Marketplace for Acquisition of Professional Services (MAPS)

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document is Amendment 02 to Attachment 0003, a Qualifying Project (QP) Form. It is designed for offerors to provide details about past projects that demonstrate their capability and experience relevant to the solicitation's domains. This form is crucial for the government's evaluation of offeror qualifications.

• Qualifying Project Number: To categorize the project (001, 002, or 003).
• Contracting Party Point of Contact: Government or private official details.
• Specific Contract/Agreement Number: Details of the contract under which the QP was performed, including any orders.
• Proposed Domain(s): Offerors must select applicable domains (Engineering, Logistic & Operational; Management & Advisory; RDT&E; Emerging IT; Foundational IT) against which the QP will be evaluated.
• Period of Performance: Requirements for LOE-based and Outcome-Based QPs, emphasizing completion within the last three years prior to May 1, 2026.
• Technical Capabilities Mapping: Alignment of the QP to Section 3.0 of the PWS.
• Description of Work: A brief description mapping work to the PWS, SOW, or SOO.
• NAICS Code: Identification of the NAICS code on the contract or the best alignment per RFP Section L.2.3.2, with an explanation.
• CPARS or PPQ: Indication if the QP has a CPARS or PPQ per RFP Section L.2.3.2.
• Dollar Value: The value of the QP.
• LOE-Based vs. Outcome-Based QP: Specification of the QP type.
• Performance Metrics: Details for Vacancy Rate, Time to Fill Rate, Schedule, and Completeness, with specific calculation methods and references to RFP sections (M.5.7.1, M.5.7.2, M.5.7.3, M.5.7.4).
• Passthrough Rate: Calculation method per RFP Section M.5.6.
• Certification: Required certifications from both the Contracting Official and the Offeror.
• Legal Entity Confirmation: Attestation that the QP was performed by the same legal entity as the Offeror, with options to explain if different.

Offerors must accurately complete this form to provide evidence of their qualifications and past performance. The details submitted will be directly used in the evaluation process against specific domains and technical capabilities outlined in the PWS. Failure to provide complete and accurate information, or to properly reference supporting documentation (contracts, PWS, SOW, SOO), may impact the evaluation of the QP and the overall proposal.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document is an "Attachment 0003 Amendment 02 Qualifying Project Form" (QP Form) used by offerors to provide details about their past projects that qualify them for the opportunity. It is intended to demonstrate relevant experience and capabilities.

• Qualifying Project Number: Selection of one of three project numbers (001, 002, or 003).
• Contracting Party Point of Contact: Government or private official's contact information.
• Specific Contract/Agreement Number: Details of the contract/agreement under which the qualifying project was performed, including any orders.
• Proposed Domain(s): Selection of relevant domains (Engineering, Logistic & Operational; Management & Advisory; RDT&E; Emerging IT; Foundational IT) against which the QP will be evaluated.
• Period of Performance: Requirements for completed performance within a specific timeframe.
• Technical Capabilities Mapping: Alignment of the QP to Technical Capabilities in Section 3.0 of the PWS.
• Description of Work: A brief description mapping the work to the PWS, SOW, or SOO.
• NAICS Code: Identification of the NAICS code associated with the QP or the best alignment.
• CPARS or PPQ: Indication of whether the QP has a CPARS or PPQ.
• Dollar Value: The monetary value of the QP.
• LOE-Based vs. Outcome-Based QP: Identification of the QP type.
• Performance Metrics: Fields for Vacancy Rate, Time to Fill Rate, Schedule, Completeness, and Passthrough Rate, with specific calculation instructions and references to RFP sections (M.5.7.1, M.5.7.2, M.5.7.3, M.5.7.4, M.5.6).
• Certification: Offeror and Contracting Official certifications of accuracy.
• Legal Entity Confirmation: Confirmation that the QP was performed by the same legal entity as the Offeror, with options to explain differences.

Offerors must complete this form to detail their qualifying projects. The information provided, particularly regarding past performance metrics (Vacancy Rate, Time to Fill, Schedule, Completeness, Passthrough Rate) and alignment with proposed domains and technical capabilities, will be used by the government for evaluation purposes as outlined in the RFP. Providing accurate and complete information is crucial for demonstrating eligibility and capability.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document is Amendment 01 to Attachment 0004, a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) Form. Its purpose is to collect factual and accurate information from a Contracting (Government/Private) Official regarding a contractor's past performance (within the last four years) for a specific contract. This information will be used in the awarding of a federal contract.

• Adjectival Ratings: The form uses specific ratings: Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory, with defined criteria for each.
• Part I: Contract Identification: To be completed by the Offeror, this section requires details about the contract, contractor, program, and nature of the effort.
• Part II: Identification of Offerors Representative: To be completed by the Offeror, this section collects contact information for the offeror's representative.
• Part III: Evaluation: To be completed by the Contracting Official, this section requires ratings and comments on Quality, Schedule, Cost Control, Management, and Small Business Subcontracting.
• Respondent Identification: The Contracting Official's contact information is required.

Bidders should be aware that this PPQ form will be used to evaluate their past performance. They need to ensure the Offeror sections (Part I and Part II) are completed accurately. The ratings and comments provided by the Contracting Official in Part III will directly influence the evaluation of their proposal. Bidders may need to provide this form to their previous contracting officials for completion.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document is a "Qualifying Project Form" (QP Form) provided as Attachment 0003, Amendment 02. It is designed for offerors to document and submit information about their past projects to demonstrate their qualifications for the opportunity. The form requires details about the contracting party, specific contract numbers, proposed domains, period of performance, and alignment with technical capabilities outlined in the PWS. It also includes sections for NAICS codes, CPARS/PPQ information, dollar value, and specific evaluation metrics like Vacancy Rate, Time to Fill Rate, Schedule, Completeness, and Passthrough Rate.

• Qualifying Project Number: Selection of one of three project numbers (001, 002, or 003).
• Contracting Party POC: Contact information for the government or private official.
• Contract/Agreement Number: Details of the specific contract or order.
• Proposed Domain(s): Selection of relevant domains (Engineering, Management, RDT&E, IT).
• Period of Performance: Requirements for completed performance within the last three years.
• Technical Capabilities Alignment: Mapping of the QP to PWS Section 3.0.
• NAICS Code: Identification and justification of relevant NAICS codes.
• CPARS/PPQ: Confirmation of performance evaluation data.
• LOE-Based vs. Outcome-Based QP: Specification of the QP type.
• Evaluation Metrics: Detailed fields for Vacancy Rate, Time to Fill Rate, Schedule, Completeness, and Passthrough Rate, with specific calculation instructions and references to RFP sections.
• Certification: Offeror and Contracting Official certifications of accuracy.
• Legal Entity Confirmation: Attestation that the QP was performed by the same legal entity as the offeror.

Offerors must complete this form to provide evidence of their experience and qualifications. The information submitted will be evaluated against specific criteria outlined in the RFP (e.g., Sections M.5.7.1, M.5.7.2, M.5.7.3, M.5.7.4, M.5.6). Accurate and complete submission of this form, along with supporting documentation (contracts, PWS/SOW), is crucial for demonstrating capability and is a key component of the proposal evaluation process. The form also includes a "Sheet: OLD QP Form" which appears to be an older version and may require clarification if still relevant.

Amendment / Modification

This amendment provides updates to Sections C, H, L, and M, as well as Attachment 0002.

Key changes include:

• Section C - Performance Work Statement: Corrected misnumbering in sections 1.4.1-1.4.4, added T&M Contract Type to section 4.0, and updated the name of the Army Training Certification Tracking System (ATCTS) in section 4.2.5 due to the system sunset.
• Section H - Special Contract Instructions: Clarified the definition of "Emerging Large Business" in H.1 and added the UEI Code requirement in H.6.
• Section L - Instructions to Offerors: Provided clarity on general instructions and compliance in paragraph 8 of L.1. Updated L.2.1 regarding the SF33 submission requirement. Clarified screening questions in L.2.2.1, stating offerors shall propose as one entity per UEI Code and how affiliates will be evaluated. Provided more clarity for "One Contract Per Entity" in L.2.3.2. Updated L.2.4 to require both Large Business and Emerging Large Business to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan.
• Section M - Evaluation Factors: Removed points for Offerors not proposing as Joint Ventures (JVs) in M.4.1 and provided clarity on Technical Capabilities in M.5.2.
• Attachment 0002 - Scorecards: Updated the Small Business, Emerging Large Business, Large Business, and Commercial Sector Vendor Scorecards to align with the "Schedule" evaluation criteria.

Sections C, H, L, M, and Attachment 0002.

Updates primarily provide clarification and do not appear to alter proposal deadlines or fundamental submission requirements, though specific instructions regarding entity proposals and subcontracting plans have been refined.

Solicitation

This document is a solicitation (W15P7T26RA0060002) for an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract, referred to as MAPS (Multiple Award Professional Services). The contract aims to provide uncommon knowledge-based professional services and IT services worldwide to Army customers and other federal agencies. The solicitation details the scope of work, which includes five technical support areas: Engineering, Logistics and Operational Services; Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) Services; Management and Advisory Services; Emerging IT Services; and Foundational IT Services. The maximum total contract value (ceiling) is $50 billion, including an optional ordering period. The period of performance is a 5-year base period with a 5-year optional ordering period. Task orders will be issued at the individual task order level, with contract types potentially including firm-fixed-price, time-and-materials, and cost reimbursement. The solicitation also outlines extensive requirements for contractor personnel, including security clearances, training (antiterrorism, OPSEC, cybersecurity), and access to government systems. It details contract deliverables, data deliverables, and specific requirements for packaging and marking (not applicable). Numerous FAR and DFARS clauses are incorporated by reference, covering a wide range of contractual requirements including inspection, acceptance, travel, program management, organizational conflict of interest, and electronic cost reporting. The evaluation approach involves an initial self-score, followed by a verification review, and then a price analysis for fair and reasonable pricing. Tie-breaking procedures are also outlined. The government intends to make 70 awards per Domain, with specific allocations for Large Businesses, Emerging Large Businesses, Small Businesses, and Commercial-Sector Vendors. Offerors must submit proposals through the Digital Market Portal by May 1, 2026, 1700 Eastern Time. Key attachments include a Cover Letter, Screening Questions and Scorecard, Qualifying Projects, and Past Performance Questionnaires.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Amd 02 Scorecard -Large Business- 09APR2026.xlsx", serves as a scorecard for large businesses responding to the opportunity. It outlines screening questions and detailed scoring criteria for various aspects of a proposal, including systems, certifications, past performance, and passthrough rates.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• Submission requirements met (refer to RFP Section L.1)
• Active facility clearance of SECRET
• ISO 9001:2015 or ISO 9001:2013 certification
• CMMC Final Level 2 (self) certification
• Government Determined Acceptable Accounting System
• Government Determined Acceptable Purchasing System
• CAGE Code meeting CPARS threshold for MARGINAL or below ratings. Note: Answering 'NO' to any screening question disqualifies the proposal from further evaluation.

Section 02 - Scorecard: Details point allocations for:

• Government Approved Systems and Certifications: Property Management System, Facility Clearance, CMMC Level 2, ISO/IEC 27001:2022.
• Past Performance: Recency, Relevance, NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality, Dollar Value, Passthrough Rate.
• LOE QPs ONLY: Vacancy Rate, Time to Fill Rate.
• OUTCOME BASED QPs ONLY: Schedule, Completeness.

This scorecard is critical for large business bidders as it defines the specific qualifications, systems, certifications, and past performance metrics that will be evaluated and scored. Bidders must carefully review these criteria to ensure their proposal meets the minimum requirements and to understand how points will be awarded for each category. The document also specifies the maximum points available for each criterion, totaling 130,000 credits.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Amd 02 Scorecard -Small Business-", serves as a scorecard for small business offerors. It outlines screening questions and a detailed scoring rubric for various aspects of the proposal, including Government Approved Systems and Certifications, Past Performance, and specific Quality Plan (QP) metrics.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• Requires confirmation of submission requirements met (referencing RFP Section L.1).
• Requires Small Business Certification.
• Requires confirmation of an active SECRET facility clearance.
• Requires verification of ISO 9001:2015 or ISO 9001:2013 certification.
• Requires documentation of CMMC Final Level 2 (self) certification.
• Assesses CAGE Code performance against CPARS thresholds for MARGINAL or below ratings.
• Crucially, answering 'NO' to any screening question will disqualify the proposal from further evaluation.

