Call for Solutions - Enterprise_25-01_Rev 03.pdf

Call for Solution for Army Training Management Capability (ATMC)

Project Number ENTERPRISE_25-01 Open Solicitation Number

W9128Z-25-S-A002

Call for Solution Title Army Training Management Capability (ATMC)

Issued By Program Executive Office (PEO) Enterprise Army Training Information System (ATIS)

Submission Instructions To respond to this Call for Solution, please refer to Sections 5 and 8 of this Call for Solution.

*Solution Briefs Due Date/Time (Suspense) Friday, 16 May 2025 at 1200E

Submit Solution Brief To Agreements Officer: leslie.m.dickson2.civ@army.mil Specialist: lindsey.j.arguello.civ@army.mil

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

*Any submissions that are received by the Agreements 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.

This Call for Solution may result in the Government awarding a prototype OT in accordance with

10 U.S.C. § 4022. This Call for Solution, and any OT awarded from this Call for Solution, is not subject to the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) or its supplements.

mailto:leslie.m.dickson2.civ@army.mil mailto:lindsey.j.arguello.civ@army.mil

1. BACKGROUND

ATIS will give time back to Soldiers and leaders via easy-to-use tools that leverage authoritative data while operationalizing training management processes described in Field Manual 7-0, Army Regulation 350-1, and TRADOC Regulation 350-70. ATIS will help the Army plan, prepare, execute, and assess training across the operational, institutional and self-development training domains for all COMPOs including Army Civilian Professionals. The ATIS effort is aligned to Army data goals and will provide authoritative data to the Army to support readiness reporting, TRADOC resourcing models, talent management and other key enterprise data goals.

2. PROBLEM STATEMENT

Current Army training management suffers from a lack of integrated, automated tools, creating significant burdens for company-level leaders and impacting unit readiness. Specifically, existing systems lack interoperability for both top-down guidance and bottom-up planning, resulting in unsynchronized scheduling and calendars across formations. This is compounded by the absence of a modern, automated method for assessing Mission Essential Task List (METL) proficiency, cross-walking those assessments to required tasks, and assigning tasks to personnel – a process currently reliant on manual effort that detracts from valuable training and leadership time and potentially leads to readiness gaps.

3. DESIRED SOLUTION ATTRIBUTES

A fully functional prototype must include the following unique or innovative capabilities, functions, and/or features:

a. Training Scheduling. The application shall provide collaborative training planning tools, with automated review/approval workflows, shareable training calendars with selectable data overlays for deconfliction or comparative analysis, and training schedule (T-week) production to assist commanders and leaders with training prioritization, planning, and preparation. Calendars and scheduling tools will provide visibility of available training resources; especially ranges, training areas, facilities and Training Aids, Devices, Simulators and Simulations (TADSS). Planning tools will allow commanders and subordinate leaders to identify and prioritize tasks to train based on training guidance and proponent approved training products. The planning tools will allow users to view doctrinal products and provide automation identifying specific events to create unit training calendars and schedules. The system will automate the production and viewing of training materials for company-level meetings and briefings, offering multiple viewing options based on planning horizons, echelons, unit adjacencies, and resource prioritization.

b. Training Records Management. The application shall provide a capability to record training outcomes in unit and individual training records including weapons qualifications, mission essential task (MET) assessments, task evaluations, Army Fitness Test (AFT) and body composition outcomes, completion of common mandatory training requirements, and other training topics, such as airborne jump logs and driver/operator training. The system shall facilitate conduct, storage and recall of after-action reviews (AAR) to include attachment of images and handwritten notes from evaluators. The application will allow users to manage unit quantities and types of weapons, then record qualification scores and outcomes. Task evaluations will reflect the overall “go/no-go” or

“Trained /Practiced/Untrained” (TPU) outcomes. The AFT and body composition data recording provides automated calculation using policy-based business rules.

c. Data Analysis. The application shall provide dashboards and reports focused on battalion-level and below training, while exporting data to external data analytic platforms for higher echelons. The dashboards will provide commanders, staff, and subordinate leaders with relevant information to monitor and assess training proficiency; view summary and aggregate training data with visualization tools that vary by echelon to inform training plans and talent management decisions; and facilitate basic analytic capabilities like predictive, trend, and comparative analysis capability. Leaders may drill down to view lower echelon and individual data, while also viewing peer or higher echelon dashboards.

The application will generate reports in varied, exportable formats to support external analysis or standard, recurring, and custom reporting requirements.

d. Integration with existing software. The application shall integrate with the Army Training Information System (ATIS) architecture which interfaces with multiple information systems and authoritative databases. The Army’s unified data reference architecture (UDRA) outlines data mesh principles to flatten and simplify the Army’s data architecture and streamline data product sharing across information systems to enable data-driven decision making at greater speed and scale.

e. Identity, Credential, and Access Management (ICAM). The solution must implement ICAM, to include authentication, authorization, and auditing capabilities, to ensure secure access to DoD resources. The solution must integrate with existing DoD identity management systems and provide user activity monitoring and regular access reviews to enhance security.

f. Data Migration from Legacy Systems. The solution must provide services to migrate data from legacy systems to the new, existing cloud-based infrastructure. The data migration must ensure data integrity and minimize downtime, and include a comprehensive migration plan, with data mapping, validation, testing, and rollback procedures to ensure a smooth transition.

In all cases, the appropriate safeguards must be in place to protect information to include guidelines and policies outlined in Appendix A.

4. AWARDING INSTRUMENT

This Call for Solution solicitation will be awarded in accordance with the Open Solicitation procedures detailed within Solicitation W9128Z-25-S-A002. The Open Solicitation outlines the guidelines for submitting Solution Briefs, pitches, and proposals and how the Government will evaluate responses to this Call for Solution.

5. SOLICITATION NOTES

In addition to the general guidelines included in the Open Solicitation, the following guidelines apply to this Call for Solution.

• The Government will give preference to submissions that demonstrate an innovative, existing, and reference-verifiable commercial ability to accomplish the desired solution attributes listed above.

• If the Government does not receive any Solution Briefs that demonstrate an innovative, existing, and reference-verifiable commercial ability to accomplish the desired solution attributes, preference will be given to submissions demonstrating existing and recent products that can be adapted for the solicited purpose with the least amount of non-recurrent-engineering effort.

• Resellers and academic research proposals are not desired.

• The period of performance / schedule for any Solution Brief or proposal submitted under this Call for Solution should generally be no greater than six (6) months.

• Submitted Solution Briefs shall be no longer than four (4) pages.

• 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 go directly from Solution Brief to award.

• The Government reserves the right to award more than one (1) award resulting from this

Call for Solution or to make no award.

6. 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:

• LMI Consulting, LLC Address: 7940 Jones Branch Drive, Tysons, VA 22102 POC Name: John Grantz Phone: 845-662-7848 Email: john.m.grantz.ctr@army.mil; John.grantz@lmi.org

• MITRE Corporation Address: 7515 Colshire Drive, McLean, VA 22102 POC Name: Brian Brennan Phone: 781-857-9694 Email: bbrennan@mitre.org

As a reminder, by submitting information to the Government, the Company further understands that it had an opportunity to enter into a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) directly with the Non-Government Advisor and therefore waives any and all claims against the Government for any disclosures of proprietary information by the non-Government personnel. Such NDAs are the responsibility of the Company, and the Government shall not be a party to them. Companies shall provide a copy of the signed NDAs to the Government with submissions.

7. FOLLOW-ON PRODUCTION

Companies are advised that any prototype Other Transaction (OT) agreement awarded in response to this Call for Solution may result in the award of a follow-on production contract or transaction without the use of further competitive procedures. The follow-on production contract or transaction will be available for use by one or more organizations in the Department of Defense and, as a result, the magnitude of the follow-on production contract or agreement could mailto:john.m.grantz.ctr@army.mil mailto:John.grantz@lmi.org mailto:bbrennan@mitre.org be significantly larger than that of the prototype OT. ATIS requests a production Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM). As such, any prototype OT will include the following statement relative to the potential for follow-on production: "In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 4022(f), and upon a determination that the prototype project for this transaction has been successfully completed, this competitively awarded prototype OT may result in the award of a follow-on production contract or transaction without the use of competitive procedures.

8. EVALUATION CRITERIA

Solution Briefs and pitches will be evaluated based on the following evaluation criteria and in accordance with the scoring rubric in Table 1:

a. Feasibility – solution to problem statement is technically possible. This criterion measures whether the technology exists or is likely to be developed in the scope of this prototype effort.

b. Viability – solution to problem statement is compatible with DoD constraints, technical environments and other organizational requirements. This criterion measures whether DoD could easily adopt the prototype.

c. Desirability – solution is responsive to a problem statement. This criterion measures whether end users are likely to adopt the offeror’s prototype solution. An example of something which is not desirable is a SW solution that is not intuitive/easy to use and requires extensive training for use/operations.

d. Technical Merit: The Government will evaluate the Company’s Offeror’s proposed solution/concept relevance to the respective Topic; innovation or a potential capability;

solves a capability/gap/problem or provides potential innovative technological advancements; capabilities and scalability of the solution; benefits of the solution/concept; and technical approach.

e. Schedule. The Government will evaluate the proposed solution/concept project schedule and maturity path.

f. Price. The Government will evaluate the proposed rough order of magnitude (ROM), to include the estimated out-the-door total cost/price.

Table 1: Scoring Rubric

Rating Definition Does Not Provide Sufficient Information to Evaluate

The solution brief lacks enough detail or clarity to determine compliance with requirements. Key elements are missing, incomplete, or ambiguous.

Fails to Meet Minimum Requirements The solution brief can be evaluated but does not satisfy one or more of the basic, mandatory requirements. It is not acceptable in its current form.

Meets Minimum Requirements The solution brief fully meets all required criteria but does so only at a basic level.

Meets Requirements and Exceeds Some The solution brief meets all requirements and includes enhancements or added value in one or more areas.

Far Exceeds Requirements The solution brief greatly surpasses all requirements. It offers exceptional quality, innovation, or value with clear, substantial benefits.

The order of importance for the evaluation criteria is in the following order: Technical Merit > Viability > Feasibility and Desirability > Schedule and Price.

Solution Briefs shall conform to the following. Should offerors submit anything longer, the Government will only evaluate the first four pages of a Solution Brief.

• Three (3) pages of technical discussion explicitly addressing the target problem statement and how the proposed solution meets the evaluation criteria.

• One (1) page ROM which includes the estimated out-the-door total price for 40,000 annual users.

The Government estimates that it will require two (2) weeks or less to review and respond to Solution Briefs. At that time, the Government will inform the offeror that:

a. The Government has not selected to move forward with the submitted Solution Brief;

b. The Government requests that the offeror participate in an in-person (or virtual) pitch; or

c. The Government will issue a Request for Prototype Proposal (RPP)

After pitches, the Government shall further down-select potential awardees and issue a request for prototype proposal (“RPP”) to the remaining candidate firm(s). The RPP will have specific guidelines. Chiefly, offerors must submit a statement of work and a detailed price breakdown as it relates to payment milestones. The Government shall use the same criteria to evaluate prototype proposals as described for Solution Briefs.

APPENDIX A: STANDARDS, REFERENCES & POLICIES

1) FIPS PUB 199 - Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems - February 2004.

2) DoD Instruction 8510.01 DoD Risk Management Framework (RMF) for DoD Information Technology (IT)

3) NIST SP 800-30 Guide for Conducting Risk Assessments

4) NIST SP 800-37 Risk Management Framework for Information Systems and Organizations: A System Life Cycle Approach for Security and Privacy

5) NIST SP 800-39 Managing Information Security Risk: Organization, Mission, and Information System View

6) NIST SP 800-53 Security and Privacy Controls for Information Systems and Organizations

7) DoDI 5000.75, Business Systems Requirements and Acquisition, dated, 2 February 2017, with change 1, dated, 31 August 2018

8) DoDI 5000.87 Operation of the Software Development Pathway, dated, 2 October 2020

APPENDIX B: LIST OF ACRONYMS

AFT Army Fitness Test ATIS Army Training Information System ATMC Army Training Management Capability FFRDC Federally Funded Research and Development Center ICAM Identity Credential and Access Management MET Mission Essential Task OT Other Transaction PEO Program Executive Office RMF Risk Management Framework ROM Rough Order of Magnitude SETA Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance TADSS Training Aids, Devices, Simulators and Simulations TPU Trained, Proficient, Unsatisfactory TRADOC Training and Doctrine Command UDRA Unified Data Reference Architecture

APPENDIX C: QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

Answers to questions submitted as of 14 May 2025. This appendix may be updated as additional questions are received.

1) Is a cover page, table of contents, and/or glossary required? If so, will those pages be excluded from the overall 4-page limit?

These are not required.

2) If the offeror includes a cover page in the Solution Brief submission, does the cover page count toward the four-page limit?

The cover page does not count toward the four-page limit.

3) Are we required to adhere to a 12-point font size, even though this submission does not fall under FAR guidelines?

No.

4) Is there a set template for the 3-page solution and ROM?

There is no set template for submission, the solicitation brief should be submitted in accordance with procedures outlined in Call for Solution ENTERPRISE_25-01 and the Army Open Solicitation W9128Z-25-S-A002.

5) Section 6 of the Call for Solution has identified LMI Consulting, LLC and The MITRE Corporation as Non-Government Advisors. Please confirm that due to an Organizational Conflict of Interest, both companies are restricted from submitting a solution response to this Call for Solution.

Both organizations are restricted from submitting a response to this Call for Solution.

6) We would like to request POCs for the below two companies who are listed as Non- Government Advisors in Section 6 of the attached to kick off the process of initiating NDAs.

Please refer to paragraph 6 regarding non-Government Advisors.

7) Regarding the requirement for 40,000 users, could you please provide a breakdown of how these users are divided between soldiers and staff?

The precise breakdown of users is dependent on the specific organization.

8) Can you clarify the potential number of logins per user annually?

The precise number of logins depends on the user.

9) We would like to inquire if solution briefs can address specific portions of the prototype versus offering an entire prototype solution?

Industry is welcome to submit solutions to capability areas their software supports.

10) Can you please provide the personas/roles and # of each for the system? We understand there are 40,000 users for the ROM. However, can you please detail what each user needs to be able to do in the system?

Please refer to the source to the Desired Solution Attributes in the source document, paragraph 3. a., b., and c.

11) Can you please provide what Azure cloud and Impact Level the solution would reside in, and whether users have access to M365, Power Platform, Dynamics 365 Customer Service, Power BI?

cArmy/AWS Impact Level IV (CUI). Not all users will have access to the tools mentioned.

12) Do all users have access to Outlook and Teams?

13) Is there information about the system we need to integrate with? Is it online/on-prem, does it support APIs, what kind of data needs to be integrated?

Some legacy systems are in the cloud, others are on-prem and/or in Army Data Centers Legacy systems vary in terms of API supportability.

Data integration types of data are: scheduling, training management, training statistics aggregated to the appropriate echelon, and training resources; tasks (individual, drill, collective), civilian and soldier data (e.g. dodid, rank, mos), GFM DI compliant id usage for organization hierarchy.

All sub-components of ATIS are expected to interoperate together, including exchange of data, preferably at the API level to maintain data quality and avoid duplication. Given the emerging state of ATIS data integration is mixed including RESTful APIs, internal data set exchange (db to db transfer of selected data sets), and structured file transfer. ATIS must also integrate with external sources to acquire non-ATIS authoritative data and to provide/publish ATIS authoritative data to others.

14) Can the Government share the most recent ATIS architecture diagram?

15) Can the Government provide clarification and details on the "new, existing cloud-based infrastructure" that is mentioned in Section 3 (f)?

cARMY AWS GovCloud infrastructure (IL4).

16) I have a question on the format for this solicitation, do you want a PowerPoint brief, or a Word document?

There is no set template for submission, the solicitation brief should be submitted in accordance with procedures outlined in Call for Solution ENTERPRISE_25-01 and the Army Open Solicitation W9128Z-25-S-A002.

17) Will the solution need to interoperate with any systems or databases outside the ATIS Architecture to collect training records and schedule data? If so, how many?

The solution will need to interoperate with approximately 80 systems and databases outside the ATIS architecture, however this number is subject to change.

18) Does ATIS want this the solution to be the primary user interface for entering/ingesting training records and schedule data?

Yes.

19) Will the training schedule functionality only support leaders and commanders, or will soldiers scheduled for training also interface with this feature?

The training schedule functionality will support leaders, commanders, and soldiers.

20) What classification and data protection are required for data from legacy systems?

CUI.

21) What is the frequency of updates/changes expected to this capability? i.e. two-week sprints for minor code updates or large complex revisions at a set cycle (quarterly, semi-annually) The frequency of updates to this capability is expected to be between two and twelve weeks.

22) Is there an expectation that foreign nationals/non-CAC eligible users would ever use the system as part of coalition exercise or training, requiring firewalling of NOFORN/non-releasable data? Or is CONOPS strictly US Personnel only?

There is an expectation that foreign nationals/non-CAC users would potentially use the system as part of training.

23) If the Government elects to go from solution brief to award, will there be a final round of discussions between government and contractor to define T&Cs for final pricing?

Please refer to Section E of the Open Solicitation document.

24) Will the contract be FFP or is the customer open to a hybrid contract for maximum agility?

FFP.

25) Will there be travel (domestic/international) required outside of the main worksite location?

Domestic travel may be required to support user engagement efforts.

26) In order for us to plan licensing and access roles properly, how many internal admin users will there be, broken down by admin type (Authentication Admins, Supervisory Admins, Configuration Admins) aside from the 40,000 annual users accessing the ATMC system?

Please refer to the source to the Desired Solution Attributes in the source document, paragraph 3. a., b., and c.

27) Is ATIS strictly requiring a Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) solution, or would a custom-built or Microsoft platform-based solution be acceptable if it meets the needs with low risk and fast delivery?

Custom-built solutions are not acceptable.

28) If a custom-built solution is acceptable under this solicitation, and we can deliver a fully functional Minimum Viable Product (MVP) within the six-month performance period, would the ATIS be open to a limited extension of the solution period to allow refinement, validation, and transition activities? This clarification will help us structure a delivery plan that ensures both compliance with the prototype objectives and sustained alignment with the Army’s long-term operational readiness goals.

Custom-built solutions are not acceptable.

29) Is there an opportunity for our technical SMES to speak with a technical POC to see if we’re hitting the mark based on the pain points and requirements?

The Government cannot fulfill this request.

30) Can the Government extend the submission deadline for project ENTERPRISE_25-01 (solicitation #: W9128Z-25-S-A002) 30 days to allow industry sufficient time to provide a detailed, rigorous, and competitive response?

The Government will not be extending the deadline for Call for Solution at this time.

31) To aid in our submittal we wanted to ask a few questions regarding current incumbent companies and permission to speak with the Non-Government Advisors - LMI and MITRE. If we could have a quick 30-minute Teams Call that would be optimal, if not, any information you could provide would be greatly appreciated.

The Government cannot fulfil the request to have a meeting. Please refer to paragraph 6 regarding non-Government Advisors.