N00421-15-R-0014_DRAFT_PBSOW.docx

Section C - Descriptions and Specifications

STATEMENT OF WORK

PERFORMANCE BASED STATEMENT OF WORK

WARFARE ANALYSIS, ENGINEERING & TECHNICAL SERVICES

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

CLINs 0001, 0002, 0003, 0004 and 0005 and Option CLINs 0101, 0102, 0103, 0104, 0105, 0201, 0202, 0203, 0204, 0205, 0301, 0302, 0304, 0305, 0401, 0402, 0403 and 0404

The services shall be performed in accordance with the statement of work as outlined below:

Warfighting challenges of today have created demands on our naval forces that exceed in quantity and differ in kind from anything experienced in our nation’s history. New warfighting concerns and threats to our national security require reshaping our naval force structure to secure the warfighting capabilities and capacity that are needed to address the threats of the future. An increased focus on Low Contingency Operations (LCOs), formerly known as the global war on terrorism, requires an increase in forward deployed forces – capable of providing a scalable and rapid response – and a significant change in our nation’s naval force structure and the way we train and deploy troops to meet emerging threats.

Requiring assessments of the naval systems, concepts, force structure and the role of naval forces in supporting joint warfighting capability requirements are key to the development of investment strategies to obtain the Navy’s vision for future operations. Naval leadership relies on analytic and capability assessments provided by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV) to help guide naval programming and investment decisions that are designed to achieve the warfighting capabilities envisioned for future operations. The naval analytic agenda and integration of analytic efforts are managed by OPNAV N81, coordinated with OPNAV Resource and Warfare Sponsors and Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command (CFFC), and supported analytically by the Systems Commands (SYSCOMs).Figure 1

The Naval Air (NAVAIR) SYSCOM Mission Engineering & Analysis Department (AIR-4.0M) serves as NAVAIR’s competency and authoritative source for naval aviation warfare analysis, providing Modeling, Simulation and Analysis (MS&A) support to NAVAIR program offices, OPNAV, and the fleet for analytically defendable acquisition decisions and acquisition program execution. Within the acquisition program, warfare analysis is used to ensure engineering level performance and design are in fact meeting campaign, mission, and engagement level warfighting capability requirements. Using campaign, mission and engagement level models as a foundation, AIR-4. 0M assesses weapon systems in the context of Major Combat Operations (MCOs) to support capabilities based acquisition. Central to AIR-4.0M’s Modeling and Simulation (M&S) capability is the Naval Aviation Enterprise Warfare Analysis Environment (NAE WAE) that provides state-of-the-art M&S laboratories in which analyses are performed to simulate naval warfare at the engineering, engagement, mission, and campaign levels. Properly integrating naval aviation systems in an appropriate M&S architecture is essential for analysts to identify the optimal systems, systems of systems, operational concepts, tactics, and capabilities required to deal with current and emerging threats to the United States abroad and at home. The NAE WAE provides decision makers with a much-needed, low cost analysis environment to efficiently plan for optimum structuring, acquisition, and operation of naval aviation forces within the new capabilities-based paradigm.

AIR-4.0M tasking for warfare analysis stems from many demands such as:

(1) Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) Analytic Agendas

(2) The Joint Capabilities Integrated Development System (JCIDS) process

(3) Quadrennial Defense Review assessments

(4) Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) guidance

(5) Sea Power 21 assessments

(6) Office of Naval Research (ONR) assessments

(7) Navy Warfare Development Command (NWDC) CONOPS

(8) OPNAV requirements development

(9) Defense transformation initiatives

(10) On-going analysis of acquisition systems

(11) Fleet support for fielded systems Each of these areas of analysis may involve operations at the campaign, mission, engagement or system level across a myriad of missions/warfare areas.

1.2 SCOPE

A broad spectrum of support for naval and joint warfighting capability assessments and M&S is required to support and enhance Government and military warfighting analytic efforts that are conducted in support of AIR-4.0M, Program Executive Offices (PEOs), the Naval Aviation Enterprise (NAE), and OPNAV. The scope of this Performance Based Statement of Work (PBSOW) is multi-faceted and includes warfare analysis, M&S, software development, and analytic program support. Additionally, analytic efforts may be assessed relative to joint capability requirements to provide time-phased capabilities within Joint Capability Areas (JCAs).

MS&A support provided under this PBSOW will be performed at the campaign, mission and / or engagement level to identify warfighting gaps, determine the effectiveness of various alternatives in meeting those gaps, and ensure engineering level performance and designs meet warfighting capabilities requirements – all of which will provide the analytic underpinning for capability based acquisition decisions. Conceptual, developmental, and existing subsystems, systems, System of Systems (SoS), and Family-of-Systems (FoS), with associated Concepts of Operations (CONOPS) and tactics, will be assessed within operational and tactical situations to derive optimal naval warfighting capability requirements. Naval mission areas that will be examined include the following:

The scope of this PBSOW includes the Naval Capability Pillars (Sea Strike, Sea Shield, Sea Basing, Sea Shaping, and FORCEnet), all aspects of the CNO Analytic Agenda, and all newly defined Naval Strategies, Capability Pillars, warfare areas, or mission areas.

Development and application of M&S and analysis techniques will be used to assess engineering designs and approaches, concepts and alternatives, weapons and their characteristics, and platforms and their performance for blue (friendly), red (threat), white (neutral), and green (coalition) systems. Support for AIR-4.0M M&S includes all associated technical support services required to operate the NAE WAE, ensure M&S is applied with engineering discipline with improved traceability of data through the modeling hierarchy, and ensure continuous improvement in the development and application of M&S in support of analysis. Related tasking will include support for M&S Validation and Verification (V&V); configuration management; user / administrator training; execution and administration of policies and procedures that govern the administration of the laboratories; and development and maintenance of an MS&A data repository. Figure 2

Per FAR 7.503(a), this contract shall not be used for the performance of Inherently Governmental Functions (IGF). Guidelines for IGF can be found in the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Federal Procurement Policy Letter 11-01, Performance of Inherently Governmental and Critical Functions, at the following link: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-09-12/html/2011-23165.htm

1.3 DATA HANDLING

This contract provides for the Contractor to provide technical evaluation and/or advisory and assistance services in support of modeling and simulation and analytically based warfare analyses. The Contractor will have access to system performance, naval force structure, program / business sensitive, and pre-decisional material / data, which shall not be disclosed to any entity, government or otherwise, outside of AIR-4.0M unless specifically indicated in task orders or authorized in writing by the Contracting Officer. The Contractor shall not use for purposes other than performance under this contract; nor shall the Contractor release, reproduce, distribute, and/or publish any data or analysis that is provided as Government Furnished Information (GFI) or produced in the performance of this contract; nor shall the Contractor authorize others to do so, without written permission of the Contracting Officer. Further, the Contractor shall, within 15 days after the effective date of this contract, obtain and provide to the COR signed Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) with each subcontractor and consultant (provided as Contract Data Requirement List (CDRL) A00K for Company) and shall obtain and provide to the COR signed individual NDAs with all Contractor, subcontractor, and consulting personnel that performs work under this contract (provided as CDRL A00L for Individuals). Additionally, the Contractor agrees to place in each subcontract affected by these provisions the necessary language to bind the subcontractor by these terms and conditions.

2.1 INFORMATION ASSURANCE PROGRAM (New Guidance July 2014)

The Government will provide all necessary reference documents not generally available to the Contractor as required. Throughout the life of the contract, if any instruction or document is replaced or superseded, the replacement or superseding instruction or document shall be applicable to the requirements defined in this SOW.

The Contractor shall not purchase any IT equipment on behalf of NAVAIR in support of this Contract, which reports to PBIS-IT, without a Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Command Information Officer (CIO) approved NAV-IDAS ITPR.

Clinger-Cohen Act:

In 1996, Congress enacted the Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA) requiring agencies to use a disciplined capital planning and investment control process to acquire, use, maintain and dispose of information technology. In accordance with the following Department of Defense Directive (DoDD), Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI), Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) memo, and Secretary of the Navy Instruction (SECNAVINST), CCA compliance is required for all programs that contain IT, including National Security Systems (NSS). NSS are defined in National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-59. Six factors are used to identify NSS, one of which is IT in weapons and weapons system programs. The law provides authority to the agency’s Chief Information Officer (CIO) to manage IT resources effectively and ensure cybersecurity and interoperability.

The authority to grant compliance with CCA as a statutory milestone program document resides at either first echelon or second echelon. The level of the Acquisition Category (ACAT) or designation as an Abbreviate Acquisition Program (AAP) determines which echelon has this authority. ACAT III and below acquisition programs CCA compliance assertion confirmation approval authority is delegated to the second echelon Command Information Officers. ACAT I and ACAT II acquisition programs CCA compliance assertion confirmation approval resides at DON CIO (First echelon). Approval of interoperability standards compliance for all acquisition programs resides at DON CIO. Approval of the Cybersecurity Strategy (formerly Acquisition Information Assurance Strategy) is a component of CCA compliance however it is approved separately. Approval authority is divided among the DoD, and DON CIOs as well as the second echelon Command Information Officers.

For ACAT ID, IAM, and IAC programs, the DoD CIO will review and approve the Cybersecurity Strategy prior to milestone decisions or contract awards.

Cybersecurity Strategy approval process begins after the Program Manager signs the Cybersecurity Strategy and puts it forward to the Command Information Officer. The final approved Cybersecurity Strategy is an appendix to the Program Protection Plan (PPP) as well as an element of CCA compliance (Interim DoDI 50000.02, Tables 2 and 9).

System Software / Application Compliance:

All Information Technology Systems or software/application development, modification or support shall be performed in accordance with Defense Business Transformation guidance (formerly Business Management Modernization Program (BMMP)), Department of the Navy (DON)/Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Functional Area Manager (FAM) Policies and Guidance, Network and Server Registration, and Web Enablement mandates.

Web Sites, Web Enablement and Application / System Development, Modification, and Maintenance Support Services:

All Information Technology systems, software, and website development, modification or support shall be performed in accordance with all applicable Federal, DoD, DON, and NAVAIR policy, guidance, standards, and strategies, and should be integrated within the NAVAIR Enterprise portal and collaboration environment whenever possible. Any Web sites/servers hosted/located in contractor facilities, or outside NAVAIR enclave, will transition to NAVAIR architecture and infrastructure in accordance with Legacy Shutdown guidance. Policies include, but are not limited to:

Software Development/Server Procurement:

Any tools developed that will be hosted by the Navy Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) or run on NMCI workstations will be certified for NMCI and comply with NMCI policy. Additionally, any servers supporting this effort will be transitioned to meet the requirements of the current NAVAIR Server Consolidation effort.

Cybersecurity:

NAVAIR’s Cybersecurity Program is a unified approach to protect unclassified, sensitive or classified information, and is established to consolidate and focus efforts in securing that information, including its associated systems and resources. Cybersecurity is required operationally throughout the DON. The DON CIO is responsible for IT within the Navy, as mandated by the Clinger-Cohen Act, and is the lead for departmental compliance with the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002.

All Cybersecurity shall be in compliance with the following listed instructions:

All IT procured on behalf of this contract shall meet all DoD/DON and NAVAIR IA polices. Failure to follow these policies will result in denied access to NMCI, One Net, Integrated Shipboard Network System (ISNS) and other DON, DoD and Joint Networks. These IA policies are standard across the Department and ensure IA compatibility and interoperability.

IT systems and or networks operated by contractors pursuant to a NAVAIR contract, regardless of the level of data processed, shall be operated in accordance with the NISPOM.

Contractor-owned equipment shall be permitted connections to NAVAIR/DoD networks in order to carry out the performance of this contract. All Contractor-owned hardware and/or software shall meet DoDI 8500.2 Cybersecurity Controls, is subject to validation scanning and must be approved by the NAVAIR site IA Manager prior to connection.

The following specific criteria must be met before the contractor may be connected to any DoD or NAVAIR network in support of this contract. Requirements include:

Enterprise Architecture:

2.0 REQUIREMENTS

The requirements under this PBSOW cover a broad spectrum of support to naval and joint warfighting capability assessments and M&S. The Contractor shall support Government and military subject matter expertise to provide integrated, capabilities-based warfighting assessments that will ultimately provide the analytic underpinning to support the acquisition of naval aviation systems and OPNAV and OSD investment decisions. The majority of work under this contract will be performed at the Secret level; however, the Contractor must be able to support up to the Top Secret classification levels when required for specific individual task orders.

2.1 Warfare Analysis and Assessments. The Contractor shall perform warfighting assessments and effectiveness analyses of operational nodes, systems, subsystems, SoS, and FoS in the operational context, including campaign, mission, engagement and force structure analysis at various levels of fidelity in support of the pre-acquisition, acquisition and sustainment of naval aviation systems and to determine the right naval warfighting capability and capacity required to address threats of the future. The Contractor shall perform the following efforts as delineated in task orders in the area of Warfare Analysis and Assessments:

2.1.1 Support in the development of Mission Technical Baselines to outline problem spaces to facilitate Integrated Warfighting Capabilities. Develop, review, and support the development of threat data sets for use in MS&A and related areas under the guidance of the NAVAIR Scientific and Technical Intelligence Liaison Officer (STILO) and the Intelligence Division under AIR 4.0M

2.1.2 Support in the development of, or develop, excursions to existing Major Combat Operations (MCOs)/Conventional Campaigns (CCs) and Steady State Security Posture (SSSP) to serve as the analytic framework specific to naval aviation warfighting assessments.

2.1.3 Perform Integrated Capability Technical Baseline (ICTB) analysis. This includes end-to-end kill chain assessments of systems, SoS and FoS in the context of Mission Technical Baselines to assist in the determination of current and Program of Record (POR) system effectiveness against defined threats to identify naval warfighting gaps and the capability and capacity required to address current and emergent threats.

2.1.4 Perform analyses of operational architectures in accordance with the DoD Architectural Framework (DODAF); develop products as defined in the DODAF in any or all of the architectural areas, including Operational Views, System Views and Technical Views.

2.1.5 Develop mission level metrics applying appropriate M&S tools to assess various options. Develop Measures of Outcome (MOOs), Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs), and Measures of Performance (MOPs) for evaluating the relative merits of warfare systems. Metrics shall be reflective of effectiveness, performance, and overall military worth.

2.1.6 Support “battle, warfare, and geopolitical experiments” and war-games.

2.2 Advanced Concept Development / Design. The Contractor shall perform research, development, and assessments related to the development and design of advanced air vehicle concepts and operations.

2.2.1 Perform research related to advanced concept development and evaluation including development of descriptive data required for MS&A.

2.2.2 Provide support for the development and MS&A of new and advanced transformational concepts and variations to existing or planned concepts.

2.2.3 Perform assessments of options for the transition of technology to support investment strategies and identify methods for transition of technology options into future architectures for Naval, Joint, and Allied forces.

2.2.4 Provide support for the development of new operational concepts to optimize use of new systems, technologies, or capabilities.

2.2.5 Provide support for air vehicle conceptual design development, assessments, comparisons, performance analysis, and simulations; develop air vehicle conceptual design drawings and Computer Aided Design (CAD) data.

2.2.6 Provide support for weapon system conceptual design development, assessments, comparisons, performance analysis, and simulations.

2.3 Acquisition Analysis and Support. The Contractor shall provide analytic support for the pre-acquisition, acquisition, and sustainment of Navy, Joint, and allied systems acquisition process.

2.3.1 Provide support for Joint Capabilities Integration & Development System (JCIDS) analysis and documentation. Participate in functional area analyses, functional needs analyses, functional solutions analyses, and post independent analyses. Functional analysis should be directly traceable to activities used in the models.

2.3.2 Provide support in establishing disciplined engineering processes and standards to ensure analyses are traceable to customer requirements.

2.3.3 Identify Doctrine, Organization, Training, Material, Leadership, Personnel and Facilities (DOTMLPF) implications resulting from the development and fielding of new warfighting capabilities.

2.3.4 Design and implement configuration management and quality assurance processes and procedures to support M&S based analysis including management support for the accreditation of models, application, data and scenarios.

2.3.5 Recommend standards for processes and employment of M&S in capabilities-based acquisition programs.

2.3.6 Support in concept development, definition, and documentation of manpower assessment requirements to achieve manpower reduction goals within the JCIDS process in coordination with NAVAIR’s Human Systems Department (AIR-4.6).

2.3.7 Perform acquisition related assessments and prepare documentation for the pre-acquisition, acquisition and sustainment of Navy, joint and allied systems to include:

1) Trade-off analysis

2) Make-buy analysis

3) Risk assessments

4) Mission Area Assessments (MAA)

5) Analysis of Material Alternatives (AMA)

6) Decision Analysis Support (DAS)

7) Capability Based Assessment (CBA)

2.3.8 Recommend tactics and employment methodologies for fifth generation weapon systems.

2.3.9 Perform Pre-Analyses of Alternatives (AoAs), Evaluation of Alternatives (EoAs) and AoAs to evaluate and compare the effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of potential weapon system alternatives in meeting defined naval requirements and support the development of Capabilities Development Documents (CDDs). Conduct effectiveness analysis that will model the performance of each alternative and determine the quantity required to execute associated missions. Combine these results with the related cost data into a complete AoA.