Section 02 - Scorecard:

• Details point allocations for various qualifications and capabilities, including:
  • Government Approved Systems and Certifications (e.g., Accounting System, Facility Clearance, CMMC, ISO 27001:2022).
  • Past Performance (Recency, Relevance, NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality, Dollar Value, Passthrough Rate).
  • Specific metrics for LOE QPs (Vacancy Rate, Time to Fill Rate).
  • Specific metrics for Outcome Based QPs (Schedule, Completeness).
• Provides maximum possible points for each category and fields for self-scored and government-verified ratings.

This scorecard is critical for small business offerors. It clearly defines the minimum requirements for proposal evaluation (screening questions) and the detailed criteria and point system used for scoring the technical and past performance aspects of the proposal. Bidders must carefully review and ensure they meet all screening requirements and understand how their qualifications and past performance will be evaluated and scored.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Amd 02 Scorecard -Commercial-Sector Vendor", is an amendment to a previous attachment and serves as a self-scoring scorecard for commercial-sector vendors. It outlines the criteria and point system used for evaluating proposals, particularly focusing on certifications and past performance.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• Vendors must confirm submission requirements are met (referencing RFP Section L.1).
• Vendors must confirm they are a "Commercial-Sector Vendor" as defined in RFP Section H.1.
• Vendors must confirm they are CMMC Final Level 2 (self) certified and provide SPRS certificate documentation.
• Answering 'NO' to any of these questions will disqualify the proposal from further evaluation.

Section 02 - Scorecard: This section details the point allocation for various evaluation factors:

• Government Approved Systems and Certifications: Points awarded for Facility Clearance (SECRET/TOP SECRET) and CMMC Level 2 (self or C3PAO) or ISO 9001 certifications.
• Past Performance: Points awarded based on Recency, Relevance, NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality (CPARS/PPQ ratings), Dollar Value, and Passthrough Rate for up to three Qualified Projects (QPs).
• LOE QPs ONLY: Points awarded for Vacancy Rate and Time to Fill Rate.
• Outcome Based QPs ONLY: Points awarded for Schedule and Completeness (measured by AQL and documented efficiencies).

Total Credits Available: 130,000

This scorecard is critical for bidders to understand how their proposal will be evaluated. It specifies the exact criteria, point values, and required documentation for certifications and past performance. Bidders should use this document to self-assess their strengths and weaknesses against the government's evaluation methodology and to ensure they meet all mandatory screening requirements.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Amd 02 Scorecard -Emerging Large Business-", is an amendment to the solicitation, providing a scorecard for Emerging Large Businesses. It outlines the screening questions and the detailed scoring criteria for the "Emerging Large Business" category. Bidders must use this scorecard to self-assess their eligibility and potential points for various capabilities and qualifications.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• Submission Requirements: Confirm all requirements from RFP Section L.1 are met.
• Emerging Large Business Status: Verify status as defined in RFP Section H.1.
• Facility Clearance: Confirm active SECRET facility clearance.
• ISO 9001:2015/2013 Certification: Provide verification.
• CMMC Final Level 2 Certification: Provide documentation (SPRS certificate).
• CPARS Performance: Assess CAGE Code performance against MARGINAL ratings in CPARS for the last three years across identified NAICS codes. Offerors with 10% or more MARGINAL ratings are excluded.

Crucially, answering 'NO' to any screening question disqualifies the proposal from further evaluation.

Section 02 - Scorecard: Details point allocations for:

• Government Approved Systems and Certifications: Property Management, Purchasing, Accounting Systems; TOP SECRET Facility Clearance; CMMC Level 2 Certification; ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Certification.
• Past Performance: Recency, Relevance, NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality, Dollar Value, and Passthrough Rate for up to three Qualified Projects (QPs).
• LOE QPs ONLY: Vacancy Rate and Time to Fill Rate.
• Outcome Based QPs ONLY: Schedule and Completeness.

This scorecard is critical for bidders to understand the specific criteria and point values used in the evaluation of Emerging Large Businesses. It guides proposal preparation by highlighting required certifications, past performance metrics, and other qualifications. Bidders must carefully review and self-score against these criteria to ensure they meet all prerequisites and maximize their potential score. The document also clarifies the recency and relevance requirements for past performance and specific metrics for LOE and Outcome-Based QPs.

Amendment / Modification

This amendment (02) provides updates to Sections C, H, L, and M, as well as Attachment 0002.

Key changes include:

• Section C - Performance Work Statement: Corrected misnumbering, added T&M Contract Type, and updated the Army Training Certification Tracking System (ATCTS) name due to system sunset.
• Section H - Special Contract Instructions: Clarified the definition of "Emerging Large Business" and added UEI Code requirements for "One Contract per Entity."
• Section L - Instructions to Offerors: Provided more clarity on general instructions, the Cover Letter (Attachment 0001) requirements (including a signed SF33), screening questions (emphasizing single entity proposals per UEI Code), QP Submission, and the Small Business Subcontracting Plan (requiring submission from both Large and Emerging Large Businesses).
• Section M - Evaluation Factors: Removed points for non-JV proposers and provided clarity on Technical Capabilities.
• Attachment 0002 - Scorecards: Updated vendor scorecards to align with the "Schedule" evaluation criteria.

Sections C, H, L, M, and Attachment 0002.

Updates to Section L and M may impact proposal preparation, submission, and evaluation criteria. Offerors should review these changes carefully.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document is a "Qualifying Project Form" (QP Form) provided as an attachment (Attachment 0003 Amendment 01) to the solicitation. It is designed for offerors to document and submit information about their past projects that qualify them for the opportunity. This form helps the government evaluate the offeror's experience and capabilities against specific domains and technical requirements outlined in the solicitation.

• Qualifying Project Identification: Assign a number (001, 002, or 003) to each QP submitted.
• Contracting Party POC: Government or private official's contact information.
• Contract/Agreement Details: Specific contract number and a copy of the contract/agreement are required.
• Proposed Domain(s): Offerors must select applicable domains (e.g., ENGINEERING, LOGISTIC & OPERATIONAL DOMAIN, MANAGEMENT & ADVISORY DOMAIN, RDT&E DOMAIN, EMERGING IT DOMAIN, FOUNDATIONAL IT DOMAIN).
• Period of Performance: Details on completed performance duration and recency.
• Technical Capability Alignment: Mapping of the QP to Technical Capabilities in Section 3.0 of the PWS.
• Description of Work: A brief description mapping work to the PWS, SOW, or SOO.
• NAICS Code: Identification and justification of relevant NAICS codes.
• CPARS/PPQ: Indication of whether the QP has a CPARS or PPQ.
• Dollar Value: The value of the qualifying project.
• QP Type: Selection between LOE-Based QP or Outcome-Based QP.
• Performance Metrics (for evaluation):
  • Vacancy Rate: Calculation based on vacant positions.
  • Time to Fill Rate: Average time to fill job vacancies.
  • Schedule: Timeliness of service outcome delivery.
  • Completeness: Fulfillment of project requirements and customer-recognized efficiencies.
  • Passthrough Rate: Calculation of subcontractor labor dollars.
• Certification: Offeror and Contracting Official certifications of accuracy.

