IBAS_BAA_2_April_2018.pdf

BAA No. W52P1J-18-R-IBAS

Broad Agency Announcement (BAA)

Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment

Rock Island, IL

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I: SUMMARY INFORMATION

PART II: OVERVIEW

I. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

II. INFORMATION CONCERNING POTENTIAL AWARDS

a. IBAS “MAJOR EMPHASIS” CONSIDERATIONS

b. FUNDING RESTRICTIONS

c. POSSIBLE “AWARD TYPES” AND BASIS FOR AWARD

III. PARTICIPANT ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

a. ELIGIBLE PARTICIPANTS

b. PROCUREMENT INTEGRITY, STANDARDS OF CONDUCT, ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS, AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

c. COST SHARING/FUNDS MATCHING

d. OTHER ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

IV. HOW DO I SUBMIT AN “INNOVATIVE IDEA TO IBAS?

a. SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS

b. PROPRIETARY/INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS

c. TWO STEP PROCESS RECOMMENDED FOR ENGAGEMENT

i. STEP 1 - SUBMISSION OF WHITE PAPERS

ii. STEP 2 - SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

APPENDIX A - WHITE PAPER Submission Requirements

APPENDIX B - PROPOSAL Submission Requirements

PART I: SUMMARY INFORMATION

NAICS CODE:

541330 – Engineering Services

FEDERAL AGENCY NAME:

Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment (IBAS) Program

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCMENT TYPE:

This is a modified Two-Step Open Broad Agency Announcement (BAA). The BAA will be open indefinitely with the acceptance of white papers and full proposals throughout the duration of this posting.

APPLICABLE DATES:

BAA Posting Date: April 4, 2018 BAA Open Period: No defined expiration, this BAA will continue as long as it is in the best interest Government.

Proposal Submission and Selection Deadlines:

Step 1 – “White Papers” Submission will be accepted from Step 2 - “Proposals” Upon Government Request through BAA Open Period

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION:

This Broad Area Announcement (BAA) is to obtain innovative ideas and projects for the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manufacturing and Industrial Base Policy (DASD MIBP) to address critical issues in the industrial base and to address supply chain vulnerabilities for investments made under provisions of Title 10, section 2508, Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment (IBAS) Program.

Companies that respond will not be paid for the information submitted except as an allowable cost under other contracts as provided in FAR 31.205-18, “Bid and Proposal Costs.”

ANTICIPATED AWARDS:

Multiple awards are possible under this BAA, although no commitment or promises are made in this regard, with a variety of different award types possible, and executed throughout the BAA open period. The BAA open period is addressed above and allows for white papers and any subsequent proposals to be submitted during the specified time frame only.

TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABILITY FOR AWARD(s):

No funding has been specifically reserved for this solicitation. The number and variety of types of awards possible, including any associated resources made available to support initiatives under this BAA will depend upon the quality of submissions received and the availability of funds.

TYPES OF INSTRUMENTS THAT MAY BE AWARDED:

Procurement contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, technology investment agreements and other transactions for prototypes.

TECHNICAL POINT OF CONTACT(S):

Matthew Schade IBAS Team Lead IBAS mailbox: usarmy.ria.rdecom-ecbc.mbx.ibasf@mail.mil

CONTRACTING POINT OF CONTACT(S):

Adam Geneva Contract Specialist adam.m.geneva.civ@mail.mil

SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTATION:

Documentation shall be submitted via email to the following email address:

usarmy.ria.rdecom-ecbc.mbx.ibasf@mail.mil

Note: All e-mail submissions to IBAS must include the name, email address, and telephone number of an authorized company, or interested party, point of contact.

PART II: OVERVIEW

I. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:

a. The Department of Defense (DoD) is required by statute to monitor and support the defense industrial base. Pursuant to Title 10, section 2508 of the U.S. Code, an Industrial Base Fund exists to fund efforts in four different areas:

1. Monitoring and assessment of the Industrial Base

2. Addressing of critical issues in the Industrial Base related to urgent operational needs

3. Supporting efforts to expand the Industrial Base

4. Addressing supply chain vulnerabilities.

DASD MIBP developed Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment (IBAS) as a Defense-wide program to champion innovative solutions for these IB risk areas.

