AOS Smart Contracting Call - Questions and Answers 2025-09-18.pdf

Question/Clarification Requested Response Are there restrictions as to the location/jurisdiction of the companies allowed to bid for the above-mentioned contract opportunity. Can a Canadian based company bid for the contract.

There is no restriction from submitting a solution brief.

respectfully requests an extension of the Solution Brief response due date to 09/19/2025 Request acknowledged, deadline was extended to 9/26.

If this solicitation is a recompete, could the Government please identify the incumbent contractors and provide details regarding their contract expiration dates, total spend to date, performance challenges (if any), and any available information on their prior responses and pricing?

This is not a recompete. This is a new requirement.

Will preference be given to vendors with prior Department of Defense (DoD) or federal contracting experience?

The purpose of this call is to seek innovative solutions from Industry, prior DoD or Federal contracting experience is not a requirement. A SAM account is required for any resulting award.

May offerors propose subcontractors as part of their response, and are there any restrictions on the scope of work that can be subcontracted?

Yes, subcontractors may be proposed as part of the response. There are no set limitations on scope that can be subcontracted; however, keep in mind excessive subcontracting may affect your affordability. If an OTA is awarded, either a non-traditional defense contractor must have significant participation or a cost-share would be required, IAW U.S.C., OT regulations.

Should subcontractors’ roles, responsibilities, and proposed workshare percentages be detailed in the proposal? Teaming arrangements should be identified in the Solution Brief as part of the requirement of Section 6.1(c)(vi).

Will the Government consider awarding to multiple vendors for parallel pilot efforts, or is a single award more likely?

As stated in the Call, " In the event multiple submissions are received for this Call, the Government reserves the right to select all, some, or none of the solution submissions submitted in response to this Call and may result in one (1) or more awards, or alternatively, no awards." Multiple pilots may be funded concurrently.

Can you confirm the priority objectives among automation, decision optimization, data synchronization, security, and enterprise-wide standardization?

There is not a priority to the listed solution objectives. Solutions may address any or all of the objectives.

Are there any mandatory systems integrations (e.g., ACWS, PADDS, SPS, PCF, GFEBS), or is interoperability proof-of-concept acceptable at Phase I?

Interoperability proof-of-concept is acceptable at Phase 1.

Will the Government provide sample datasets or synthetic data for development, testing, or demonstration? This will not be provided as part of Phase 1, but may be provided as part of Phase 2 or 3.

Are there specific contracting phases (requirements development, solicitation, evaluation, award, post-award, closeout) where you want us to demonstrate capability first, or is end-to-end coverage expected in Phase I?

Full solution end-to-end coverage is not required for Phase 1. There is no priority for the contracting process Phases, though demonstrating capability across multiple phases is a strength for technical merit.

What security baselines (FedRAMP, IL-4/IL-5, CMMC, etc.) will apply to solutions handling sensitive contract data? IL5 will be the primary requirement.

Will vendors need to comply with specific data hosting requirements (e.g., DoD cloud environments only, GovCloud, on-premise)?

Specific data hosting requirements will be discussed and negotiated during Statement of Work (SOW) collaboration as part of Phase 3.

What is the expected funding range or ceiling for solutions moving into Phase 2/3?

The Government has not specified a funding ceiling or number of awards for this effort. Multiple solutions may be selected based on need, value, and/or availability of funding.

How will the Government evaluate ROM affordability—are there benchmarks or historical references we can align to? The Government will evaluate each ROM against the unique solution proposed.

Can you clarify whether non-Government advisors will include specific contractors, and should we prepare NDAs with them in advance?

There are no Non-Government Advisors identified at this time. The Government will notify vendors before any proposal information is shared with non-Government personnel.

If multiple vendors are awarded, will there be down-selects per phase, or could multiple vendors operate in parallel through Phase 3?

The Government has not specified a funding ceiling or number of awards for this effort. As stated in the Call, " In the event multiple submissions are received for this Call, the Government reserves the right to select all, some, or none of the solution submissions submitted in response to this Call and may result in one (1) or more awards, or alternatively, no awards." Multiple pilots may be funded concurrently.

How will the Government handle proprietary AI models or pre-trained systems? Will data rights need to be granted beyond Government Purpose Rights (GPR)?

The Government has not defined minimally acceptable technical rights. As stated in the Call, please ensure that the Solution Brief identifies "any intellectual property involved in the effort and associated restrictions on the Government’s use of that intellectual property."

For solutions leveraging existing commercial products, what level of IP disclosure is sufficient without compromising trade secrets?

The Government has not defined minimally acceptable technical rights. As stated in the Call, please ensure that the Solution Brief identifies "any intellectual property involved in the effort and associated restrictions on the Government’s use of that intellectual property."

AOS Smart Contracting Call - Questions & Answers 2025-09-18.xlsx 1

What level of detail is required in the Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) analysis—is a risk-mitigation plan always required, or only if conflicts are identified?

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.

Will the Government accept joint submissions/teaming arrangements, and how should multiple company certifications and IP disclosures be presented?

The Government encoragues teaming for any solution. A singular prime contractor must submit the solution brief.

An Appendix A (added to the Call for Solutions) shall be submitted for each participating vendor as the Affirmation of Business Status. IP disclosures shall be separate for each company and included in the submitted solution brief package.

Can the subcontracor complete 100% of the work? Or is there a minimum % of work that needs to be done by the prime contractor?

It is up to vendors to determine their workshare. Yes, subcontractors may be proposed as part of the response.

There are no set limitations on scope that can be subcontracted; however, keep in mind excessive subcontracting may affect your affordability. If an OTA is awarded, either a non-traditional defense contractor needs to have significant participation or a cost-share would be required, IAW U.S.C., OT regulations.

Do both the subcontractor and prime contractor need to be located within the US? Or is offshore work allowed? There is no restriction from submitting a solution brief.

Is site visit required in this project? If so, which location and what would be the frequency? No, a site visit is not required.

Which documents will be accepted under the point "Affirmation of Business Status Certification" apart from Certificate of Status?

The Government is only looking for the Appendix A template to be completed at this stage. The template has been added to the Call for Solutions.

Will a Certificate of Status (Maryland) from March 8th, 2024 work?

An Appendix A form will be added to the Call for Solutions. Filling out this form and submitting with your Solution Brief will serve as the Certificate of Status.

What specific pain points in the current Army contracting process should we prioritize for AI automation in Phase 1?

Please see "Objectives" in Section 3 of the Call for Solutions. There is not a priority to the listed solution objectives.

Solutions may address any or all of the objectives, and any part of the contracting lifecycle.

Among the six contracting phases (Requirements, Solicitation, Evaluation, Award, Post-Award, Closeout) outlined on pages 2–3, is there a priority order or specific phase expected to benefit most from early AI deployment?

There is no defined priority order or expected specific phase.

Are there existing benchmarks or KPIs for reducing Procurement Acquisition Lead Time (PALT) or administrative workload that our solution should aim to achieve?

PALT is one KPI used internally by ACC to determine efficiency, measured in days. There are PALT targets based on the contracting action being performed (e.g. a modification to an existing contract has a lower PALT than a competitive FAR 15 award). The Army does not have a predetermined target for PALT or manual labor hour reduction for solutions. Instead, the level of improvement will be evaluated in relation to the proposed cost.

Which existing Army systems (e.g., ACWS, PADDS, SPS, PCF, SAM.gov) should be integrated first, and will access be provided for API or data testing?

There is no defined priority order. No data or APIs will be provided for Phase 1, but may be provided prior to phases 2 or 3.

Will the solution need to handle classified or sensitive contracting data, and if so, what security requirements or certifications (e.g., FedRAMP, IL5) must be met?

IL5 will be the primary requirement for certification of solution outcomes.

For technical merit scoring, how will innovation be defined:

o Use of cutting-edge AI models, o Integration with existing tools, or o Measurable efficiency gains?

The Government will evaluate solutions in accordance with the Call for Solutions. No further defintion is provided.

Should we design the solution to be modular and scalable across all contracting offices from the outset, or focus on a pilot program for one command first?

The solution should be designed to be modular and scalable.

How important is human-in-the-loop oversight versus full automation in early phases? Full automation is not required for Phase 1. Human-in-the-loop is an important element.

For Phase 1 Solution Briefs (due September 12, 2025), will the Army provide templates for the Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) and Notional Schedule (as noted on page 7)?

Due to the variance in maturity and complexity of vendor solutions, there is not a prescribed ROM format or level of expected detail we can provide. Vendors can provide their own format and level of detail approporiate for their solution as long as it conforms to the instructions provided in the Call for Solution.

Are there preferred technical readiness levels (TRLs) for Phase 1 solutions, or can we propose both commercially available tools and R&D efforts?

The Government is looking for innovative solutions that can be leveraged to accomplish the problem statement.

R&D efforts are not as desirable.

AOS Smart Contracting Call - Questions & Answers 2025-09-18.xlsx 2

Will the Live Pitch (Phase 2) include a technical challenge or demo environment provided by the Army, or should companies use their own simulated environment?

Instructions will be provided prior to Phase 2.

For Phase 3, will the Army prioritize fixed-price, cost-plus, or other contract types for awards? Instructions will be provided prior to Phase 3. The AOS allows for various award options.

Are there Intellectual Property (IP) considerations for proprietary AI models or software we should address in Phase 1 submissions?

The Government has not defined minimally acceptable technical rights. As stated in the call, please ensure that the Solution Brief identiifes any intellectual property involved in the effort and associated restrictions on the Government’s use of that intellectual property.

Will the down-selection criteria between phases prioritize technical maturity, cost, or innovation potential?

Phase 1 solution briefs are evaluated individually against the four evaluation criteria elements in the Call. Further instructions will be provided prior to Phases 2 and 3.

If selected for future consideration (page 8), will the Army provide an estimated funding timeline for revisiting proposals?

Instructions will be provided prior to Phase 2. There is no current specified timeline for potential awards which are subject to availability of funding.

How many awards does the Army anticipate across Phase 1–3, and will multiple vendors be funded for pilot testing?

The Government has not specified a funding ceiling or number of awards for this effort. The Government reserves the right to award multiple pilots concurrently.

Will the Government provide access to anonymized historical contracting documents (solicitations, awards, modifications, closeout reports) to enable model training and benchmarking?

This will not be provided as part of Phase I, but may be provided as part of Phase 2 or 3.

Will we be able to access structured contracting datasets (FPDS-NG, VCE, PAM, GFEBS) for ingestion, or only unstructured contract files? This will not be provided as part of Phase I, but may be provided as part of Phase 2 or 3.

Will test/sandbox environments be available for ACWS, PADDS, SPS, or PCF to validate integration pipelines? This will not be provided as part of Phase I, but may be provided as part of Phase 2 or 3.

Is it expected that industry partners create custom ML models trained on Army data, or can existing LLMs be fine-tuned/restricted via RAG and validation layers?

Vendors may submit their solution brief in either configuration.

Can external/commercial LLMs (e.g., OpenAI, Anthropic, Llama) be used if deployed in a FedRAMP or Gov-authorized environment, or must all models be on-premise and government-owned?

External LLMs deployed in a FedRAMP or Gov-authorized environment with a proper ATO are acceptable for Phase 1.

What level of validation is expected from the AI system? Should it perform compliance checks against FAR/DFARS/AFARS clauses automatically, or simply cite relevant sources for human validation?

A required level of validation is not included in the desired solution objectives, however the Army is looking for vendors to propose their innovative solutions to the problem statement.

Will the Government provide machine-readable feeds or APIs for FAR/DFARS/AFARS updates, or are vendors expected to maintain their own parsing pipelines?

APIs will not be provided for Phase 1, though vendors may refer to this site as an option for implementation:

https://www.acquisition.gov/content/developers-page

Which contracting systems (ACWS, PADDS, SPS, PCF, SAM.gov, CHESS) are highest priority for integration in Phase I?

There is not a priority to the listed systems or solution objectives. Solutions may address any or all of the objectives.

What are the deployment constraints? Must the solution operate entirely within DoD closed networks, or is Gov-authorized cloud (e.g., IL5) acceptable?

IL5 will be the primary requirement for certification of solution outcomes.

Will the Government provide evaluation datasets for the Phase II demo/tech challenge, or should vendors prepare their own test sets? Information will be provided prior to Phase 2.

How will “success” be defined in Phase I vs. Phase II? Is it the demonstration of a working prototype pipeline, or measurable improvements in processing time/accuracy compared to baseline?

Evaluation criteria for Phase 1 is provided in the Call. Further information will be provided prior to Phases 2 and/or 3.

What Impact Level (IL) / enclave is anticipated for Smart Contracting MVP hosting (e.g., IL4, IL5, IL6)? IL5 will be the primary requirement for certification of solution outcomes.

Of the Army systems identified (ACWS, PADDS, SPS, PCF, SAM.gov, CHESS), which are the highest priority for Phase I integration?

There is not a priority to the listed systems or solution objectives. Solutions may address any or all of the objectives.

Should AI-generated documents (e.g., PWS, SSDD drafts) include FAR/DFARS/AFARS policy citations for human verification?

A required level of validation is not included in the desired solution objectives, however the Army is looking for vendors to propose their innovative solutions to the problem statement.

Does the Government anticipate down-selecting multiple vendors for Phase II, or is a single award path preferred for Smart Contracting? The Government reserves the right to advance multiple vendors to Phases 2 and/or 3.

If a Phase II technical challenge is conducted, what evaluation criteria (e.g., accuracy, speed, usability, security) will be emphasized?

Per 6.2 of the Call for Solutions, "Phase 2 and/or Phase 3 submission requirements and evaluation criteria will be outlined within the invitation into the respective Phase."

Will the Government require unlimited rights to deliverables, or are Government Purpose Rights acceptable for code and models developed under this effort?

The Government has not defined minimally acceptable technical rights. As stated in the call, please ensure that the Solution Brief identiifes any intellectual property involved in the effort and associated restrictions on the Government’s use of that intellectual property.

AOS Smart Contracting Call - Questions & Answers 2025-09-18.xlsx 3

What baseline PALT metrics should contractors use to measure reduction?

PALT is one KPI used internally by ACC to determine efficiency, measured in days. There are PALT targets based on the contracting action being performed (e.g. a modification to an existing contract has a lower PALT than a competitive FAR 15 award). The Army does not have a predetermined target for PALT or manual labor hour reduction for solutions. Instead, the level of improvement will be evaluated in relation to the proposed cost.

Beyond PALT, what additional KPIs (e.g., touch-time, error rates, compliance audit results) are considered critical success measures?

Reduction in PALT and manual labor hours are two KPIs identified for automating contracting processes, however relevant KPIs will be dependent on the solution proposed. Additional instructions on success metrics may be provded prior to phases 2 or 3. Vendors may propose their own success metrics applicable to their solution to demonstrate technical merit.

Will the Government identify non-Government advisors or incumbent contractors supporting Smart Contracting who may present OCI restrictions, as was done in ATMC and MAHC-III?

This is not a recompete. This is a new requirement. There are no Non-Government Advisors identified at this time.

The Government will notify vendors before any proposal information is shared with non-Government personnel.

is there a Fedramp or Impact Level requirement associated with this? IL5 will be the primary requirement for certification of solution outcomes.

Is it required for an offeror to have a complete end-to-end solution, or is a solution which addresses specific phases and will be further customized acceptable? In our experience, a full COTS solution across all 6 phases is not supported in the commercial market today

An end-to-end solution is not required at this time. Solutions that address specific phases are acceptable.

What is the expected user archetype of this solution, and in which Army office? (e.g., KOs in ACC) The expected users will be Contract Specialists and Contracting Officers, however some phases may have different users. (e.g. requirements generation)

What classification level will this solution need to operate on, both at the start and in sustainment (e.g., strictly UNCLASS, CUI, S, TS)? CUI will be the primary classification level for solution outcomes.

Of the information systems identified, which ones will need to be included immediately and which ones will be phased in?

There is not a priority to the listed systems or solution objectives. Solutions may address any or all of the objectives.

Related to infrastructure - what classification level are we targeting? I saw cArmy supports up to IL5, and JWCC handles Secret (IL6). Just trying to understand if we're working with CUI/controlled unclassified or if this needs to handle classified contract data.

IL5 will be the primary requirement for certification of solution outcomes.

I saw that PALT for competitive contracts ($50M-$250M range) is running around 600 days with a target of 180. Where's the biggest bottleneck - pre-solicitation requirements, source selection, or those sequential legal/compliance reviews that bounce between different offices?

Each phase contains bottlenecks that can be improved. The bottleneck can be different for each acquisition depending on complexity of the requirement, number of offers received, level of review required, etc.

The DoD IG report showing 86% of contracts with FAR/DFARS clause issues is concerning. From your experience, how many contract mods are just fixing clause problems? What's the typical delay when you have to go back and fix these?

We are not sure what specific report you are referencing. We do not have this specific data.

If we're prioritizing features, what would help your contracting officers most:

- Catching missing FAR/DFARS clauses before award

- Flagging evaluation inconsistencies that lead to protests

- Real-time compliance checking while drafting

- Capturing knowledge from senior COs before they retire

The Army has not priotizied the systems to integrate with. Reminder that the Army is looking for innovative solutions to the problem statement.

I know you're dealing with multiple systems (SAM.gov, FPDS, contract writing systems) that don't talk to each other. Which integration would save the most manual work?

The Army has not priotizied the systems to integrate with. Reminder that the Army is looking for innovative solutions to the problem statement.

Looking ahead - if this works, what metrics matter beyond PALT reduction? What would convince you to roll this out enterprise-wide after the pilot?

Reduction in PALT and manual labor hours are two KPIs identified for automating contracting processes, however relevant KPIs will be dependent on the solution proposed. Additional instructions on success metrics may be provded prior to phases 2 or 3. Vendors may propose their own success metrics applicable to their solution to demonstrate technical merit.

Please confirm whether the Government is looking for affirmation on business size or affirmation of good standing. See Appendix A document for clarification, which has been added to the Call.

Can the Government confirm that the required one-page executive summary will not count toward the High-Level Solution/Concept’s eight-page limit?

The executive summary is excluded from the "High-Level Solution/Concept" page limit.

Does the Army envision the Smart Contracting AI solution as a single application focusing on specific contracting tasks, or as part of a broader ecosystem of integrated tools?

Vendors are encouraged to submit their innovative solutions that address any or all of the identified objectives.

There is not a defined requirement of what the solution must look like.

AOS Smart Contracting Call - Questions & Answers 2025-09-18.xlsx 4

Could the Army please elaborate on the intended use-cases for AI in the proposal evaluation phase? For instance, is the expectation for the AI to simply assist evaluators with summaries and consistency checks, or to provide scored recommendations?

The Army does not have pre-defined expected or required use-cases for AI in the proposal evaluation phase.

Vendors are encouraged to submit their innovative solutions to the problem statement described in the Call.

What metrics or KPIs will the Army use to judge the solution’s success in the pilot and beyond?

Reduction in PALT and manual labor hours are two KPIs identified for automating contracting processes, however relevant KPIs will be dependent on the solution proposed. Additional instructions on success metrics may be provded prior to phases 2 or 3. Vendors may propose their own success metrics applicable to their solution to demonstrate technical merit.

Should the proposal address potential Phase 2 capabilities beyond this use case (such as applying the AI solution to post-award contract management or other Army contracting use cases), or focus strictly on the immediate scope of the Smart Contracting Initiative?

The problem statement for this Call includes the full contracting lifecycle. Vendors have latitude in how their solutions address the solution objectives.

Will the government please provide the contact information for the Non-Government Advisor(s) that will be used so that offerors may reach out to execute NDAs?

There are no Non-Government Advisor(s) identified at this time. The Government will notify vendors before any proposal information is shared with non-Government personnel.

Beyond PALT reduction, what specific KPIs will define success (error rates, compliance scores, user adoption rates)?

Reduction in PALT and manual labor hours are two KPIs identified for automating contracting processes, however relevant KPIs will be dependent on the solution proposed. Additional instructions on success metrics may be provded prior to phases 2 or 3. Vendors may propose their own success metrics applicable to their solution to demonstrate technical merit.

Is there a specific timeline the Army has for the next 2 phases of the AOS solicitation (Live Pitch Session and Solution Proposal)? There is no specific timeline for Phases 2 and 3 of this effort.

Is there a specific timeline the Army has for the Award? There is no specific timeline for award for this effort.

Is there a specific timeline the Army has for the initial solution to be live?

There is no specific timeline. This is dependent on the solutions received, TRL, funding available, and Statement of Work collaboration.

Is the government willing to accept a 2-week extension for Phase 1 - Solution Brief?

Request acknowledged, deadline was extended to 9/26. We will begin reviewing solution briefs as they are submitted (due no later than the 26th), in preparation to make awards as resources become available.

In section 6.1 (d) Phase 1, ROM/Schedule - The Call for Solution requests that offerors “Submit one (1) Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) and one (1) Notional Schedule.” We believe there are multiple options that would be beneficial for the Army to consider in their decision. As a result, there may be more than one ROM/schedule. Would the Army allow for multiple options for the solution, and their associated ROM and Notional Schedule?

Yes, vendors may organize their ROM as they seem fit, as long as it conforms to the Call instructions.

The Call for Solutions states that a primary objective is to achieve a 'reduction both in manual labor and in Procurement Acquisition Lead Time (PALT)'. To help formulate the most effective response, could you provide any specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or targets the Army is aiming for in these areas? For instance, is there a desired percentage reduction in PALT for high-value contracts, or a target reduction in manual labor hours for a specific phase like Requirements Development or Evaluation?

PALT is one KPI used internally by ACC to determine efficiency, measured in days. There are PALT targets based on the contracting action being performed (e.g. a modification to an existing contract has a lower PALT than a competitive FAR 15 award). The Army does not have a predetermined target for PALT or manual labor hour reduction for solutions. Instead, the level of improvement will be evaluated in relation to the proposed cost.

Could you please provide further guidance on the preferred format and specific details expected for the Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) tab within the Excel sheet, such as desired cost categories or the level of granularity for the cost breakdown?

Due to the variance in maturity and complexity of vendor solutions, there is not a prescribed ROM format or level of expected detail we can provide. Vendors can provide their own format and level of detail approporiate for their solution as long as it conforms to the instructions provided in the Call for Solution.

Does the “Executive Summary (One Page)” count against the “Solution Brief eight pages”? The instructions also indicate “High-level Solution/Concept (Eight-page limit)”.

The executive summary is excluded from the "High-Level Solution/Concept" page limit.

In the second paragraph of Section 7, the Call for Solution states: "Companies shall provide a copy of the signed NDAs to the Government with submissions."

Please identify the entity of the third party advisor who is providing the evaluation.

Also, please confirm that the copy of the signed NDA is not included in page count.

There are no Non-Government Advisor(s) identified at this time. The Government will notify vendors before any proposal information is shared with non-Government personnel.

AOS Smart Contracting Call - Questions & Answers 2025-09-18.xlsx 5

In Section 1, the Call for Solution states: “Given the complexity, duration, and criticality of these contracts, this tool presents an opportunity to enhance speed, accuracy, and compliance. Commercial examples demonstrate that AI-powered contracts can optimize procurement, reduce human error, and ensure regulatory adherence.”

Is the Government seeking a single “tool” or “solution” for the entire contracting process defined in Section 1, or will you consider capabilities that are focused on a specific contracting phases, such as "Requirements Development"?

Full solution end-to-end coverage is not required for Phase 1. There is no priority for the contracting process Phases, though demonstrating capability across multiple phases is a strength for technical merit.

The Offeror requests an extension of the Solution Brief response due date to 09/19/2025 to allow Offerors to provide a more thorough and comprehensive solution that meets all the requirements and expectations.

Request acknowledged, deadline was extended to 9/26. We will begin reviewing solution briefs as they are submitted (due no later than the 26th), in preparation to make awards as resources become available.

Please confirm that the ROM/Schedule is limited to one file and not one sheet. Yes that is correct. A single excel file with no more than two tabs.

Can the Government please confirm whether non-government advisors will be used? If so, could the Government please provide the POC for industry to initiate NDAs?

There are no Non-Government Advisor(s) identified at this time. The Government will notify vendors before any proposal information is shared with non-Government personnel.

Can the Government provide an anticipated timeline for down-select notification to vendors for Phases 2 or 3, as well as any projected target award date?

There is no specific timeline for Phases 2 and 3 of this effort. Phase 1 submissions will be evaluated individually and on a rolling basis.

Can we assume that font sizes in graphics and visuals smaller than 12pt are permissible? Yes as long as the graphics and visuals are readable.

Does the Executive Summary count against the eight-page limit for the Solution Brief? The executive summary is excluded from the "High-Level Solution/Concept" page limit.

Reference: Page 9, Section 8: “Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)…Specifically, the Offeror shall analyze the planned acquisition for actual or potential OCI situations associated with the Offeror or any of the Offeror’s proposed teammates or subcontractor’s performance under any contract or agreement the Offeror or the Offeror’s teammates or subcontractors has been or may be awarded by any federal agency or other entity.”

Does the phrase “planned acquisition” refer to this “Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Case: Smart Contracting Initiative” acquisition?

Yes.

Reference: Page 9, Section 8: “The OCI analysis does not count towards the 10-page limitation.”

Is the 10-page limit made up of the 1-page Title, 1-page Executive Summary, and the 8-page limit for the Solution proposal?

Yes that is correct.

Are you looking for a COTS solution or a customizable integration tailored to your environment? A COTS solution or a modified COTS solution are both acceptable.

Is the "call reference number" requested on the title page in section 6.1 the same as the call solicitation number? The call number is "HQAMC_25-01".

AOS Smart Contracting Call - Questions & Answers 2025-09-18.xlsx 6

Released Q&A