Offerors must complete this form accurately and thoroughly to demonstrate their relevant experience. The information provided in this QP Form, particularly regarding past performance metrics, domain alignment, and technical capabilities, will be used by the government for evaluation purposes. Failure to provide complete and accurate information may impact the evaluation of the offeror's proposal. Bidders should pay close attention to the specific instructions for each field, especially those related to the type of QP (LOE-Based vs. Outcome-Based) and the required documentation (e.g., copy of contract, PWS, SOW).

Note: A "Sheet: OLD QP Form" is also included, which appears to be a previous version of this form.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) form, provided as Attachment 0004, Amendment 01. Its purpose is to collect factual and accurate information from a Contracting (Government/Private) Official regarding a contractor's past performance (within the last four years) on a specific contract. This information will be used in the awarding of a federal contract.

The form is divided into three parts:

• Part I: Contract Identification: To be completed by the Offeror, this section requires details about the contract, contractor, program, NAICS code, and contract dates.
• Part II: Identification of Offerors Representative: To be completed by the Offeror, this section collects contact information for the offeror's representative.
• Part III: Evaluation: To be completed by the Contracting Official, this section requires ratings and comments on the contractor's performance in the following areas:
  • Quality
  • Schedule
  • Cost Control
  • Management
  • Small Business Subcontracting

Adjectival ratings (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory) are defined within the document.

Bidders should be aware that this form will be used to evaluate their past performance. They need to ensure the Offeror sections (Part I and II) are completed accurately. The ratings and comments provided by the Contracting Official in Part III will directly influence the evaluation of their proposal. The Government may contact the Contracting Official to verify information provided.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document is a Cover Letter Form associated with Attachment 0001 Amendment 01. It requires bidders to provide company information and indicate their proposed domains and business sizes. It also includes sections for Joint Venture/Mentor Protégé information, Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) declarations, and CUI Supporting Documentation.

• Prime Company Name
• Point of Contact for Proposal
• Company CAGE Code and UEI
• Proposed Domains (Engineering, Logistics and Operational Services; Management and Advisory Services; Research, Development, Test & Evaluation Services; Emerging IT Services; Foundational IT Services) with corresponding business size selections (Large Business, Emerging Large Business, Small Business, Commercial-Sector Vendor).
• Affiliate/Subsidiary Information (CAGE Code, UEI).
• Joint Venture/Mentor Protégé Information, including JV status, JV company details, Mentor Protégé status, and associated names and codes.
• Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) declaration.
• CUI Supporting Documentation details.

Bidders must complete this form to provide essential company and proposal-specific details. It is crucial for indicating which service domains the bidder intends to propose for and their corresponding business size classifications. The information regarding JV/Mentor Protégé status and OCI is also critical for compliance and proposal evaluation. This form is integral to the proposal submission process.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Amd 01 Scorecard - Large Business", serves as an amendment to a previous attachment and provides a scorecard for evaluating large business offerors. It outlines the screening questions and detailed scoring criteria for various capabilities and qualifications.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• Requires confirmation that all submission requirements are met (referencing RFP Section L.1).
• Inquires about the offeror's active facility clearance (SECRET).
• Asks for verification of ISO 9001:2015 or ISO 9001:2013 certification.
• Requires documentation for CMMC Final Level 2 (self) certification.
• Seeks verification of a Government Determined Acceptable Accounting System.
• Seeks verification of a Government Determined Acceptable Purchasing System.
• Checks if the CAGE Code meets the threshold for performance elements rated MARGINAL or below in CPARS.
• Crucially, if any screening question is answered 'NO', the proposal will not be evaluated further.

Section 02 - Scorecard: Details point allocations for:

• Government Approved Systems and Certifications: Property Management System, Facility Clearance, CMMC Level 2, ISO/IEC 27001:2022.
• Past Performance: Recency, Relevance, NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality, Dollar Value, Passthrough Rate.
• LOE QPs ONLY: Vacancy Rate, Time to Fill Rate.
• OUTCOME BASED QPs ONLY: Schedule, Completeness.

This scorecard is critical for large business offerors. It clearly defines mandatory pre-qualification criteria (screening questions) and the detailed scoring methodology for technical capabilities and past performance. Understanding these criteria and the associated point values is essential for preparing a compliant and competitive proposal. Failure to meet the initial screening questions will disqualify an offeror from further evaluation.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Amd 01 Scorecard -Small Business- 07APR2026.xlsx", serves as an amendment to the solicitation, providing a scorecard for evaluating small business offerors. It outlines screening questions and a detailed scoring mechanism for various capabilities and qualifications.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• Requires confirmation that all submission requirements are met (referencing RFP Section L.1).
• Requires confirmation of Small Business status with certification.
• Requires confirmation of an active SECRET facility clearance with supporting documentation.
• Requires confirmation of ISO 9001:2015 or ISO 9001:2013 certification with verification details.
• Requires confirmation of CMMC Final Level 2 (self) certification with SPRS certificate screenshot.
• Requires assessment of CAGE Code performance against CPARS thresholds for the five NAICS codes, with specific exclusion criteria for Small Businesses if five or more element ratings are MARGINAL or below.
• Crucially, if any screening question is answered 'NO', the proposal will not be evaluated further.

Section 02 - Scorecard: Details point allocations for:

• Government Approved Systems and Certifications: Acceptable Accounting System, not proposing as a Joint Venture, Active TOP SECRET Facility Clearance, CMMC Level 2 Certification (various levels), ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Certification.
• Past Performance: Evaluated based on Recency (LOE-Based and Outcome-Based), Relevance, NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality (CPARS/PPQ ratings), Dollar Value, and Passthrough Rate.
• LOE QPs ONLY: Vacancy Rate and Time to Fill Rate.
• Outcome Based QPs ONLY: Schedule and Completeness.

This scorecard is critical for small business offerors. It defines mandatory screening criteria that must be met to proceed with evaluation. It also details the specific point allocations and criteria for technical capabilities, past performance, and other factors, allowing bidders to self-score and understand how their proposals will be evaluated. Failure to meet the initial screening questions will result in non-evaluation.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Amd 01 Scorecard -Commercial-Sector Vendor", is an amendment to a scorecard used for evaluating commercial-sector vendors. It outlines the screening questions and the detailed scoring criteria for various aspects of a proposal, including Government Approved Systems and Certifications, Past Performance, and specific Quality Plan (QP) metrics.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• All submission requirements met (refer to RFP Section L.1).
• Offeror is a Commercial-Sector Vendor (as defined in RFP Section H.1).
• Company is CMMC Final Level 2 (self) certified or higher, with documentation (SPRS certificate screenshot).
• Crucially, answering 'NO' to any of these questions will disqualify the proposal from further evaluation.

Section 02 - Scorecard: This section details the point allocation for various qualifications:

• Government Approved Systems and Certifications: Points awarded for Facility Clearance (SECRET/TOP SECRET) and CMMC Level 2 (C3PAO) or ISO 9001/27001 certifications.
• Past Performance: Points awarded based on Recency, Relevance, NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality (CPARS/PPQ ratings), Dollar Value, and Passthrough Rate for up to three Quality Plans (QPs).
• LOE QPs ONLY: Points awarded for Vacancy Rate and Time to Fill Rate.
• OUTCOME BASED QPs ONLY: Points awarded for Schedule and Completeness (based on AQL and documented efficiencies).

This scorecard is critical for bidders to understand how their proposal will be evaluated. It clearly defines the criteria and maximum points for each category, allowing vendors to self-score and strategize their submissions to maximize their competitive advantage. Bidders must ensure they meet the initial screening requirements and understand the detailed point system for certifications, past performance, and specific quality plan metrics to tailor their proposals effectively.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document is an amendment to the Qualifying Project (QP) Form, providing a structured template for offerors to submit information about their past projects. This information is used by the government to evaluate the offeror's qualifications and capabilities against specific domains and technical requirements outlined in the solicitation.

• Qualifying Project Number: Identifies the specific project being submitted.
• Contracting Party Point of Contact: Government or private official details.
• Specific Contract/Agreement Number: Details of the contract under which the QP was performed.
• Proposed Domain(s): Selection of relevant domains (Engineering, Management, RDT&E, IT) for evaluation.
• Period of Performance: Details of the project's duration.
• Technical Capabilities Mapping: Alignment of the QP to PWS Section 3.0 Technical Capabilities.
• Description of Work: A summary demonstrating relevance to the PWS/SOW.
• NAICS Code: Identification and justification of the relevant NAICS code.
• CPARS/PPQ: Indication of past performance evaluations.
• Dollar Value: The value of the QP.
• LOE-Based vs. Outcome-Based QP: Classification of the project type.
• Performance Metrics: Fields for Vacancy Rate, Time to Fill Rate, Schedule, Completeness, and Passthrough Rate, with specific calculation instructions and references to RFP sections.
• Certification: Offeror and Contracting Official certifications of accuracy.

Offerors must accurately complete this form for each Qualifying Project they wish to submit. The details provided, particularly regarding past performance metrics, domain alignment, and technical capabilities, will be critical for the government's evaluation of the offeror's qualifications. Failure to provide complete and accurate information may impact the evaluation outcome. This form is an amendment (Amd 01) to Attachment 0003.

Amendment / Modification

This document, Amendment 01, dated April 7, 2026, provides updated portal instructions for submitting MAPS Proposals.

This amendment details the registration and proposal submission process via a specific portal.

• Registration: Offerors must register only one person for portal access, with an alternate allowed only in emergencies. Registration is required via a provided link: https://chess.army.mil/proposal/default/index. If already registered on the CHESS website, no new registration is needed.
• Account Creation: New accounts require First Name, Last Name, Email Address, and a password meeting specific complexity requirements (15 characters, 2 uppercase, 2 lowercase, 2 numbers, 2 special characters, no spaces). Company address and phone number are also required. For 'Service or Agency,' select 'Not Applicable'.
• Proposal Submission: After profile creation, access the submission page using the same link. Confirm contact information, then enter Company Name, CAGE Code, UEI, Business Size, Alternate Submitter Email (if applicable), and proposed Domains. Upload all documents as a full package; only the last submitted package will be evaluated. Documents must adhere to naming conventions specified in RFP Section L.1 Paragraph 2.
• CUI Supporting Documentation: CUI documents must be annotated within the proposal, indicating the CUI status, page count, and submission via DoD Safe. DoD Safe is only for CUI documentation, not the proposal itself. Instructions for submitting via DoD Safe include logging in, selecting Drop Off, entering Molly Beale (molly.e.beale.civ@army.mil) as the recipient, uploading CUI documents, and sending the drop-off notification.
• Questions: Questions related to the acquisition can be submitted via a Live Q&A button on the submission page. Questions pertaining to the submission portal and site access should be directed to the help desk at armychess@army.mil.

Amendment / Modification

This amendment (Amendment 01) details changes to Sections L and M, and Attachments 0001 and 0002.

Key changes include:

• Section L - Instructions to Offerors:
  • Updated paragraph 9 regarding CPARS date to three (3) years prior to 01 May 2026.
  • Added paragraph 12 concerning CUI-related supported documentation submissions.
  • Updated L.2.3.2 QP Submission to reflect that a TGL may be submitted in addition to PWS, SOW, or SOO, and updated the recency date.
• Section M - Evaluation Factors:
  • Revised M.5.1 Recency to reflect the CPARS date of three (3) years prior to 01 May 2026.
  • Updated M.5.6 Passthrough Rate with additional information on QPs performed as prime contractor versus subcontractor.
• Attachment 0001 - Cover Letter:
  • Added a CUI Section to specify the number of supporting documents that are CUI and will be submitted via DoD Safe.
• Attachment 0002 - Scorecards:
  • Updated Small Business, Emerging Large Business, Large Business, and Commercial Sector Vendor Scorecards to reflect the CPARS date of three (3) years prior to 01 May 2026.

Sections L, M, and Attachments 0001 and 0002.

Offerors should review the updated instructions and evaluation factors, particularly regarding CPARS dates, CUI documentation, and QP submissions. The changes to the scorecards also impact how vendor performance will be evaluated.

Solicitation

This document is a solicitation (W15P7T26RA0060001) issued by the Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG) for the Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (MA IDIQ) contract, referred to as MAPS. The objective is to provide Army customers, Portfolio Acquisition Executives (PAE), CPEs, Department of War (DoW) agencies, and other federal agencies with uncommon knowledge-based professional services and support for Army enterprise infrastructure and infostructure goals with information technology (IT) services worldwide.

The contract will be an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) type contract in accordance with FAR 16.504. The contractor shall perform individual Task Orders (TO) in accordance with the Performance Work Statement (PWS) in Section C. The maximum total contract value (ceiling), including the Optional Ordering Period if exercised, is $50B. Pricing Arrangement: Firm Fixed Price.

The Technical Support Areas include:

• Engineering, Logistics and Operational Services
• Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) Services
• Management and Advisory Services
• Emerging IT Services
• Foundational IT Services

Services NOT within scope include: Inherently Governmental Functions, Personal Services, Architect & Engineering (A&E) Services, and Construction Services.

• Contract Type: Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (MA IDIQ).

• Period of Performance: Maximum ordering period may be 10 years, consisting of a five (5) year Base Ordering Period and one (1) five (5) year Optional Ordering Period.

• Contract types for Task Orders (TOs) may include Fixed Price (FP), Time-and-Materials (T&M), and Cost Reimbursement (CR) with a hybrid of all types.

• Proposal submission deadline: No later than (NLT) 1700 Eastern Time on 01 May 2026.

• Questions due: NLT 17 April 2026, 1700 Eastern.

• Proposals must be submitted through the Digital Market Portal.

• Evaluation will be based on a Pass/Fail basis for Screening Questions and then a Verified Score for Past Performance, followed by a price analysis for reasonableness.

• The Government intends to make 70 awards per Domain.

• The base contract will be utilized with full and open competition with reserved awards for small businesses.

• Specific ordering procedures and restrictions for Small Businesses are detailed in Section H.

• The solicitation includes numerous FAR and DFARS clauses incorporated by reference.

• Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Level 2 or higher is required for contractor information systems processing, storing, or transmitting FCI or CUI.

• Attachments include Cover Letter, Scorecard, Qualifying Projects, and Past Performance Questionnaire.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Amd 01 Scorecard -Emerging Large Business- 07APR2026.xlsx", serves as a scorecard and screening tool for Emerging Large Businesses responding to the solicitation. It outlines specific requirements and evaluation criteria.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• Bidders must confirm all submission requirements are met (referencing RFP Section L.1).
• Confirmation of status as an Emerging Large Business (as defined in RFP Section H.1).
• Requirement for an active SECRET facility clearance, with supporting documentation.
• Requirement for ISO 9001:2015 or ISO 9001:2013 certification, with verification details.
• Requirement for CMMC Final Level 2 (self) certification, with SPRS certificate documentation.
• Verification that the CAGE Code meets thresholds for CPARS performance ratings (MARGINAL or below) for the specified NAICS codes. Offers with 10% or more MARGINAL ratings will be excluded.
• Crucially, answering 'NO' to any screening question will result in the proposal not being evaluated further.

Section 02 - Scorecard: This section details the point allocation for various capabilities and qualifications, including:

• Government Approved Systems and Certifications: Points awarded for acceptable Property Management, Purchasing, and Accounting Systems, as well as TOP SECRET Facility Clearance and CMMC Level 2 (C3PAO) certifications, and ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Certification.
• Past Performance: Points are awarded based on Recency (LOE-Based or Outcome-Based QPs), Relevance (percentage of technical capabilities met), NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality (based on CPARS ratings), and Dollar Value of QPs. Specific point breakdowns are provided for each category.
• Passthrough Rate: Points awarded based on the percentage of work performed by subcontractors.
• LOE QPs ONLY: Points for Vacancy Rate and Time to Fill Rate.
• OUTCOME BASED QPs ONLY: Points for Schedule (AQL achievement) and Completeness (documented efficiencies).

This scorecard is critical for bidders to understand the minimum qualifications and the scoring methodology for the "Emerging Large Business" category. Bidders must carefully review and ensure they meet all screening requirements to be considered for evaluation. The detailed point allocations highlight areas where strong performance can significantly impact the overall evaluation score.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document is a Cover Letter Form (Attachment 0001) required for proposals submitted under the "Marketplace for the Acquisition of Professional Services." It serves to collect essential information about the proposing company, its proposed domains, business size, and any joint venture or mentor-protégé relationships.

• Prime Company Information: Name, Point of Contact, CAGE Code, UEI.
• Proposed Domains: Checkboxes to indicate which of the following domains the company is proposing to and their business size within each domain (Large Business, Emerging Large Business, Small Business, Commercial-Sector Vendor):
  • Engineering, Logistics and Operational Services Domain
  • Management and Advisory Services Domain
  • Research, Development, Test & Evaluation Services Domain
  • Emerging IT Services Domain
  • Foundational IT Services Domain
• Affiliate/Subsidiary Information: CAGE Code and UEI (if applicable).
• Joint Venture/Mentor Protégé Information: Details on JV proposals (agreement submission required), JV considerations (Populated/Unpopulated), JV Company Name, CAGE Code, UEI, and Mentor Protégé status (including Mentor/Protégé names, CAGE Codes, and UEIs).
• Systems and Certifications: Information on systems/certifications used by JV or MP members.
• Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI): Disclosure of any known or potential OCI.
• Cost Submission: Placeholder for Volume V - Cost Submission.
• Post Award Conference: Placeholder for Offerors FFP for Post Award Conference.

This form is critical for bidders to accurately represent their company's structure, capabilities, and eligibility for specific domains. Proper completion is necessary for proposal acceptance and evaluation, particularly concerning business size standards and any JV or mentor-protégé arrangements. It also requires disclosure of potential OCI.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Scorecard - Large Business," is a scoring worksheet designed for large business offerors. It outlines the criteria and point allocations for evaluating proposals, focusing on both screening questions and detailed scoring categories.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• Requires offerors to confirm adherence to submission requirements (referencing RFP Section L.1).
• Asks for verification of an active SECRET facility clearance.
• Requires proof of ISO 9001:2015 or ISO 9001:2013 certification.
• Requires documentation of CMMC Final Level 2 (self) certification or higher, including an SPRS certificate screenshot.
• Requires verification of a Government Determined Acceptable Accounting System from DCMA or CFA.
• Requires verification of a Government Determined Acceptable Purchasing System from DCMA or CFA.
• Asks if the CAGE Code meets the threshold for performance elements rated MARGINAL or below in CPARS.
• Crucially, failure to answer "YES" to any screening question will result in the proposal not being evaluated further.