Investments close gaps in defense manufacturing capabilities and create and sustain reliable sources. Key areas of IBAS investment include:

1. Advancing and sustaining both traditional and emerging defense manufacturing sectors

2. Preserving critical and unique manufacturing and design skills

3. Supporting and expanding reliable sources

4. Identifying and mitigating supply chain vulnerabilities including cyber manufacturing and trade skills vulnerabilities.

The intent of the IBAS Program is to provide an enabling process, which enhances the ability of the DoD to preserve or improve the capability of the IB to sustain readiness by mitigating risks and issues, which diminish industrial capabilities.

II. INFORMATION CONCERNING POTENTIAL AWARDS

A. IBAS “MAJOR EMPHASIS” CONSIDERATIONS

IBAS is interested in all potential “innovative” concepts/ideas of interest which will assess the defense industrial base proactively mitigating industrial base vulnerabilities on industrial capabilities vital to national security; Strengthen DoD-industry partnerships; Strengthen and expand the defense industrial base in both traditional and emerging manufacturing sectors; or Incentivize the industrial base to rebuild, reform and invest in industrial base capabilities and capacities. The technical focus is comprised of, but not limited to, these industrial base sector areas: aircraft; radar and electronic warfare; shipbuilding; ground vehicles;

soldier systems; space; chemical, biological, radiological, & nuclear (CBRN);

materials; machine tools; cyber for the industrial base; optics; advanced technology and advanced manufacturing; electronics; command, control, communication, & computers (C4); munitions & missiles; and industrial base & manufacturing skills.

B. FUNDING RESTRICTIONS

No funding has been specifically reserved at this time. However, funding may be provided throughout the open period of the BAA to pursue promising innovation concepts of interest with any and all qualified sources.

C. POSSIBLE “AWARD TYPES” AND BASIS FOR AWARD

Various award types are possible under this BAA to include procurement contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, technology investment agreements, and other transactions for prototypes. In all instances, the government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, or none of the proposals received in response to this BAA, and make awards without discussions with proposers. The government, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions with a proposer if the government determines this to be necessary and in the government’s best interests. However, the government does need not to conduct discussions with all proposers but may hold discussions with only some proposers or only one proposer. In addition, the government may permit a proposer to submit a proposal revision as part of discussions. However, the government may, at its discretion, provide only some or only one proposer the opportunity to revise its proposal. If multiple proposers are permitted to revise their proposals the government need not give every proposer the same amount of time in which to submit proposal revisions and may establish differing (i.e., uncommon) cut-off dates for receipt of proposal revisions.

The government additionally reserves the right to accept proposals for funding consideration in their entirety, or to select only portions of proposals thereof for funding consideration, and to reshape and re-scope effort into phases or blocks, including short periods of performance with the potential for options, if appropriate, to quickly prototype or otherwise substantiate proof-of- concept, or to assess on a continuing or ongoing basis the validity or feasibility of the effort for greater potential agency use or further adoption as may be appropriate. In the event that only portions of a proposal are considered for possible funding, the government anticipates that discussions may be held between the parties. In all cases, the government shall have sole discretion to select the appropriate award instrument type and to negotiate all appropriate terms and conditions with potential selectees. Likewise, the government will apply publication or other restrictions, as necessary, if the government determines that effort presents a high likely hood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense or to the intelligence community. Any award resulting with said restrictions will require advance government permission before any information is openly or publicly disseminated.

Awards under this BAA, if any, will be made to proposers whose proposals are deemed to be the most advantageous to the government on the basis of the evaluation criteria contained herein and on the basis of the availability of funding for the proposed effort. The government reserves the right to request any additional, necessary documentation once it makes the award instrument determination or initial selection decision. Such additional information may include but is not limited to Representations and Certifications. The government reserves the right to remove proposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms, conditions or cost/price within a reasonable time or the proposer fails to timely provide requested additional information.

III. PARTICIPATION ELIGIBILTY REQUIREMENTS

A. ELIGIBLE PARTICIPANTS

All responsible sources capable of satisfying the objectives of this solicitation announcement are encouraged to reply in accordance with the instructions specified herein, to include historically traditional partners and non-traditional potential partners that maybe interested in doing business with the government, but that have infrequently, or perhaps never before, done so.

Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Small Businesses, Small Disadvantaged Businesses and Minority Institutions (MI) are encouraged to submit ideas for funding consideration and to join other parties in doing so. At the present time it is not envisioned that any portion of this solicitation announcement will be specifically reserved or set-aside for exclusive competition among these entities, although where particular government capability/need area more specifically identifies innovation targets of opportunity that might be best fulfilled by this class of participants, the government may maximize engagement opportunity with this list of interested parties, to include targeted engagement with these parties if appropriate to the circumstances.

Non-U.S. parties may participate to the extent that such sources comply with applicable statues and necessary regulations appropriate to the circumstances.

B. PROCUREMENT INTEGRITY, STANDARDS OF CONDUCT, ETHICAL

CONSIDERATIONS, AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

Current federal employees are prohibited from participating in particular matters involving conflicting financial, employment, and representational interests (18 U.S.C. 203, 205, 208). With respect to any proposals that may ultimately be submitted in response to this BAA, proposers are notified that the government will assess all submissions for the existence or appearance of any potential conflicts of interest. Notwithstanding any government assessment that shall be conducted as a result of receipt of proposal submissions, it is principally incumbent upon the party submitting any proposal to the government for funding consideration to assess all facts relevant to the existence or potential existence or a conflict of interest and disclose such information to the government for appropriate consideration. Conflicts may be either organizational or personal.

Because of the significant myriad of potential scenarios and situations that may be prevalent concerning an actual or possible conflict of interest and the time, effort, and expense that may be involved in submitting proposals to the government for funding consideration, proposers are encouraged to contact the government in the event a proposer believes a conflict of interest exists or may exist (whether organizational or otherwise), or has questions concerning the particulars of the situation in question.

C. COST SHARING/FUNDS MATCHING

Cost sharing is not required, however, it will be carefully considered where there is an applicable statutory condition related to the potential award instrument under consideration. See below for example:

(e.g., for any type of Other Transaction issued pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2371b, which, for example, would include Technology Investment Agreements (TIAs) that are dual use initiatives (i.e. both military/commercial benefits) that typically require a 50/50 cost share ratio between the parties, and section 845 to the 1994 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), as amended, Other Transactions for Prototypes that are military prototype initiatives (i.e. principally military benefit) that typically require 1/3 cost share from the potential awardee if a non-traditional defense contractor is nor participating personally, substantially, and significantly in the effort in question.

See APPENDIX A for additional information.)

Proposers should also note that in circumstances where not statutorily required, when there is a reasonable probability of a potential commercial application related to any potentially funded research and development initiative under this BAA, that the government encourages participant cost share.

D. OTHER ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Although not required, where it is logical, feasible, and may result in potentially greater efficiencies, leveraged capability, or probability for success, collaborative/teaming arrangements between multiple parties in responding to this BAA is encouraged

IV. HOW DO I SUBMIT AN “INNOVATIVE” IDEA TO IBAS?

A. SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS

Engagement pertaining to this BAA is unclassified only. To the extent interested parties have questions concerning this, respondents are encouraged to submit unclassified questions to the following:

B. PROPRIETARY/INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS

The government anticipates that initial engagement with, and submission of information by, interested parties under this BAA will not contain proprietary information. However, to the extent necessary and appropriate, “proprietary” information may be submitted in accordance with the instructions contained herein. With respect to “proprietary” information considerations associated with this BAA, the following is applicable:

Proposers that include in their white papers or proposals data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, shall --

1. Mark the title page with the following legend inserting the term “white paper” instead of “proposal” when a white paper is being submitted:

This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed -- in whole or in part -- for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. If, however, a procurement or assistance instrument is awarded to this proposer as a result of -- or in connection with -- the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting instrument. This restriction does not limit the Government’s right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction.

The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets]”; and

2. Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following legend:

“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.”

If an interested party is submitting a white paper or proposal under this BAA for potential funding consideration, they are hereby advised to treat submissions as source selection information (see FAR 2.101 and 3.104), or to otherwise protect the contents of the information submitted, and to disclose the contents only for purposes of evaluation. With respect to restrictive notices that may have been applied by the party submitting information to the government for possible funding consideration, all parties are hereby notified that submissions may be handled by support contractors for administrative purposes and/or to assist with technical evaluation activities. All support contractors performing this role, however, are bound by appropriate nondisclosure agreements and FAR 9.505-4(b) will be followed if applicable.

C. TWO STEP PROCESS RECOMMENDED FOR ENGAGEMENT

(i) STEP 1- SUBMISSION OF “WHITE PAPERS”

Parties interested are asked to submit a “White Paper” to the government for review, prior to submission of any proposal related information so that:

a. Interested parties can initially engage the government in the most expeditious and least costly manner possible, by not otherwise expending unnecessary effort and expense associated with the submission of a proposal as a first step.

b. The Government may quickly gauge its interest in the “innovative” topic of interest, and respond to the proposer regarding the government’s interest in the submission in question.

(ii) STEP 2 - SUBMISSION OF “PROPOSALS”

Parties interested in engaging the government with “innovative” topics of interest are asked to submit a “White Paper”, to the IBAS for review, prior to submission of any proposal related information. SEE STEP 1 above.

In response to a “White Paper” submission or as a result of follow up discussion with an interested party, IBAS may request that an interested party submit a proposal for possible award funding consideration. Interested parties should follow the instructions in this BAA if submitting a proposal to the Government for possible award funding consideration.

APPENDIX A – “WHITE PAPER” SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

I. “WHITE PAPER” Submission Requirement:

Parties with an “innovative” topic of interest are asked to submit a “White Paper” to IBAS for review, so IBAS can gauge its interest in the innovative idea and the proposer does not expend unnecessary effort and expense associate with the submission of a proposal.

No information provided by interested parties in response to this BAA will be returned. In addition, the cost of preparing White Papers in response to this announcement is not considered an allowable direct charge to any resulting procurement or assistance instrument.

A. DUE DATE

“White Papers” may be submitted at any time throughout the open period of this

BAA.

B. SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTATION:

C. WHITE PAPERS FORMAT

Submitted responses should be provided on standard letter size 8-1/2 by 11 inch paper, limited to a maximum of 3 pages, double-spaced. The font for text should be Times New Roman 12-point or larger. Oversized pages (including foldouts) may be used where appropriate to contain graphic presentations and do not count as extra pages within the page limitations. Submitted responses should be in Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat PDF format. Existing commercial documentation and product literature can be included and is not subject to page limitation.

Note: Responses must be unclassified, but may contain proprietary information that must be appropriately marked.

C. Detailed White Paper Information

Responses are preferred in the following format:

i. Title: Identify the capability area.

ii. Submitter Information: Responses should include the company name, location of production facility or facilities, and the title, mailing address, telephone number, and e-mail address of a point of contact having authority and knowledge to discuss the submission.

iii. Government Customers and Interested Organizations: Identify the government customer organizations such as Program Executive Officer, acquisition program office, or suggested other government organizations cognizant of the technology/production issues and challenges. This should be organizations and agencies that have the technical or programmatic expertise for assessing the values of the technology to potential government customers. Provide title, contract number, and points of contact with current or pending DoD and other Federal contracts. Identify the appropriate government Programs of Record (and/or point of contact), including organization, mailing address, telephone number, and e-mail address. Points of contact that can provide additional information useful to the BAA submission reviewers should be included in an Appendix. (Pages in the Appendix do not count in the page limitation.)

iv. Critical Capability Impacted: This section provides essential background information on the critical capability and necessary investments. It addresses the importance of the capability to national defense and the need for IBAS assistance. This section should at least include the following:

1. Capability Description: The capability and its DoD current and future uses.

2. Benefits: Cite specific benefits to the Government.

3. Problem Statement: The nature of the problem, risk or impact if defense capability is lost and/or break in production, reconstitution cost if capability is lost, and any other considerations that increase the need for the project.

4. Identifiable Path of Preservation: How the capability will be sustained or improved post IBAS funding.

5. Role of IBAS: How IBAS funding can solve the problem.

v. Implementation Concept: Discuss an initial implementation concept to assist reviewers in better understanding of the execution framework.

1. Technical approach: State recommended objectives and outline the approach. Identify what the implementation would accomplish and how. Describe what work and investments would be required to preserve the capability. Identify needed major equipment purchases or upgrades to existing equipment. Include a time-phased plan for major elements of the approach.

2. Cost/Funding Estimates: Provide a top-level breakdown of estimated project costs to include labor, material, and equipment.

D. WHITE PAPER EVALUATION ASSESSMENT:

a. EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. Addresses a critical capability with a fragile business case and/or a supply chain vulnerability.

2. Preserves critical skills for technological superiority and/or supports expansion of a reliable source.

3. Supports a verified future DOD need.

4. Provides an enabling process, which enhances the DOD’s ability to preserve or improve the IB capability: sustains readiness by mitigating risks and addressing issues that diminish industrial capabilities.

5. Meets Research, Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E)

Budget Activity 7 criteria. (reference – Comptroller DOD Financial Management Regulation Volume 2B, Chapter 5)

b. RATING:

Evaluations of all white papers submitted in response to this BAA will be issued via e-mail notification by the government. Each paper will subsequently be assigned one of the following three ratings: “Promising”, “Acceptable”, or “Not of Interest” at this time. Offerors submitting white papers that receive a rating of “Promising” are encouraged to submit a full technical and cost proposal on all or part of its white paper submission.

However, any such encouragement does not assure a subsequent award.

Rating definitions are as follows:

Promising White Paper demonstrates good understanding of the evaluation criteria, displays a solid technical approach, and has a medium to high probability of achieving all or most of the requirements of the program. White Paper has one or more strengths that can significantly benefit the government.

Acceptable White Paper demonstrates some understanding of the evaluation criteria and displays an approach that has a fair probability of achieving most of the requirements of the program. White Paper has potential to benefit the Government, but is not considered a priority, as written.

Not of Interest White Paper demonstrates a shallow understanding of the evaluation criteria and/or the approach has little probability of achieving any requirements of the program. White Paper proposes a less than minimally acceptable solution to the Government.

APPENDIX B – PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

1. Proposal Submission Requirements

Any Offeror may submit a full proposal even if its white paper was not identified as being “Promising”. However, the Government’s initial evaluation of the white papers should give potential offerors some indication of whether a full proposal would likely result in an award. If the white paper is identified as “Acceptable” or “Not of Interest” at this time, it is likely that no award will be made.

The government reserves the right to open discussions with offerors in interest of their submitted full proposals.

A. SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTATION:

B. PROPOSAL FORMAT:

Submitted responses should be provided on standard letter size 8-1/2 by 11 inch paper, limited to a maximum of 20 pages, double-spaced. The font for text should be Times New Roman 12-point or larger. Oversized pages (including foldouts) may be used where appropriate to contain graphic presentations and do not count as extra pages within the page limitations. Submitted responses should be in Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat PDF format. Existing commercial documentation and product literature can be included and is not subject to a page limitation.

Note: Responses must be unclassified, but may contain proprietary information that must be appropriately marked.

To protect such proprietary data, each line or paragraph on the pages containing such data must be specifically identified and marked with a legend similar to the following:

“The following contains proprietary information that (name of Responder) requests not be released to persons outside the Government, except for the purposes of review and evaluation.”

a. Detailed Proposal Information

i. Cover sheet to include:

1. BAA number;

2. Proposal title;

3. Lead Organization submitting proposal;

4. BAA Technical Focus Area addressed:

a. Monitor and assessment of the Industrial Base

b. Address critical issues in the Industrial Base related to urgent operational needs

c. Support efforts to expand the Industrial Base,

d. Address supply chain vulnerabilities;

5. Technical point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, mailing address, telephone number, fax (if available), e-mail (if available);

6. Administrative point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, mailing address, telephone number, fax (if available), and e-mail (if available);

7. Place(s) and period(s) of performance;

8. Specific manufacturing capability area(s) associated with proposal;

9. Total proposed cost separated by basic award and option(s)

(if any);

10. Date proposal was prepared;

11. DUNS number;

12. Cage Code;

13. Planned contract vehicle mechanism, if known

14. Proposal validity period.

ii. Statement of Work (SOW)

1. Please use the following decimal numbering system for

Statement of Work (SOW) preparation. Do not include proprietary data or markings in the SOW.

Table of Contents

1.0 Objective

2.0 Scope

3.0 Background

4.0 Tasks/Technical Requirements

1st sub-level 4.1 Task 2nd sub-level 4.1.1 Sub-task 3rd sub-level 4.1.1.1 second level sub-task

2. The offeror is required to submit a proposed SOW that accurately describes the work to be performed, is enforceable, and void of inconsistencies. If, in the Government’s opinion, the offeror’s SOW does not reflect these requirements, the Government will prepare a SOW using information available in the offeror’s proposal; this process may delay the award. The SOW must be a separate and distinct part of the proposal. The proposed SOW must contain a summary description of the technical methodology as well as the task description, but in not so much detail as to make the SOW inflexible. Do not include the name of the offeror or any proprietary information in the SOW.

3. The following is offered as a format for the SOW.

a. Objective: This section is intended to give a brief overview of the specialty area and should describe why it is being pursued, and what is trying to be accomplished.

b. Scope: This section includes a statement of what the SOW will cover. This should include the technology area to be investigated, objectives or goals, and major milestones for the effort.

c. Background: The offeror shall identify appropriate documents that are applicable to the effort to be performed. This section includes any information, explanations, or constraints that are necessary in order to understand the requirements. It may include relationship to previous, current, and future operations. It may also include techniques previously tried and found ineffective.

d. Technical Requirements: This section contains the detailed description of tasks, which represent the work to be performed which are contractually binding. Thus, this portion of SOW should be developed in an orderly progression and in enough detail to establish the feasibility of accomplishing the overall program goals.

The work effort should be segregated into major tasks and identified in separately numbered paragraphs according to the decimal system above. Each numbered major task should delineate, by subtask, the work to be performed. The SOW must contain every task to be accomplished.

The tasks must be definite, realistic, and clearly stated. Use “shall” whenever the work statement expresses a provision that is binding.

Use “should” or “may” whenever it is necessary to express a declaration of purpose. Use “will” in cases where no offeror requirement is involved; e.g., power will be supplied by the Government. Use active voice in describing work to be performed.

Do not use acronyms or abbreviations without spelling-out acronyms and abbreviations at the first use; place the abbreviation in parenthesis immediately following a spelled-out phrase. This provides the definition for each subsequent reuse. As an option, a glossary may contain definitions of acronyms and abbreviations.

iii. Technical Rationale:

1. Provide the technical rationale for the objective requirement including technology advancements and value-added to DoD capabilities.

2. Provide technical rationale, business case analysis, and any supporting details for the technical approach for each major task and activity.

3. Provide a comparison of the technical objectives and technical approach with other ongoing research and existing state-of-the-art, indicating advantages and disadvantages of the proposed effort.

4. Provide a technical discussion of the analysis of alternatives that substantiates the proposed effort versus other courses of action.

5. Provide a completed copy of Fragility and Criticality (FaC) self-assessment. Instructions are found in Attachment 0001, IBAS FaC Matrix.

iv. Sustainment Plan: Demonstrate that the proposed effort provides long-term sustainment of the capability for future DoD needs.

v. Schedule: Provide a detailed integrated schedule, including a spend plan, of all initial phase activities to include:

1. Key events and spend plans for the technology concept.

2. All tasks and funds in the integrated master schedule (IMS) shall be linked and the ability to display the critical path shall be implemented.

3. If proposal is awarded, an updated schedule and spend plan with actuals to date shall be provided each month.

b. Cost Proposal (No Page Limit)

i. Cover sheet to include:

1. BAA number ;

2. Proposal title;

3. Lead Organization submitting proposal;

4. BAA Technical Focus Area addressed;

5. Technical point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, mailing address, phone number, fax (if available), and e-mail address (if available);

6. Administrative point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, mailing address, phone number, fax (if available), and e-mail address (if available);

7. Place(s) and period(s) of performance;

8. Total proposed cost separated by basic award and option(s) (if any);

9. Date proposal was prepared;

10. DUNS number;

11. Cage Code;

12. Proposal validity period.

ii. Costs: Detailed cost breakdown to include:

1. Provide the total program cost and costs broken down by initial phase and options.

2. Provide costs broken down for the initial phase including as minimum:

a. Direct labor including labor categories and man-hours;

b. Cost by the prime and major subcontractors;

c. Cost by major task/activity;

d. Materials;

e. Other Direct Costs (ODCs), (e.g., travel, equipment, etc.);

f. Overhead/Indirect charges and rates used to calculate overhead/indirect costs;

g. Provide the source, nature, and amount of any industry cost-sharing.

3. Identify the pricing assumptions that may require incorporation into the resulting award instrument (e.g., use of Government Furnished Property/Facilities/Information, access to Government Subject Matter Experts, etc.).

iii. Supporting Cost Data: Supporting cost and pricing information to include:

1. Sufficient detail to substantiate the summary cost estimates above.

2. A description of the method used to estimate costs and supporting documentation.

3. All proprietary subcontractor proposal documentation shall be prepared at the same level of detail as that required of the prime and shall be provided to the Government by e-mail: (address to be provided by contracting).

The subject line of the e-mail shall contain the lead organization’s proposal title, lead organization name, lead organization proposal submission date, and subcontractor name.

2. PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

a. Includes all required information in proper format and funds match/cost sharing statement.

b. Effectively explains project and quantifiable benefit to the government and supports DOD Service(s)/agency(ies).

c. Proposes an identifiable, realistic, and timely execution schedule, with designated milestones, to include risk assessment and mitigation plan.

d. Provides a detailed spend plan, which correlates with provided schedule and milestones.

e. Provides an identifiable path of sustainment or improvement of the capability being preserved.

f. Details return on investment

g. Completed, detailed FaC self-assessment with justified ratings

h. Costs are detailed and reasonable and a cost realism analysis will be performed to determine:

1. If realistic for work to be performed.

2. Reflects a clear understanding of the requirements.

3. Is consistent with the unique methods of performance and material described in offeror’s technical proposals.

3. PROPOSAL EVALUATION ASSESSMENT

a. RATING: Each proposal will subsequently be assigned one of the following ratings: “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” at this time. Rating definitions are as follows:

Acceptable The full proposal demonstrates technical merit, understanding of requirements and importance to agency programs. The offeror presents relevant experience and access to adequate resources.

The proposed risk is acceptable. The cost/price is reasonable and realistic. The proposal meets requirements and indicates a minimally adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Full proposals labeled “Acceptable” are recommended for the IBAS program and normally are displaced only by other Acceptable proposals.

Unacceptable The full proposal does not demonstrate technical merit; does not meet agency needs; does not present adequate experience or resources; the risk level is unacceptable; or the cost/price is not reasonable or realistic.

4. OTHER INFORMATION

a. Under this BAA, the IBAS will be utilizing non-Government personnel to function as technical advisors to the Government reviewers. These non- Government personnel will have access to the information submitted in response to the BAA and will provide technical expertise and/or advice as required. All non-government personnel have Non-Disclosure Agreements on file with the Government.