Sources Sought Notice- W911NF-18-S-0005-FY20-02.pdf

Ver. 20DEC2016

W911NF-18-S-0005-FY20-02

SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE

REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS

BAA TOPIC A-8.a.2: Enhancing Job Classification and Assignment

“Computer Adaptive Non-Cognitive Test Development for Officer Assessment Applications”

INTRODUCTION

Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-18-S-0005 is publicized on beta.SAM and Grants.gov.

This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA Topic A-8.a.2:

Enhancing Job Classification and Assignment. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-18-S-0005, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent proposal requested by this notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.

The sequence of steps leading to an award is:

1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice

2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than five pages in length to the POC for the U.S.

Army Contracting Command, maria.d.nelson.civ@mail.mil, and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC), peter.j.legree.civ@mail.mil

3) Written or telephonic feedback provided to the Offeror regarding the White Paper’s scientific merit and potential contributions to the Army mission as per established criteria presented in Part

III

4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI

5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal

6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III

7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors

This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.

Note that an interested Offeror must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to submit a formal proposal under this notice. This notice requires that a White Paper be submitted electronically no later than 18 May 2020, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for additional details.

BAA W911NF-18-S-0005 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract, grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this notice, the intention of the Government is to award a contract.

THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A

GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT

THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF

GOVERNMENT FUNDS.

This BAA for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:

Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper

Part II: Preparation and Submission

Part III: Evaluation Criteria

Part IV: Feedback

Part V: Deadlines

Part VI: Inquiries

Part VII: References

ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:

The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park Division is: Ms. Maria Nelson, (919) 541-4992, maria.d.nelson.civ@mail.mil.

ARI Agency Point of Contact:

The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Peter Legree, (703) 545-2391, peter.j.legree.civ@mail.mil.

I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:

The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for the improvement of Army readiness and performance via research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel, organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas, including the areas specifically identified in Paragraph 8 of W911NF-18-S-0005. Efforts funded under this White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.

Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology Development (ATD) Program.

The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;

training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.

WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Computer Adaptive Non-Cognitive Test Development for Officer Assessment Applications

ARI requires non-cognitive personality tests to support ongoing officer assessment requirements and ensure the transition of valid, secure products to the U.S. Army to support officer selection and assessment applications.

These measures are intended to support officer selection and assignment requirements across the full breadth of officer ranks as well as branches, functional areas, and positions. Although it is not anticipated that a unique test or item pool is needed for each application, possible applications may include:

1. Award of ROTC 4-year Scholarships to High School Applicants;

2. Award of ROTC 2/3-year Scholarships to College Applicants;

3. Initial branch assignment for newly commissioned officers;

4. Assessment of officers for U.S. Army Captains Career Courses;

5. Assignment of officers to U.S. Army Functional Areas;

6. Assignment of officers following U.S. Army Command and General Staff College;

7. Selection of officers for U.S. Army Battalion Command; and

8. Selection of officers for U.S. Army Brigade Command.

While current measures can support ongoing research projects, potential threats to test validity (e.g., test compromise, response distortion, etc.) limit the utility of these measures to support a diverse array of research and operational requirements.

The purpose of this project is to develop non-cognitive measures that can be used to support selection and assignment research and operational applications. Specifically, the measures should primarily focus on predicting continuance criteria at junior levels and performance at senior levels. The contractor shall develop a detailed plan to create non-cognitive personality measures that are suitable for selection and assignment applications using computerized adaptive testing (CAT) technology. To enhance test security, the contractor should anticipate the use of item response theory (IRT) to guide item administration and scoring. The theoretical framework should be based on, but not limited to the Five Factor Model of personality. The plan will include:

1. A review of the literature and ARI research efforts to identify:

a. Best practices for scale development within the IRT framework and using CAT technology;

b. Extensions to IRT that may enhance scale validity, and

c. Relevant predictor domains for military occupations.

2. A research plan to develop no fewer than three separate item pools that are tailored to support assessment of pre-commissioned cadets, junior officers, and mid-level officers (e.g., Battalion and Brigade Commanders). The research plan will:

a. Incorporate results from the literature review to identify scale domains and provide exemplary draft items for candidate scales.

b. Describe research activities for measure development using IRT and CAT, as well as preliminary assessment over a 36-month period of performance in the event of subsequent contract award.

c. Demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed approach through one of several means to include, but not limited to, developing a draft or mock CAT- IRT delivery system, describing the underlying delivery system model, or developing scaled items for an identified predictor domain. Emphasis should be placed on evaluating the feasibility of proposed extensions to IRT that the contractor expects will enhance scale validity.

d. Summarize proof-of-concept activities, analyses and statistics that were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of the contractor’s proposed approach.

The award for the contract period of performance will be approximately 12-months with a budget not to exceed $125,000. Two contract awards are anticipated.

The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed.

II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:

Preparation of White Paper

A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for the 12-month effort, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate of total cost for the 12-month effort. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army mission.

A White Paper must be limited to five (5) pages plus the cover page and an addendum in which the Offeror must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel

(i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any pages submitted in excess of the five (5) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.

TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:

1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach, relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be demonstrated.

2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Offeror requests of the Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished Data (GFD). Offeror shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would demonstrate the proposed capability.

3. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Offeror must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research, highlighting their qualifications and experience.

RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:

1. The Offeror must identify any proprietary data the Offeror intends to be used only by the Government. The Offeror must also identify any technical data or computer software contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.

2. An Offeror is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.

Submission of White Paper

White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, maria.d.nelson.civ@mail.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC), peter.j.legree.civ@mail.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI BAA W911NF-18-S-0005-FY20-02, Computer Adaptive Non-Cognitive Test Development for Officer Assessment Applications” in the e-mail subject line.

III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:

A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:

1. Overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed research: The Offeror must demonstrate a thorough understanding of the research problem and articulate a clear approach to addressing the research objectives. The proposed approach must be based on feasible and realistic scientific methods and provide the Government with a high level of confidence of successful completion within proposed timeline.

2. Potential contributions of the effort to the U.S. Army Research Institute’s mission: In addition to showing how the proposed research aligns with the solicited topic, the Offeror must also specify how the proposed research will contribute to or advance the current U.S. Army Research Institute’s behavioral and social science research mission.

3. The Offeror’s capabilities, related experience, facilities, techniques or unique combination of these which are integral factors for achieving the proposed research objectives: the Offeror must demonstrate relevant organizational capabilities [e.g., experience, facilities, techniques] beyond individual capability to ensure the proposed research objectives can be achieved by the organization as a whole.

4. The qualifications, capabilities, and experience of the proposed Principal Investigator and other key personnel who are critical to the achievement of the proposed research objectives: The Offeror must demonstrate that the key personnel have the education and experience necessary to successfully complete the research objectives. Personnel capabilities need to be aligned with the expertise needed to achieve the required research objectives.

5. The Offeror’s record of past performance: Past performance information obtained from the Offeror’s White Paper, centralized past performance databases, and other sources will be used to evaluate past performance on projects of similar size, scope, and complexity to determine timely compliance with Government specifications. For an Offeror with no relevant past performance, the Government may take into account information regarding the past performance of predecessor companies, subcontractors, or proposed personnel that will perform key aspects of the proposed research.

6. Realism, affordability, and appropriateness of proposed costs: The Offeror must demonstrate that the proposed costs are appropriate given the suggested research approach. The Government will also evaluate the proposed costs in relation to the scope of the research objectives and the U.S. Army Research Institute’s budget.

7. Current and/or future relationship or interface with ongoing activities in academia and/or industry: The Offeror must demonstrate how the research findings and/or products could inform current or future scientific research, impact industry, and/or meet Army needs and goals.

The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the seven criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be weighted more strongly than all of the other factors combined. A request for proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a discussion with an Offeror, but discussions are not guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions The Offeror’s initial submission should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command.

If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.

IV. FEEDBACK:

Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Offeror regarding the White Paper’s scientific merit and potential contributions to the Army mission. If the Government decides to request a full proposal, a written request will be sent to the Offeror. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for award.

V. DEADLINES:

Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-18-S-0005-FY20-02, “Computer Adaptive Non-Cognitive Test Development for Officer Assessment Applications” by e-mail no later than 18 May 2020, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to beta.SAM as an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this notice will be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 19 May 2020 and ending 16 June 2020. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of White Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact reviewing the White Papers. An Offeror will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation timeline is extended beyond 16 June 2020.

Instructions for the submission of a full Proposal will be provided by the U.S. Army Contracting Command to an Offeror invited to submit based on the evaluation of their White Paper.

An Offeror is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received and accepted at the Government site indicated in this notice no later than the date and time specified above. When sending electronic files, an Offeror shall account for potential delays in file transfer from the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Offeror is encouraged to submit their response early to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.

An Offeror should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay from the Offeror’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no exceptions.

If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above, then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time specified in this notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.

An Offeror agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180 calendar days from the date of submission.

VI. INQUIRIES:

ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)

The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park Division is: Ms. Maria Nelson, (919) 541-4992, maria.d.nelson.civ@mail.mil.

ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)

The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is Dr. Peter Legree, (703) 545-2391, peter.j.legree.civ@mail.mil.

VII. REFERENCES:

Drasgow, F. (2020). Prediction of performance by non-cognitive traits. Military Psychology, 32, 127–134.

https://doi.org/10.1080/08995605.2019.1652479

Drasgow, F., Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., Nye, C. D., Hulin, C. L., & White, L. A. (2012).

Development of the Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment System (TAPAS) to Support Army Personnel Selection and Classification Decisions (ARI Technical Report 1311). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

Hughes, M. G., O’Brien, E. L., Reeder, M. C., & Purl, J. (2020). Attrition and reenlistment in the Army:

Using the Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment System (TAPAS) to improve retention.

Military Psychology, 32, 36–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/08995605.2019.1652487

Kirkendall, C., Bynum, B., Nesbitt, C., & Hughes, M. (2020). Validation of the TAPAS for predicting in-unit soldier outcomes. Military Psychology, 32(1), 24–35.

https://doi.org/10.1080/08995605.2019.1652484

Kirkendall, C. D., Nye, C. D., Rounds, J., Drasgow, F., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Stark, S. (2019).

Adaptive Vocational Interest Diagnostic: Development and Initial Validation (ARI Technical Report 1378).

Kirkendall, C. D., Nye, C. D., Rounds, J., Drasgow, F., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Stark, S. (2020).

Adaptive vocational interest diagnostic: Informing and improving the job assignment process.

Military Psychology, 32, 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/08995605.2019.1652480

Kyllonen, P. (2013). Soft Skills for the Workplace. Change, 45, 16–23.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2013.841516

Niebuhr, D. W., Gubata, M. E., Oetting, A. A., Weber, N. S., Feng, X., & Cowan, D. N. (2013).

Personality Assessment Questionnaire as a pre-accession screen for risk of mental disorders and early attrition in U S Army recruits. Psychological Services, 10, 378–385.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032783

Nye, C. D., Beal, S. A., Drasgow, F., Dressel, J. D. White, L. A., & Stark, S. (2014). Assessing the Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment System for Army Special Operations Forces Personnel (ARI Research Report 1971). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

Nye, C. D., Drasgow, F., Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S., Kubisiak, U. C., White, L. A., & Jose, I. (2012).

Assessing the Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment System (TAPAS) As A MOS Qualification Instrument (ARI Technical Report 1312). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

Oetting, A. A., Garvin, N. U., Boivin, M. R., & Cowan, D. N. (2017). Non-cognitive personality assessment and risk of injuries among army trainees. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 52, 324–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2016.08.025

Paullin, C., Sinclair, A. L., Moriarty, K. O., Campbell, R. C., Legree, P.J., Kilcullen, R. N. (2014).

Delineating Officer Performance and its Determinants. Military Psychology, 26, 259-277.

Paullin, C., Sinclair, A. L., Moriarty, K. O., Vasilopoulos, N. L., Campbell, R. C., and Russell, T. L.

(2011). Army Officer Job Analysis: Identifying Performance Requirements to Inform Officer Selection and Assignment (ARI Technical Report 1295). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute.

Russell, T. L., Paullin, C. P., Legree, P. J., Kilcullen, R. N., & Young, M. C. (2017). Identifying and Validating Selection Tools for Predicting Officer Performance and Retention (ARI Research Note 2017-01). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute.

Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., Drasgow, F., Nye, C. D., White, L. A., Heffner, T., & Farmer, W. L.

(2014). From ABLE to TAPAS: A new generation of personality tests to support military selection and classification decisions. Military Psychology, 26, 153–164.

https://doi.org/10.1037/mil0000044

Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., Nye, C. D., Drasgow, F., & White, L. A. (2017). Moderators of the Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment System Validity (ARI Technical Report 1357). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

Trent, J. D., Barron, L. G., Rose, M. R., & Carretta, T. R. (2020). Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment System (TAPAS) as an indicator for counterproductive work behavior: Comparing validity in applicant, honest, and directed faking conditions. Military Psychology, 32, 51–59.

https://doi.org/10.1080/08995605.2019.1652481

Wasko, L. E., Putka, D. J., Legree, P. J., & Kilcullen, R. N. (2019). Validation of Measures for Predicting Leader Development and Assessment Course Performance (ARI Technical Report 1375). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute.