SOLICITATION NOTICE
A -- Training Capabilities Analysis of Alternatives Broad Agency Announcement
- Notice Date
- 8/28/2003
- Notice Type
- Solicitation Notice
- Contracting Office
- Department of the Navy, Naval Supply Systems Command, FISC NORFOLK DETACHMENT PHILADELPHIA, 700 Robbins Avenue, Building 2B, Philadelphia, PA, 19111-5083
- ZIP Code
- 19111-5083
- Solicitation Number
- Reference-Number-H500
- Point of Contact
- Guy Goss, Contract Negotiator, Phone 215-697-9662, Fax 215-697-5418, - James Swizewski, Contracting Officer, Phone 215-697-9630, Fax 215-697-9569,
- E-Mail Address
-
guy.goss@navy.mil, james.swizewski@navy.mil
- Description
- This synopsis constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 35.016. There will be no formal request for proposals or other solicitation regarding this announcement. It is not anticipated that information other than that provided within this BAA will be disseminated. This BAA is requesting the submission of proposals for the provision of research and analysis support to the U.S. Joint Forces Command required in the execution of a DoD Directed Training Capabilities Analysis of Alternatives (AoA). Specifically, this BAA is seeking innovative solutions to accomplish the requirements of three specific analysis areas required in the execution of the Training Capabilities AoA. The Government intends to award several contracts in the range of $25K to $500K to support the Training Capabilities AoA. The length of contractor participation will vary by analysis area supported, but will be limited to the AoA study duration which has a deadline of 1 August 2004. Most of the analysis areas have intermediate termination dates and will vary in length from three to six months. Due to the business sensitive nature of the program, participants in the AoA will be required to sign non-disclosure and conflict of interest forms. The Training Capabilities AoA will result in the identification of cost-effective methods for meeting joint and service training requirements. The AoA is expected to result in 1) The development of a business case to assess how live, virtual and/or constructive modeling and simulation tools can resolve existing or projected training gaps and deficiencies or enhance training capabilities and 2) baseline today?s joint and service training process in terms of cost, capability, and effectiveness and develop alternative solutions for future training requirements. The Training Capabilities AoA will result in a final report to be completed by 1 August 2004 based upon the following sequence of events: Methodology Report due 1 December 2003, Midterm Progress Report due 1 February 2004, Baseline Report due 1 May 2004, Final Brief due 1 June 2004, Final Report due 15 July 2004. The USJFCOM is seeking innovative solutions to successfully accomplish the requirements of three specific analysis areas of the Joint Training AoA. Proposed solutions are expected to result in the delivery of a specific product, report, analysis, study result or like tool and/or product that can be used by the government in the preparation of the various parts of the Training Capabilities AoA. The government will combine the results of many inputs into the final document. A Senior Steering Group will be responsible for coordinating the roles of subject matter experts to be drawn from various sectors. The below analysis areas identify the AoA requirements and the issues for which innovative solutions are being sought. 1. HOW TO COORDINATE THE ANALYSIS BASELINE FOR JOINT AND SERVICE TRAINING NECESSARY TO ESTABLISH A BUSINESS CASE. An approach is required to identify and analyze training gaps and deficiencies of legacy training capabilities, to include classifying and analyzing opportunities for improving capability or efficiency consistent with Training Transformation goals. This area of analysis involves the identification and analysis of training gaps, deficiencies of legacy training capabilities, and opportunities for improving capability or efficiency consistent with training transformation goals. This will include Joint National Training Capability (JNTC) and other significant Live-Virtual-Constructive service initiatives. The final report will identify training gaps and provide an analysis of deficiencies, both current and projected. The deliverables are a presentation and report documenting the baseline case and associated training gaps or deficiencies, both current and projected. 2. DEFINITION OF MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS (MOE) AND MEASURES OF PERFORMANCE (MOP). This area of the analysis involves the definition of MOE and MOP that will capture both the technological suitability and training effectiveness. The Technology MOE will evaluate technical specifications of each alternative to determine the degree to which the alternative?s training environment can be integrated with live, virtual, and constructive environments. The training effectiveness MOE will evaluate alternatives against their ability to deliver effective joint and service training. This requirement maybe responded to in two parts, (1) Technology MOE, (2) Training Effectiveness MOE or as a single integrated task including the two elements of the tasks. The MOE task will be delivered in two phases, the proposed MOE solution that will be reviewed, revised and approved by the Senior Steering Group and the actual evaluation of the AoAs using the approved criteria. Although Verification, Validation and Accreditation (VV&A) efforts maybe required to validate certain processes, the VV&A effort is not part of this task and should not be in the proposed solution to the problem. The contractor will deliver a proposed MOE solution and upon approval, use the process to conduct the analysis of the alternatives for both technology and effectiveness. The government in the execution of the AoA will use this analysis. The delivery will conform to the schedule provided above. The contractor must demonstrate the ability to generate the response to this task in a timely manner since other elements of the AoA are dependent upon this input. The response should clearly identify the knowledge of what is required and the ability to meet the schedule vice the details associated with day-to-day operations. 3. COST ANALYSIS. This AoA area involves the identification of a cost analysis approach that includes all cost and any engineering development effort for each capability or capabilities associated with each alternative. The cost analysis will include research, development, testing, engineering, spiral development cycles and associated cost, procurement cost, fixed cost for facilities, operational cost, per trainee cost, classroom, textbooks, and other associated model and licensee cost. The object is to capture the total cost and compare the results as each alternative is reviewed. The Training Capabilities AoA will provide the total costs for each alternative, using the legacy systems of the Joint Training Confederation as a baseline for cost and effectiveness comparisons. Where a capability to be provided by an alternative has not yet entered a mature stage of developmental engineering, projected developmental cost will be compared with the seven-year operational cost required to provide an equivalent capability by other means. The AoA will also provide an estimate of life-cycle costs over the period 2005-2025 for each alternative. Further, the AoA will provide an assessment of the technical risk associated with each alternative. The cost analysis described above is the deliverable and may be divided into segments if a contractor has significant knowledge and information with respect to a major segment of the effort and desires to deliver a solution for that segment. The decision to divide the effort will be made by the government and governed by value added to the process with respect to quality, cost and schedule. Since all work must be measured against a common baseline, the following information is provided concerning the alternatives to be considered during the AoA. The Training Capabilities AoA will consider a broad range of alternatives, including but not limited to the following: 1. The base case- current live, virtual, and constructive training systems. 2. Common joint tool based on a standard architecture. 3. Separate Joint & Service systems developed independently to a standard architecture. 4. Privately Funded Initiatives to develop a training solution(s). 5. Use of commercially available products and gaming/simulation technology. Each alternative will be defined using capabilities that can be measured, such as the ability to stimulate a command and control workstation so the user cannot distinguish model input from live input. Alternatives will then be evaluated using measures of effectiveness (MOE) developed in accordance with the guidelines listed with the MOE requirements. Alternatives may be defined using capabilities found in existing documents, to include operational requirements documents, but only insofar as the capabilities are measurable and capable of being compared against established MOEs. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS. Industry, academia and service laboratories are encouraged to submit proposals that consist of a technical and a cost proposal. The technical proposal shall consist of a white paper, which is not to exceed five pages, that clearly specifies the proposed solution to complete the task requirements for a specified area of analysis. The white paper should address how the proposed solution will be accomplished within the timeframes required. Respondents are encouraged to address any previous experience in implementing the proposed solution. Respondents may submit a separate white paper for each of the task areas identified above. Respondents shall also submit a complete and detailed cost breakdown will all supporting information. The cost/price proposal shall support the technical proposal. If the price/cost proposal does not support the technical proposal, the offeror?s overall proposal rating may be downgraded. The price/cost proposal shall include all elements of cost and such other cost information as considered appropriate to support the proposal. Due to the time sensitive nature of this work, proposals are desired not later than 4:00 P.M. eastern time, 19 September 2003 but will be accepted through 45 days after the publication of this synopsis. Proposals should be submitted to Guy.Goss@navy.mil. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS. The Government intends to award a contract or contracts resulting from this BAA to the responsible offeror(s) whose proposals(s) represent the best value to the Government after evaluation in accordance with the factors in the BAA. The evaluation of proposals will consider the offeror?s technical proposal to be more important than cost/price. After evaluation, offerors will be notified of selectability or non-selectability. Selectable proposals will be considered for funding. Decisions to fund selectable proposals will be based on funds availability. Not all proposals deemed selectable will be funded. The Government reserves the right to select for award all, some or none of the proposals received. All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government?s needs may submit proposals which shall be considered by the Government. Contractors responding must have a background, experience, and understanding of the use of simulation in the context of joint and service training and the implications of interoperability of service simulation models to the role of Joint Operations at an Operational level. Responses from contractors without the essential skills and experience will not be considered for award. Work will be conducted at various locations, but solutions provided to the study director located in the USJFCOM/JWFC/JTASC building located in Suffolk, VA. A statement of non-disclosure will be required. Nothing in this announcement should be construed as a commitment by the Government to award any of the project areas identified above. In addition to new contracts, selectable proposals may be funded through a variety of other mechanisms: use of existing contracts; cooperative agreements; or an other transaction agreement.
- Record
- SN00415403-W 20030830/030828213943 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |