IBCS Modernization_Call for Solutions (1OCT25).docx

Call for Solution for Integrated Fires Mission Command (IFMC) Hardware Product Office

Submit Solution Brief To Leigh Kellstrom (leigh.t.kellstrom.civ@army.mil) Procuring Contracting Officer David Street (david.w.street.civ@army.mil) Contract Specialist Christa Bird (christa.c.bird.ctr@army.mil) IFMC Acquisition

Note 1: Please advise the cognizant Contracts/Agreements Officer and Specialist as soon as possible via the email above if your organization intends to submit a Solution Brief in response to this Call for Solution.

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 company to ensure that its submission is received in the inbox listed above before the deadline specified.

1. BACKGROUND

PEO Missiles and Space (PEO MS) supports the Fires Enterprise by integrating sensors, effectors, and fire control into a system-of-systems (SoS) that delivers offensive and defensive fires for the Joint Force.

The IFMC Project Office develops and sustains mission command and fire control capabilities across all Army Air and Missile Defense (AMD) echelons. IFMC closes key operational gaps such as the Single Integrated Air Picture (SIAP), Integrated Fire Control (IFC), and critical asset defense while enabling adaptability against evolving threats.

The Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) Program builds on this foundation by unifying all Army AMD components into a SoS, delivering operational capabilities not achievable by individual systems. IAMD strengthens homeland defense, protects forces and critical assets, and preserves freedom of action by countering adversary air and missile threats.

At the center of IAMD is the Integrated Battle Command System (IBCS), the Army’s materiel solution that links current and future AMD sensors, effectors, and mission command nodes on a single common network. IBCS consists of Engagement Operations Center (EOC), Integrated Fire Control Network (IFCN) Relays, and integration kits to network-enable current and future AMD components (current IBCS MEIs are shown at the enclosure).

Initial IAMD fielding includes Sentinel A3 and PATRIOT system integration with future expansion to additional sensors and effectors.

2. PROBLEM STATEMENT

The Integrated Battle Command System (IBCS) is a critical enabler for the Army’s future force, providing an integrated and adaptable air and missile defense capability. IBCS delivers significant advancements in joint interoperability and sensor-to-effector integration; however, the current system architecture must evolve to leverage new technologies to enhance survivability, adaptability, and supportability on the future battlefield.

The Army seeks innovative approaches to address the following problem areas:

· Survivability: The system architecture and employment concept must be continually refined to reduce vulnerability against emerging threats, particularly in contested environments.

· Size, Weight, and Power (SWaP): The current hardware footprint is characterized by medium tentage with supporting light and medium tactical vehicles and a towed power supply, which limits maneuverability, mobility, and emplacement. A smaller and more agile design is required.

· Detection Vulnerability: Adversary detection capabilities are rapidly advancing. The system must evolve to remain survivable and resilient against peer and near-peer detection capabilities.

· Adaptability: The system design and technology baseline must be restructured to accommodate future modernization requirements and enable rapid technology insertions.

· Supportability: Rapidly emerging obsolescence within the current architecture creates challenges for affordability, producibility, and sustainability.

3. DESIRED SOLUTION ATTRIBUTES

The desired solution is a full system architecture (inclusive of both hardware and software) to address rapid, scalable integration of new capabilities, enhanced survivability, increased mobility, and enhanced and enduring sustainability.

The desired solution attributes are below:

Solutions shall be able to perform functions as demonstrated in the Operational View 1 (enclosed) within current Army formations.

Solutions shall meet military standards (MIL-STD) for environmental, electromagnetic interference/compatibility (EMI/EMC), and cybersecurity accreditation requirements for fielding.

A. Survivability

1. Reduced signature and exposure: Achieve reductions in electromagnetic, acoustic, thermal, and visual signatures consistent with enabling concealment and dispersed emplacement.

2. Resilience and graceful degradation: Provide architecture to support continued mission capability in contested environments with electronic warfare or degraded communications (e.g., graceful degradation modes, redundant/heterogeneous compute paths, local autonomy).

3. Mobility and dispersal: Reduce emplacement time and enable carriage on smaller air/land/sea platforms.

B. Adaptability

1. Modularity: Maintain modular open systems approach (MOSA) to enable rapid technology insertion and interoperability. Increase modularity of hardware and software solutions to enable flexible hosting onto diverse platforms with minimal integration time.

2. System of Systems Integration: Minimize time to integrate new capabilities including, but not limited to, sensors and effectors.

3. Scalability: Support incremental scaling of capability from tactical to strategic echelons.

4. Artificial Intelligence (AI) / Machine Learning (ML): Incorporate AI and ML - enabled automation and decision support to reduce operator workload and increase system performance.

C. Supportability

1. Sustainment: Minimize long-term life-cycle costs. Design for modular field-repairable components.

2. Obsolescence: Minimize disruption to acquisition, production, and fielding through proactive obsolescence management processes. Minimize costs associated with obsolescence by balancing technological advancements with sustainability in the system architecture design.

4. AWARDING INSTRUMENT

In accordance with Open Solicitation Procedures detailed within Solicitation W9128Z- 25-S-A0021, the Government intends to award one or more Other Transaction (OT) for Prototype Project pursuant to 10 USC 4022 (formerly 10 USC 2371b). The Government further reserves the right to award to all, part, or none of the companies who submit proposals. This Call for Solution will utilize CSO procedures. Use of a CSO in accordance with DFARS Subpart 212.70 in conjunction with FAR 35 and DFARS 235 is considered to be a competitive procedure for the purposes of 10 U.S.C. chapter 221 and FAR 6.102.

1 https://sam.gov/opp/2b84cd72ec6b494c9a5301ba714fdc8e/view.

5. SOLICITATION 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 Solution Brief must identify any intellectual property involved in the effort and associated restrictions on the Government’s use of that intellectual property.

· The Government reserves the right to bypass Phase 2.

· 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.

· If submitting a Call for Solution, company font shall be readable without magnification and support the Content Quality evaluation criteria. Use of diagram(s) or graphics with associated bullet points and text layout to depict the essence of the proposed solution is strongly encouraged. The Government will allow 8.5 x 11-page landscape graphics within the overall page count. Any pages exceeding the limit will be removed and not evaluated.

· Questions are to be sent only to the Contracting/Agreements Officer and Specialist (POCs) listed in this Call for Solution by 7 November 2025 @ 1500 EST. The following shall be utilized in the email subject line: “Call for Solution – IBCS Modernization 26-01.”

6. SOLUTION SUBMISSION REQUIRMENTS

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. The Government is interested in unique and innovative solutions, including techniques to reduce costs, improve efficiency, and enhance performance. Submissions will be evaluated based on the merit of the proposed solution in addressing the Call – not against other submissions in response to this Call. The Government will utilize up to three (3) phases for assessing solutions:

Phase 1 Solution Brief:

Solution Briefs submitted in response to this Call shall be submitted as specified in Section 6.1. The Government will evaluate Solution Briefs against the criteria also stated in Section 6.1. The Government will not pay companies for the cost(s) associated with Solution Brief submissions.

Phase 2 Pitch Session: (Unless bypassed):

Companies whose Solution Briefs are evaluated to satisfy all evaluation criteria discussed below (Technical Merit, Schedule) may be invited to provide a pitch following the instructions provided within this Call. If multiple submissions are received, the Government reserves the right to limit the number of Companies invited to pitch, as a result of the Government’s evaluation. As such, a company’s solution may be evaluated to be of merit; however, not invited to pitch.

In the event the Government requires a demonstration, additional information will be provided to the company, otherwise Phase 2 will be comprised solely of the pitch. The Government will not pay Companies for costs associated with pitches, unless otherwise stipulated within the individual call for solution (the call).

Phase 3 Solution Proposal:

Companies whose Solution Brief and Pitch Session are evaluated to be of merit during Phase 1 and Phase 2 (unless bypassed), may be invited to submit a full proposal following the instructions provided in the Phase 3 invitation. The Government will not pay Companies for costs associated with the Solution Proposal (e.g., proposal development, negotiations) in Phase 3, unless otherwise stipulated.

6.1 PHASE 1:

Solution Brief Content

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. 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. Company Name, Title, Date, Point of Contact Name, 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.

ii. Specifically identify the Call number and title for which the Solution Brief is submitted.

b. Company Summary (one page limit)

i. Provide an executive summary of the Company and subsequently proposed technology.

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

i. Describe the unique technical aspects of your solution/concept and how it is relevant and important to this Call.

ii. Describe how the solution/concept is innovative and/or a potential capability.

iii. Describe how the proposed solution/concept solves a capability gap/problem and/or provides potential innovative technological advancements.

iv. Describe the solution/concept capabilities and scalability.

v. Describe the benefits of your solution/concept as it applies to the Call.

vi. Describe how the proposed technical approach is feasible, achievable, and supported by a technical team that has the expertise and experience to accomplish the proposed solution/concept.

vii. Identify whether the proposed solution/concept includes a pilot or demonstration of existing commercial technology (identified as commercially available and viable technology), or the development of technology for potential defense application. Identify the DoD Technical Readiness Level (TRL) along with the supporting evidence. If development or adaptation is proposed, discuss the suggested path to maturity. Identify aspects which may be considered proprietary.

viii. Provide a summary of product/solution and go-to- market strategy.

d. Schedule (Limited to no more than three pages)

i. Submit a Notional Schedule and describe how the notional schedule is achievable for the submitted solution. Annotate assumptions used for the Notional Schedule.

e. Affirmation of Business Status Certification (no page limit)

i. Lead companies shall include a separate Affirmation of Business Status Certification form (Attachment 0002 – Affirmation of Business Status Certification) for each company/vendor participating in the prototype project.

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

i. The Solution Brief must identify any intellectual property involved in the effort and associated restrictions on the Government’s use of that intellectual property. As needed, include a separate disclosure for each company that is a participant of the solution/concept.

*The Government may be unable to evaluate the Solution Brief if a Company fails to comply with providing the information requested above.

Solution Brief Basis of Evaluation Solution Briefs submitted in response to the Call for Solution will be evaluated against the criteria below. The Government reserves the right to use external market research in the evaluation of a Company. 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 resulting in one (1) or more awards, or alternatively, no awards. All evaluation criteria (A, B, C) are of equal importance.

The Government intends to evaluate the Solution Briefs to determine which proposed solutions have the potential to meet the Government’s needs utilizing the evaluation criteria below.

a. Technical Merit: The Government will evaluate the Technical Merit of a Company’s Solution Brief to determine whether the proposed solution meets the criteria outlined in the Call for Solution. Technical Merit is defined as having direct relevance to the stated requirement, addressing identified capability gaps, and/or providing innovative technological advancements. The technical approach must demonstrate the ability to scale and must be assessed by the Government as both feasible and achievable. In addition, the Government will determine whether the technical approach and/or underlying technology constitutes a compelling solution.

Based on this evaluation, the Government will assign one of the following determinations:

· The Company’s solution has Technical Merit: The solution is relevant, addresses the capability gap, demonstrates scalability, is feasible and achievable, and is considered compelling.

· The Company’s solution does not have Technical Merit: The solution fails to meet one or more of the Technical Merit criteria. (i.e not relevant, does not address the capability gap, does not demonstrate scalability, is not feasible and achievable, is not compelling.)

If the Company is evaluated as to not having Technical Merit, the Government reserves the right to not evaluate any further (i.e. schedule), thus effectively leaving the Company as “Not Selected for Further Consideration.”

b. Schedule: The Government will evaluate the feasibility of the Company’s proposed solution/concept project schedule and maturity path.

Solution Brief Selection Process Based on the evaluation, the Solution Brief will be categorized as either 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 schedule, and is achievable.

Not Selected for Further Consideration: The submitted Solution Brief does not represent the necessary degree of technical merit, a feasible schedule, and achievability.

Companies selected for further consideration may be invited to participate in the next Phase, subject to the availability of funds. The Government reserves the right to limit the number of companies invited to Phase 2 (if not bypassed) and/or Phase 3. As such, a Company’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 Phase 2 and/or Phase 3 will be notified in writing as soon as practicable.

6.2 PHASE 2 AND/OR PHASE 3

All Solution Briefs submitted under this Call will undergo a fair, impartial, and consistent evaluation in accordance with the stated criteria; however, advancement to Phase 2 and/or Phase 3 will be limited to those submissions that the Government determines offer the most technically sound, operationally relevant, and compelling solutions with the highest potential to address the identified capability gaps. Phase 2 and/or Phase 3 submission requirements and evaluation criteria will be outlined within the invitation into the respective Phase.

7. NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS

As identified in Section I of the Open Solicitation, non-Government advisors may be used in the evaluation of Solution Briefs, Pitches, and during proposal development and negotiation. For this Call for Solution, the Government anticipates using non- Government advisors from the following contractors:

As a reminder, by submitting information to the Government, the Company further understands that it had an opportunity to enter an NDA directly with the Non- Government Advisor 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 Company, 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 their submission. The OCI analysis does not have a page limitation requirement. 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. The Offeror shall describe in detail the methodology used to identify actual or potential OCI issues. 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. Finally, there are certain post-employment restrictions on former Federal officers and employees as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 207 and FAR 3.104-3(d). If a vendor believes a post-employment restriction or conflict of interest exists, the vendor shall notify the Contracts/Agreements Officer as soon as possible.

Any proposed avoidance or mitigation techniques shall be consistent with FAR 9.5 and the most recent decisions of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

image1.png image2.png image3.emf