2.3.10 Provide analytic support for the support of acquisition documentation to include, but not limited to:

1) Acquisition Plan (AP

2) Acquisition Program Baselines (APB)

3) Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration(ACTD)

4) Analysis of Alternatives (AOA)

5) Capability Development Documents (CDD)

6) Capstone Requirements Documents (CRD)

7) Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence Support Plans (C4ISP)

8) Decision Analysis Support (DAS)

9) Evolutionary Acquisition (EA)

10) Information Support Plans (ISP)

11) Modeling & Simulation Support Plan (MSSP)

12) Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Cost Rationale Report (RAM-C)

13) Technology Development Strategy (TDS)

14) Test & Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP)

2.3.11 Perform warfare analyses and assessments in terms of cost, effectiveness and capability to determine the ability of systems and architectures to meet current and emerging warfighting requirements.

2.3.12 Perform force analyses to determine the Navy’s capability to meet peacetime deployment requirements and respond to transition-to war and contingency operations.

2.3.13 Support in the development of OPSITs and TACSITs within the scope of the defense planning scenarios which will allow performance of appropriate analyses under the desired operational conditions. OPSIT and TACSIT development shall include review of threat and friendly force lay-downs, CONOPS, tactical missions and timelines for use in analysis.

2.3.14 Perform readiness analysis of current and future systems to include readiness impacts of advanced technologies and ensure successful integration of aircraft operations, maintenance and support requirements aboard new ships / ship classes and in-service ships for both legacy and future aviation weapon systems.

2.3.15 Perform vulnerability and survivability assessments of weapon systems, including determination of the contributions of various technologies to overall platform and SoS survivability, in close coordination with the Survivability and Vulnerability Assessment Branch under NAVAIR’s Systems Engineering Department (AIR-4.1).

2.3.16 Provide source selection support in the areas of planning, process definition and improvement, research, analysis of prior related acquisitions, documentation, training, and support of source selection activities. No item in this PBSOW shall be used to procure any services that are IG or personal services. See Section C, paragraph 1.2 for further information regarding IGF.

2.3.17 Perform cost analysis and develop cost estimates for projects and phases of projects in close coordination with AIR-4.2, including; development, Test and Evaluation (T&E), operations and maintenance, travel, materials and training in current FY dollars and other-year dollars as specified and all relevant estimating techniques, information, and data required to develop or interpret cost estimates provided with one-time and recurring costs identified.

2.3.18 Perform Life Cycle Cost Estimation (LCCE) analysis based on inventory requirements for weapon systems in close coordination with the NAVAIR Cost Department (AIR-4.2). Define cost ground rules and assumptions and determine cost issues. Develop methodologies for Research and Development (R&D), investment, and Operating and Support (O&S) costs

2.3.19 Support cost-performance trade studies, Earned Value Management (EVM) efforts, and development of independent cost estimates as specified by AIR 4.2.

2.3.20 Attend and provide analytic support to system engineering reviews, technical interchange meetings, and acquisition program reviews.

3.4 Modeling & Simulation. The Contractor shall apply a standardized, rigorous, structured methodology to create, verify, and validate physical, mathematical, or otherwise logical representations of systems, entities, phenomenon, or processes. This functional area involves the use of models and simulations, including emulators, prototypes, and simulators, either statically or over time, to develop data as a basis for supporting managerial, technical, strategic, or tactical decisions. Models and simulations must be traceable to requirements. The Contractor shall perform the following efforts as delineated in task orders in the area of M&S:

3.4.1 Apply, with demonstrated proficiency, the following models and simulations for operational analysis to include but not limited to:

1) Extended Air Defense Simulation (EADSIM),

2) Naval Simulation System (NSS)

3) BRAWLER

4) STORM

5) Network Warfare Analysis (NETWARS)

6) OPNET Modeler

7) Enhanced Surface-to-Air Missile Simulation (ESAMS)

8) General Campaign Analysis Model (GCAM)

9) Integrated Theater Engagement Model (ITEM)

10) C4ISR Space & Mobile Operations Simulator (COSMOS)

11) Joint Services Endgame Model (JSEM)

12) Fast Shot-line Generator (FASTGEN)

13) Computation of Vulnerability and Repair Time (COVART)

14) SPECTRUM

15) Managed Attrition End Game (MAEG)

16) SHAZAM

17) Active System Performance Estimate Computer Tool (ASPECT)

18) Joint Integrated Mission Model (JIMM)

19) SUPPRESSOR

20) Enhanced Surface to Air Missile Simulations (ESAMS)

21) Satellite Tool Kit (STK)

22) PC-Interactive Multisensor Analysis Training (PC-IMAT)

23) RADGUNS

24) QUALNET

25) AFSim

26) SAFEGARD

3.4.2 Develop and use integrated M&S environments to assess engineering designs and approaches, concepts and alternatives, weapons and their characteristics, and platforms and their performance for Blue (friendly), Red (threat), White (neutral), and Green (coalition) systems.

3.4.3 Support engagement, mission, and campaign level M&S efforts including development of new “discovery” type M&S efforts.

3.4.4 Develop M&S tools that support Joint and Navy resource allocation decisions including development of models and simulations for non-traditional warfare, Manpower Personnel Training & Education (MPT&E), and emerging Naval and Joint mission/warfare areas.

3.4.5 Support the evolution of integrated M&S environments, digital system models and architectures to support programs over their life cycle, program design decisions, CONOPS development, requirements assessments and demonstrations, integration of systems, sensitivity analyses, spiral design development, and system test in cooperation with the NAVAIR T&E Department (AIR 5.0).

3.4.6 Provide support for M&S Validation, Verification & Accreditation (VV&A) activities including tasks associated with plan development, documentation review, and acceptance testing.

3.4.7 Perform V&V of M&S to ensure consistent and credible M&S results, informed decision-making, compliance with DoN Policy, and the cultivation of reusable M&S.

3.4.8 Perform V&V activities and develop templates to improve the traceability of data through the modeling hierarchy. Traceability must extend to validated requirements, or DODAF products, and shall be coordinated with the Type Commanders (TYCOMs) (operational) and System Commands (SYSCOMs) (technical) as required.

3.4.9 Support Naval MS&A initiatives such as the N81 World Class Models Program.

3.4.10 Develop, test, install, and support MS&A and related training in support of the numbered fleet commands or other operational units (i.e., Course-Of-Action tools and Tactical Decision Aids).

3.4.11 Apply, with demonstrated proficiency, operations research analysis tools to be used in addition to or conjunction with M&S warfare tools, such as MATLAB, SAS and JMP.

3.4.12 Provide analytic expertise in operations research areas to be used in addition to or conjunction with M&S warfare tools, such as Design of Experiments, Response Surface Methodology and regression Analysis.

3.5 Naval Aviation Enterprise Warfare Analysis Environment (NAE WAE) ITIL processes within IT Service Management (ITSM) /Requirements:

3.5.1 ITIL Integration

3.5.1.1 The Contractor shall provide support for all WAD Lab IT service delivery in a manner that aligns to ITIL v3 processes within the ITSM framework.

3.5.1.2 Where ITIL aligned processes are not present, the Contractor shall assist the government in developing and these processes as required by the Government and in a manner deemed acceptable by the Government.

3.5.2 Service Strategy

3.5.2.1 Strategy Management for IT Services

3.5.2.1.1 The Contractor shall assist the Government in assessing WAD Lab offerings and capabilities in order to develop a Strategy to serve existing and future customers. The Contractor is also responsible for assisting with the documentation and implementation of the Strategy.

3.5.2.1.2 The Contractor shall develop and track metrics including, at a minimum, adherence to project cost and schedule; a report of these metrics shall be provided to the Government, updated at a frequency deemed appropriate by the Government, and in a format deemed acceptable by the Government.

3.5.2.1.3 The Contractor shall develop and present recommendations for cost optimization, updated at a frequency deemed appropriate by the Government, and in a format deemed acceptable by the Government.

3.5.2.2 Service Portfolio Management (SPM)

3.5.2.2.1 The Contractor shall assist the Government with managing the WAD Lab's IT Service Portfolio and ensuring that the Government has the correct service offerings required to meet the Government’s expected business outcomes, at an appropriate level of investment.

3.5.2.2.2 The Contractor shall provide an SPM Report (A002) that quantifies WAD service offerings. The report and its development shall include:

· Conducting workshops with stakeholders to review WAD Lab service offerings

· A Software and Hardware section:

· This section shall focuses on comparing spending on planned and established systems based upon their relative value to the organization.

· Lists all information services required for successful accomplishment of WAD Lab Service delivery.

· A Project section:

· This section lists all active and planned projects and addresses the issues with spending on the development of capabilities in terms of potential ROI and reducing investment overlaps. The management issues with this section can be judged in terms of data cleanliness, maintenance savings, and suitability of resulting solution and the relative value of new investments to replace these projects.

· A Resource section:

· This section involves analyzing and forecasting the skills needed to execute and sustain infrastructure Components proactively rather than reactively. The chief goal of this section is to ensure the right people are in the right place at the right time.

3.5.2.3 Demand Management

3.5.2.3.1 The Contractor shall assist the Government in ensuring the WAD Lab has sufficient Capacity to meet required short and long-term Demand.

3.5.2.3.2 The Contractor shall assist the Government in understanding, anticipating and influencing user demand for WAD Lab IT Services. Demand Management shall align tightly with Capacity Management to ensure that the WAD Lab has sufficient capacity to meet the required demand.

3.5.2.4 Customer Relationship Management (CRM)

3.5.2.4.1 The Contractor shall assist the Government in identifying the needs of existing and potential customers and/or users, and ensuring the development of appropriate IT Services to meet those needs.

3.5.3 Service Design

3.5.3.1 Design Coordination

3.5.3.1.1 The Contractor shall assist the Government in developing Service Design resources and capabilities, and to ensure that a consistent approach to designing new or changed services is adopted across all WAD Lab IT projects.

3.5.3.1.2 The Contractor shall assist the Government in determining how a new service will be provided from both technical and personnel management perspectives. In particular, this means to specify any technical infrastructure to be created, as well as identifying required organizational changes and/or the alignment of personnel to tasks.

3.5.3.2 Service Catalog Management (SCM)

3.5.3.2.1 The Contractor shall assist the Government to ensure that a Service Catalog is produced and maintained, which contains accurate information on all operational services and those being prepared to be run operationally.

3.5.3.2.2 The Contractor shall provide an SCM Report (A002), which provides a central source of information for all IT Services delivered to WAD Lab users. This report shall ensure that the Government can view an accurate and consistent picture of all WAD Lab IT Services available, as well as their details and status. The SCM Report and its development shall include:

· Conducting workshops with stakeholders to review all services to be included in the Service Catalog

· Interfaces, dependencies and consistencies between the Service Portfolio and Service Catalog

· Ensuring that the Service Catalog is up-to-date and contains reliable information

· A database or structured document with information about all live services, including availability, details and status

· Information about services offered, prices, contact points, and ordering/request processes

3.5.3.3 Service Level Management (SLM)

3.5.3.3.1 The Contractor shall assist the Government in negotiating Service Level Targets (SLTs), Service Level Agreements (SLAs), and Operational (internal) Level Agreements (OLAs).

3.5.3.3.2 The Contractor shall assist the Government with designing services in accordance with the agreed SLTs.

3.5.3.3.3 The Contractor shall provide a SLM Report (A002) that includes:

· Conducting workshops with stakeholders to review all services and establish SLAs to be included in the SLM Report

· Number of Services covered by SLAs

· Number of Services covered by OLAs

· Number of Services where SLAs are backed up by corresponding OLAs

· Fulfilment of Service Levels, specifically the number of IT Services/SLAs where the agreed service levels are fulfilled

· Number of issues in the service provision, which are identified and addressed in an Improvement Plan

· Specific and measurable service levels for each service offered in the Service Catalog

· Clear and unambiguous service targets

· Identifying how the service level targets are monitored

3.5.3.4 Capacity Management

3.5.3.4.1 The Contractor shall assist the Government to ensure that the capacity of WAD Lab IT infrastructure is able to deliver the agreed SLTs in a cost effective and timely manner.

