the Offeror, and the Government shall not be a party to them. Companies shall provide a copy of the signed NDAs to the Government with submissions.

8. ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST (OCI)

The Offeror shall perform an OCI analysis and submit the results of that analysis in addition to the Solution Brief submission. Specifically, the Offeror shall analyze the details of the Call and the implementation of their proposed Solution for actual or potential OCI situations associated with the performance of the Offeror, or any of the Offeror’s proposed teammates or subcontractors, under any contract or agreement the Offeror or the Offeror’s teammates or subcontractors have been or may be awarded by any federal agency or other entity. The Offeror shall describe in detail the methodology used to identify actual or potential OCI issues. The level of detail for OCI analysis may not be the same for all vendors. FAR 9.5 may be used as guidance for OCI analysis. If no conflicts are identified, a risk mitigation plan is not required; however a description of the analysis methodology, and an affirming statement that no conflicts are identified shall be included.

If the Offeror identifies any actual or potential OCIs with respect to the performance of the Offeror or the Offeror’s subcontractors or teammates, the contractor shall provide an OCI Mitigation Plan to be incorporated as an attachment to any resulting contract or agreement. Any proposed avoidance or mitigation techniques shall be consistent with

2 A achment tled “Army Open Solicita on_26 March 2026.pdf” on the main AOS SAM.gov pos ng.

FAR 9.5 and the most recent decisions of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.