Section 02 - Scorecard: Details point allocations for various capabilities and qualifications, including:

• Government Approved Systems and Certifications: Property Management System, Facility Clearance, CMMC Level 2, ISO/IEC 27001:2022.
• Past Performance: Recency, Relevance, NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality, Dollar Value, and Passthrough Rate for up to three Past Performance Quoters (QPs).
• LOE QPs ONLY: Vacancy Rate and Time to Fill Rate.
• Outcome-Based QPs ONLY: Schedule and Completeness.

This scorecard is essential for bidders to understand the specific requirements and evaluation criteria for large businesses. It details the mandatory certifications, system approvals, and past performance metrics that will be assessed and scored. Offerors must carefully review these requirements to ensure their proposals meet the minimum qualifications and to maximize their scores in each category. The document also highlights the critical nature of the screening questions, as a "NO" to any of them disqualifies the offeror.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Scorecard -Emerging Large Business- 01APR2026.xlsx", serves as a self-scoring scorecard for Emerging Large Businesses responding to the solicitation. It outlines the criteria and point allocations for various aspects of the proposal, including systems, certifications, past performance, and other qualifications.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• Confirms submission requirements are met (referencing RFP Section L.1).
• Verifies the offeror meets the definition of an Emerging Large Business (Section H.1).
• Requires proof of an active SECRET facility clearance.
• Requires verification of ISO 9001:2015 or ISO 9001:2013 certification.
• Requires documentation of CMMC Final Level 2 (self) certification.
• Assesses CPARS performance against specific thresholds for MARGINAL ratings.
• Crucially, answering 'NO' to any screening question disqualifies the proposal from further evaluation.

Section 02 - Scorecard: This section details the point system for evaluation, broken down into:

• Government Approved Systems and Certifications: Points awarded for acceptable Property Management, Purchasing, and Accounting Systems, as well as TOP SECRET Facility Clearance and CMMC/ISO certifications.
• Past Performance: Points awarded based on Recency, Relevance, NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality (CPARS ratings), Dollar Value, Passthrough Rate, Vacancy Rate, Time to Fill Rate, Schedule adherence, and Completeness.
• Specific point values are assigned for different levels of achievement within each category.

This scorecard is critical for bidders to understand the evaluation criteria and how their proposal will be scored. Bidders must carefully review each section to ensure they meet all screening requirements and to self-assess their potential score based on their company's qualifications and past performance. It highlights the importance of specific certifications (e.g., CMMC, ISO), clearance levels, and detailed past performance data.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Scorecard - Commercial-Sector Vendor," serves as a self-scoring tool for commercial-sector vendors responding to the solicitation. It outlines the criteria and point system used for evaluating specific aspects of a vendor's proposal, particularly related to certifications and past performance.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• Vendors must confirm they have met all submission requirements (referencing RFP Section L.1).
• Vendors must confirm they are a Commercial-Sector Vendor as defined in RFP Section H.1.
• Vendors must confirm they are CMMC Final Level 2 (self) certified and provide SPRS certificate screenshot.
• Answering 'NO' to any of these questions will result in the proposal not being evaluated further.

Section 02 - Scorecard: This section details the point allocation for various evaluation categories:

• Government Approved Systems and Certifications: Points are awarded for Facility Clearance (SECRET/TOP SECRET), CMMC Level 2 (C3PAO) certifications (Conditional/Final), and ISO 9001:2015/2013 or ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certifications.
• Past Performance: Evaluated based on Recency, Relevance, NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality (CPARS/PPQ ratings), and Dollar Value of up to three (3) Qualified Projects (QPs).
• LOE QPs ONLY: Includes Vacancy Rate and Time to Fill Rate criteria.
• Outcome Based QPs ONLY: Includes Schedule and Completeness criteria.

Total Credits Available: 130,000

This scorecard is critical for bidders to understand how their proposal will be evaluated and scored. It highlights specific certifications (CMMC, ISO) and past performance metrics (recency, relevance, dollar value, quality, passthrough rate, vacancy rate, time to fill, schedule, completeness) that will earn points. Bidders should use this document to self-assess their strengths and weaknesses against the evaluation criteria and ensure they meet the initial screening requirements to be considered for further evaluation.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0002 Scorecard -Small Business- 01APR2026.xlsx", is a scorecard designed to help bidders assess their eligibility and potential scoring for the opportunity, particularly focusing on small business considerations. It is divided into two sections: Screening Questions and the Scorecard itself.

Section 01 - Screening Questions:

• Requires bidders to confirm they have met all submission requirements (referencing RFP Section L.1).
• Asks if the offeror is a Small Business and requires certification.
• Inquires about having an active SECRET facility clearance and requires supporting documentation.
• Asks about ISO 9001:2015 or ISO 9001:2013 certification and requires verification.
• Asks about CMMC Final Level 2 (self) certification and requires documentation (SPRS certificate).
• Requires checking if the CAGE Code meets performance thresholds in CPARS for MARGINAL or below ratings. Small Businesses are excluded if five or more elements are MARGINAL or below.
• Crucially, answering 'NO' to any screening question disqualifies the proposal from further evaluation.

Section 02 - Scorecard: This section details how points are awarded for various capabilities and qualifications, including:

• Government Approved Systems and Certifications: Points for acceptable accounting systems, not proposing as a Joint Venture, TOP SECRET Facility Clearance, CMMC Level 2 Certification, and ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Certification.
• Past Performance: Points awarded based on Recency, Relevance, NAICS Alignment, Performance Quality (CPARS ratings), Dollar Value, and Passthrough Rate for up to three Qualified Projects (QPs).
• LOE QPs ONLY: Points for Vacancy Rate and Time to Fill Rate.
• Outcome Based QPs ONLY: Points for Schedule and Completeness.

This scorecard is critical for bidders to understand the minimum eligibility requirements and the detailed scoring methodology for the technical and past performance aspects of their proposals. Bidders must carefully review the screening questions to ensure they meet the basic qualifications. The scorecard provides a clear breakdown of how points are allocated, allowing bidders to self-assess their strengths and weaknesses against the evaluation criteria and maximize their potential score.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, "Attachment 0003 Qualifying Project Form," is an Excel spreadsheet containing a form that offerors must complete to detail "Qualifying Projects" (QPs). These QPs are used by the government to evaluate the offeror's experience and capabilities relevant to the proposed domains of the opportunity. The form requires specific information about past contracts or agreements that demonstrate the offeror's qualifications.

• Contracting Party Point of Contact: Information for the government or private official associated with the QP.
• Specific Contract/Agreement Number: Requires a copy of the contract/agreement.
• Proposed Domain(s): Offerors must select applicable domains (Engineering, Logistic & Operational; Management & Advisory; RDT&E; Emerging IT; Foundational IT).
• Period of Performance: Criteria for the age and duration of the QP.
• Technical Capabilities Alignment: Mapping the QP to technical capabilities in Section 3.0 of the PWS.
• Description of Work: Detailing how the QP work maps to the PWS/SOW.
• NAICS Code: Identification and explanation of relevant NAICS codes.
• CPARS or PPQ: Indication if the QP has a CPARS or PPQ.
• Dollar Value: The value of the QP.
• QP Type: Whether the QP is a Level of Effort (LOE) or Outcome-Based QP.
• Performance Metrics: Specific calculations for Vacancy Rate, Time to Fill Rate, Schedule adherence, Completeness, and Passthrough Rate, with references to specific RFP sections (M.5.7.1, M.5.7.2, M.5.7.3, M.5.7.4, M.5.6).
• Certification: Offeror and Contracting Official certifications.
• Legal Entity Confirmation: Attestation that the QP was performed by the same legal entity as the offeror.

Offerors must use this form to document and submit evidence of their relevant past performance and experience. The information provided in this form will be evaluated against specific criteria outlined in the RFP, impacting the offeror's technical evaluation. Failure to accurately complete and submit this form with required supporting documentation may affect proposal evaluation.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) form. It is used to collect factual and accurate information from a Contracting (Government/Private) Official regarding a contractor's past performance (within the last four years) and current performance for a specific contract. This information will be used in the awarding of a federal contract.

• Adjectival Ratings: The form defines five rating levels: Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory, with specific criteria for each.
• Part I: Contract Identification: To be completed by the Offeror, this section requires details about the contract, including Contract Number, Contractor Name, CAGE Code, Program Identification, NAICS Code, Contract Award Date, Completion Date, and Nature of the Contractual Effort.
• Part II: Identification of Offerors Representative: To be completed by the Offeror, this section collects contact information for the Offeror's representative.
• Part III: Evaluation: To be completed by the Contracting Official, this section requires ratings and comments on the contractor's performance in the following areas:
  • Quality
  • Schedule
  • Cost Control
  • Management
  • Small Business Subcontracting
• Contracting Official Identification: Final section for the Contracting Official's identification and certification.

Bidders should be aware that this form will be used to evaluate their past performance. They need to ensure that the Offeror's Representative information is accurate and that the Contracting Official who completes the form is prepared to provide detailed and factual feedback. The ratings and comments provided in this PPQ will directly influence the evaluation of proposals for this opportunity.

Form / Attachment / Pricing Sheet

This document, Appendix A, provides portal instructions for the submission of MAPS Proposals. It details the registration process for offerors and the steps required to submit a complete proposal package.

• Registration: Offerors must register one primary person and may register one alternate for emergency purposes. Registration is done via a provided link: https://chess.army.mil/proposal/default/index.
• Proposal Submission: After profile creation, offerors must confirm contact information, enter company details (Name, CAGE Code, UEI, Business Size, Alternate Submitter Email, Domains), and upload all required documents.
• Document Upload: Offerors must submit a full package, and only the last submitted package will be evaluated. Documents must adhere to naming conventions specified in RFP Section L.1 Paragraph 2.

This document is critical for bidders as it outlines the mandatory process for registering on the submission portal and submitting their proposals. Failure to follow these instructions may result in a proposal not being accepted as complete.

Solicitation / RFP / RFQ

This solicitation is for a Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (MA IDIQ) contract, referred to as MAPS (Multiple Award Professional Services), to provide Army customers, Portfolio Acquisition Executives (PAE), CPEs, DoW agencies, and other federal agencies with uncommon knowledge-based professional services and support for Army enterprise infrastructure and infostructure goals with information technology (IT) services worldwide (inside and outside the contiguous United States, including hostile areas). The objective is to enhance flexibility, reduce redundancy, and improve cost-efficiency in acquiring these services.

The contract will cover the following technical support areas:

• Engineering, Logistics and Operational Services
• Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) Services
• Management and Advisory Services
• Emerging IT Services
• Foundational IT Services

Services explicitly NOT within scope include: Inherently Governmental Functions, Personal Services, Architect & Engineering (A&E) Services, and Construction Services.

• Contract Type: Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (MA IDIQ)

• Contract Value: Maximum total contract value (ceiling) is $50 Billion, including the optional ordering period.

• Period of Performance: Base Period: 5 Years; Optional Ordering Period: 5 Years (totaling up to 10 years). Task Orders will have their own Period of Performance.

• Pricing Arrangement: Firm Fixed Price (FFP) for the base contract. Task Orders may be Fixed Price (FP), Time-and-Materials (T&M), or Cost Reimbursement (CR), or a hybrid.

• Proposal Submission Deadline: May 1, 2026, 5:00 PM local time.

• Questions Submission Deadline: April 17, 2026, 5:00 PM Eastern Time.

• Proposals must be submitted via the Digital Market Portal.

• Evaluation will be based on a Pass/Fail basis for Screening Questions, followed by a Verification Review and Downward Adjustments. The highest technically rated proposal offering a fair and reasonable price will be selected.

• Tie-breaker criteria are outlined for Large, Emerging Large, Small Businesses, and Commercial-Sector Vendors.

• The base contract will be utilized with full and open competition with reserved awards for small businesses.

• Orders may be restricted to Small Businesses based on market research.

• Specific requirements for Joint Ventures, Small Businesses, and Commercial-Sector Vendors are detailed.

• The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is 541519.

• Offerors must register on the Digital Market Portal.

• Specific attachments are required for proposal submission, including Cover Letter, Scorecard, Qualifying Projects, and Past Performance Questionnaire.

• Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Level 2 (C3PAO) or higher is required for contractor information systems processing, storing, or transmitting Federal Contract Information (FCI) or Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI).