PSAP Modernization_Call for Solution_REVISED_30SEP2025.pdf

Call for Solution for Product Director, Base Emergency Communications System

(PD BECS)

Call Number PSAP_25-01 Army Open Solicitation (AOS) No.

W9128Z-25-S-A002

Call for Solution Title Army Enterprise Public Safety Answering Point Modernization (PSAP)

Requiring Activity Program Executive Office for Command, Control, Communications, and Network (PEO C3N), and Product Director, Base Emergency Communications System

(PD BECS)

Issued By Army Contracting Command – Aberdeen Proving Ground

(ACC-APG)

*Solution Briefs Due Date/Time (Suspense)

17 October 2025, 1200, Eastern Daylight Time (EDT)

Submit Solution Brief To Contracts Officer/Agreement Officer: Katia Lacoste;

Katia.Lacoste.civ@Army.mil Specialist: Curtissa Bond; curtissa.m.bond.civ@army.mil

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.

mailto:Katia.Lacoste.civ@Army.mil mailto:curtissa.m.bond.civ@army.mil

1. BACKGROUND

On November 5, 2009, a terrorist attack and mass shooting occurred at Fort Hood – a military base in Texas. Nidal Hasan, a U.S. Army major and psychiatrist, fatally shot fourteen (14) people and injured more than thirty (30) others. It was the deadliest mass shooting to occur on an American military base in the Nation’s history. In the aftermath of the shooting, the Department of Defense (DoD) commissioned an independent review to identify and address possible deficiencies in DoD emergency communications systems. Much of the DoD and U.S. Army’s emergency response guidance stems from that review.

Revealed by the review, the Fort Hood attacks underscored the necessity for seamless emergency response. Such need prompted Congress to mandate the adoption of E911 services on military installations throughout the world. Similarly, laws such as Kari’s Law (addressing direct dialing of 9-1-1) and the RAY BAUM’s Act (ensuring dispatchable location information provided with call) have been enacted to continue progress toward implementing NENA i3 Standards (enhancing 9-1-1 call routing and location services).

Despite these measures, many of the problems identified in the Fort Hood Cavazos report still exist today due to limitations of E911 and legacy telephony technologies.

Moving from E911 to NG911 technology will overcome remaining capability gaps exposed in previous reviews.

The Program Executive Office (PEO) Command, Control, and Communications- Network (C3N), Project Manager Integrated Enterprise Network (PM IEN) has been tasked with deploying Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Next Generation-911 (NG-911) CHE, and Location Information Services (LIS) to installations in the Continental United States (CONUS) – specifically at the 911 dispatch centers also known as Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs).

Product Director (PD) BECS supports Soldier readiness by providing pre-deployment, non-tactical base emergency communications worldwide. With a global presence, PD BECS is the single integrated acquisition program for the design, procurement, fielding, new equipment training and management of emergency management / critical communications capabilities.

Noted above, this effort supports installation of public safety organizations and functions, including first responder, force protection, and other installation management activities worldwide. This effort encompasses capabilities that deliver CAD, NG-911, Land Mobile Radio (LMR), Enterprise Mass Warning and Notification (EMWN) and the First Responder Broadband Network (FRBN) – Long Term Evolution (LTE) 4G and 5G.

The Program’s primary focus, in addition to the Warfighter, is the support of first responders and Army installation missions. PD BECS provides turnkey solutions to deploy critical communications that meet Department of Defense (DoD), Army, and federal mandates while supporting Garrison operations.

2. PROBLEM STATEMENT

This effort aims to modernize first responder emergency dispatch and communications capabilities across identified Army Installations with deployment of Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD), Next Generation 9-1-1 Call Handling Equipment (NG-911 CHE), and Location Information Services (LIS). Army PSAPs are currently operating obsolete and outdated technologies that do not integrate with other systems in the PSAP nor interoperate with systems operated by neighboring mission partner agencies. Many of these systems lack redundancy and are beyond their expected life cycle, leading to a high risk of failure. In some instances, a PSAP failure can directly contribute to loss of life due to critical vulnerability in our emergency response system. (i.e. first responders receiving incorrect information as to location, injury, etc.)

Due to the lack of adequate GIS and LIS capabilities, the DoD has been unable to fully comply with the Congressional mandated RAY BAUM’s Act associated with dispatchable caller location. By fully adopting NG911 technologies, Army voice systems will gain access to the necessary GIS and LIS data, enabling them to comply with the mandate and provide dispatchers with better information to assist during an emergency incident.

NG911 systems play a vital role in enhancing the efficiency of public safety telecommunicators by providing more precise location data, thus significantly improving dispatch efficiency and reducing incident response times. This is exemplified by their capability to obtain caller location through GIS data and access caller identification directly from the 9-1-1 caller's phone.

Current PSAP systems supporting (Army/DoD/installation) emergency communications rely on antiquated 9-1-1 and CAD infrastructure that are increasingly unsustainable, vulnerable to outages and unable to fully support NG-911 data and geolocation capabilities. These limitations create operational risk in emergency response by:

• Preventing the seamless intake, processing, and routing of voice, text, and multimedia emergency calls.

• Restricting interoperability with NG-911 compliant networks, systems, and partner agencies.

• Lacking the redundancy, resiliency, and cybersecurity protections required to sustain mission-critical communications during disruptions or cyber events.

• Forcing reliance on manual processes and outdated dispatch tools that slow response time and reduce situational awareness.

Without modernization, Army PSAP’s ability to meet current and emerging public safety standards will continue to degrade. This degradation will directly impact response coordination, timeliness, and safety for installation personnel and the surrounding community.

3. DESIRED SOLUTION ATTRIBUTES

The desired solution should integrate NG-911, CAD, and LIS capabilities into an interoperable group of systems that leverages IP based voice and data communications, dynamic geolocation, dispatch automation, and information sharing within a secure, redundant, and compliant operational framework. These capabilities must be operational within six (6) months, require minimal customization, and offer long-term sustainability and scalability. The desired solution should be a fully functionable and reliable emergency dispatching and communications capability for First Responders at US Army installations. In addition to the desired solution, the contractor shall engineer, furnish, install, secure, test and train a fully operational and redundant solution. The following describes the objectives:

• Implement CAD, NG-911 CHE, and LIS solutions at each specified location.

Solutions should be complete systems providing all fully interoperable hardware and software.

• Incorporate Government provided GIS data and updates for integrated mapping and location accuracy.

• Provide New Equipment Training: Operator/Dispatch, system administration, and preventative maintenance training for provided systems.

• Satisfy applicable DoD and commercial standards for installation, commissioning, physical security, and cybersecurity of the delivered system.

• Provide system warranty, software and cyber security upgrades, ongoing system monitoring/scanning, where applicable, and support services for each delivered system including system interfaces, from the time of Site Acceptance.

Refer to the attached Draft Statement of Objectives (SOO) for a more comprehensive attribute list.

4. AWARDING INSTRUMENT

In accordance with Open Solicitation Procedures detailed within Solicitation W9128z- 25-S-A0021, the Government intends to award FAR Part 12, firm fixed price type contracts as a result of this solicitation; however, the Government also reserves the right to award an 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, 1 https://sam.gov/opp/2b84cd72ec6b494c9a5301ba714fdc8e/view.

https://sam.gov/opp/2b84cd72ec6b494c9a5301ba714fdc8e/view 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 is considered to be a competitive procedure for the purposes of 10 U.S.C. chapter 221 and FAR 6.102.

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 supports 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.

• The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools may be used during evaluations. Any AI tools utilized by the Government will be employed in a manner consistent with applicable regulations that govern the protection of proprietary and source selection sensitive information. No proposal data will be transmitted to or processed by external, non-Government systems without appropriate safeguards and authorizations in place.

• Questions are to be sent only to the Contracting/Agreements Officer and Specialist (POCs) listed in this Call for Solution by 11 September 2025 @ 1200.

The following shall be utilized in the email subject line: “Call for Solution – PSAP 25-01.”

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, Fair and Reasonable) may be invited to provide a pitch following the instructions provided within this Call. The Government reserves the right to limit the number of Companies invited to pitch. 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 (ten-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). 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 commercialization and go-to-market strategy.

d. ROM/Schedule (Limited to one excel sheet with no more than three tabs)

i. Submit one (1) Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) and one (1) Notional Schedule and describe how the notional schedule is achievable for the submitted solution. NG-911, CAD and LIS ROMS to be broken out separately. Annotate assumptions used within the respective tab, ROM or Notional Schedule.

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

i. The Team Lead 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.

g. Total Proposed Price (two-page limit)

i. The Vendor shall propose a total price, broken down by phase/milestone, to complete the effort, as well as provide any other data or supporting information necessary for the determination of a fair and reasonable price. This can include, but is not limited to, a commercial price catalog or other proprietary information to help the Government assess the reasonableness of the project price.

*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 best 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, fair and reasonableness), 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.

c. Fair and Reasonableness Determination: The Government will evaluate the ROM submission for fairness and reasonableness based on market research for these COTS capabilities. It will similarly evaluate whether the price is fair and reasonable in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 3453(d) and DFARS 212.209.

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, is considered fair and reasonable.

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

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 PSAP 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:

Chenega Information Technology Enterprise Services / ADEPT Force Group, Inc.

Address: 950 N Washington St, Ste 400A Alexandria, VA 22314 POC: James Woodis Email: james.woodis@adeptforcegroup.com; james.c.woodis.ctr@army.mil Phone: (520)671-0219

Netmaker Communications 2654 Valley Ave, Ste J Winchester, VA 22601 POC: Kevin Brown Email: kevin.brown@ucnetmaker.net; kevin.l.brown216.ctr@army.mil Phone: (520)725-8032

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.

mailto:james.woodis@adeptforcegroup.com mailto:james.c.woodis.ctr@army.mil mailto:kevin.brown@ucnetmaker.net mailto:kevin.l.brown216.ctr@army.mil

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 in Phase 1 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.