3.5.3.4.2 A Capacity Management Report and the resulting Capacity Plan (a subsection of the Capacity Management Report) for all WAD Lab compute assets shall be provided to the Government (A002). The Capacity Management Report includes IT Service and Component Capacity Management across the Service lifecycle. The Capacity Management Report shall align WAD Lab IT capacity to the Service Levels in the SLM Report. The Capacity Management Report and the resulting Capacity Management Plan, and their development shall include:

· Conducting workshop with stakeholders to review all services that are included in the Capacity Management Plan

· Alignment to the Service Level Report , Demand Management, and technology refresh planning activities

· Identifying how capacity levels will be determined, monitored, and measured

· Incidents due to Capacity Shortages

· Number of incidents occurring because of insufficient service or component capacity

· Exactness of Capacity Forecast

· Deviation of the predicted capacity development from actual course

· Capacity Adjustments

· Number of adjustments to service and component capacities due to changing demand

· Unplanned Capacity Adjustments

· Number of unplanned increases to service or component capacity as result of capacity bottlenecks

· Resolution Time of Capacity Shortage

· Resolution time for identified capacity bottlenecks

· Capacity Reserve Identification

· Percentage of capacity reserves at times of normal and maximum demand

· Percentage of Capacity Monitored

· Percentage of services and infrastructure components under capacity monitoring

3.5.3.5 Availability Management

3.5.3.5.1 The Contractor shall ensure that all WAD Lab IT infrastructures, processes, tools, roles etc. are appropriate for negotiated availability targets.

3.5.3.5.2 The Contractor shall assist the Government to define, analyze, plan, measure and improve all aspects of Service availability.

3.5.3.5.3 An Availability Management Report shall be provided to the Government (A002). The Availability Management Report shall establish a point of focus and management for all availability-related issues, relating to Services, Components and resources; thus, ensuring that SLTs in all areas are measured and achieved, and that they meet or exceed the current and future agreed needs of the WAD Lab. The Availability Management Report shall take place at two inter-connected levels, and shall aim to continually optimize and proactively improve the availability of IT Services. There are two key aspects:

· Reactive activities:

· Monitoring, measuring, analysis and management of Events, Incidents and Problems involving service unavailability

· Proactive activities

· Proactive planning, design, recommendation and improvement of availability The Availability Management Report shall include availability, reliability, maintainability and serviceability in terms of IT Service, infrastructure Components, and personnel. The Availability Management Report and its development shall include:

· Conducting workshops with stakeholders to review all elements of the Availability Plan

· Alignment to the SLM Report

· Identification of services supporting mission critical processes

· Identification of infrastructure components supporting mission critical processes

· Identification of personnel supporting mission critical processes

· Service Availability

· Availability of IT Services relative to the availability agreed in SLAs and OLAs

· Number of Service Interruptions

· Duration of Service Interruptions

· Average duration of service interruptions

· Availability Monitoring

· Percentage of services and infrastructure components under availability monitoring

· Availability Measures

· Number of implemented measures with the objective of increasing availability

3.5.3.6 IT Service Continuity Management (ITSCM)

3.5.3.6.1 The Contractor shall assist the Government to manage risks that could seriously affect WAD Lab IT Service delivery.

3.5.3.6.2 The Contractor shall assist the Government in ensuring it can always provide minimum agreed SLTs, by reducing the risk from disaster events to an acceptable level and planning for the recovery of IT services in a manner deemed acceptable by the Government.

3.5.3.6.3 An ITSCM Report and the resulting Contingency Plan (a subsection of the ITSCM Report) for all WAD Lab compute assets shall be provided to the Government (A002). ITSCM Reporting encompasses maintaining the appropriate on-going recovery capability within IT Services to meet the agreed needs (SLTs), requirements and timescales of critical mission processes. The ITSCM Report and its development shall include:

· Conducting workshops with stakeholders to review all elements of the ITSCM Report

· Continued alignment to SLM Report and disaster recovery planning

· IT risk reduction measures and activities

· IT disaster recovery plans

· Business Processes with Continuity Agreements

· Percentage of business processes which are covered by explicit service continuity targets

· Gaps in Disaster Preparation

· Number of identified gaps in the preparation for disaster events (major threats without any defined counter measures)

· Implementation Duration

· Duration from the identification of a disaster-related risk to the implementation of a suitable continuity mechanism (time required to adequately mitigate risk)

· Number of Disaster Practices

· Number of disaster practices actually carried out

· Number of identified Shortcomings…