UNITED STATES ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES (ARI) BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT FOR BASIC, APPLIED, AND ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

> Download RTF file: Questions and Answers Developmental Experiences Assessment for Officer Strategic Thinking Development.rtf

---

BAA Enlisted Career Progression Sources Sought Notice_Final

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2-.a.ii: Holistic Personnel Assessment
Influences on Enlisted Soldier Career Progression
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.a.ii: Holistic Personnel Assessment. The United States Army Research Institute for the
Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under
the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the
competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not related to the
development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this
BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full
compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984,"
and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest
will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related
to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds
availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or
other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
julia.h.whitaker@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 13 September 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V,
Deadlines, for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types
(e.g., contract, grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the
intention of the Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Julia Whitaker, (703) 383-4791,
julia.h.whitaker.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
2

---

development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Influences on Enlisted Soldier Career Progression
Empirical research on the careers of enlisted Army personnel is important and impacts talent management
policy. This project is a 4-year effort to support ARI’s longitudinal cohort research on enlisted Soldier
careers. The overall objective is to examine how individual, organizational, and other factors support or
constrain career continuance and progression.
Previous research has modeled enlisted careers, including continuance (e.g., Young et al., 2010), attrition
(Strickland, 2005) and other related outcomes, such as performance and attitudes (e.g., Knapp, Owens &
Allen, 2012; Nesbit, Knapp, & Kirkendall, 2023). Additional research is needed to evaluate relationships
among variables and test and improve models. Further, this project is designed to advance research by
collecting multiple waves of data to better understand how and when key variables change over
time.
This longitudinal cohort effort was initiated in 2018 (Carre et al., 2023) and will track the careers of the
FY17-27 enlisted accessions cohorts. Annually, survey data is collected from Soldiers to track their
attitudes, experiences, and outcomes over time from initial entry to mid-career. The survey data is
integrated with additional Army data sources to develop a database for analyzing enlisted career
influences and outcomes.
Key project tasks include:
1) Data requirements include collecting annual survey data and leveraging and Army administrative
data and research data sources.
2) Construction of a longitudinal database to track multiple years and waves of recent and future
survey data for up to ten Soldier accessions cohorts. Data from administrative and archival
sources will be integrated with survey data.
3) Measurement and analysis of project data requires advanced statistical methods and modeling
approaches to accommodate challenges such as irregularly timed data and missing data.
4) Conceptualize and provide data-driven recommendations to inform effective policies for
recruiting, managing, and retaining talent.
The award period of performance is approximately 48 months (12 months Base, 12 months Option
1, 12 months Option 2, 12 months Option 3). The total budget will not exceed $1,350,000 and the
budget for each PoP will not exceed the following: $325,000 in Base period, $325,000 in Option 1,
$350,000 in Option 2, and $350,000 in Option 3.
3

---

The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
4

---

RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
julia.h.whitaker.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Influences on Enlisted Soldier Career Progression” in the e-mail subject
line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
5

---

If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Influences on
Enlisted Soldier Career Progression” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 13
September 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and
Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will
be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 14 August 2023, and
ending 13 September 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of
White Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact
reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation
timeline is extended beyond 13 September 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
6

---

VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Julia Whitaker, (703) 383-4791,
julia.h.whitaker.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Carre, J., Striler, J., Owens, K., D’Mello, S., Yu, M., Reeder, M., Posnock, S., Ellis, B., &
Walton., W. (2023). Impact of Army policies on personnel career progression: Base year report.
(ARI Research Note 2023-05). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the
Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Horgen, K.E., Nye, C.D., White, L.A., LaPort, K.A., Hoffman, R.R., Drasgow, F.,
Chernyshenko, O., Stark, S., & Conway, J.S. (2013). Validation of the Noncommissioned
Officer Special Assignment Battery. (ARI Technical Report 1328). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S.
Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Knapp, D.J., Owens, K.S., & Allen, M.T. (2016). Validating Future Force performance measures
(Army Class): Concluding analyses. (ARI Technical Report 1355). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S.
Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Strickland, W.J. (2005). A longitudinal examination of first term attrition and reenlistment
among FY1999 enlisted accessions (Technical Report 1172). Arlington, VA: U.S. Army
Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Young, M.C., Kubisiak, U.C., Legree, P.J., Tremble, T.R. (2010). Understanding and managing
the career continuance of enlisted Soldiers. (ARI Technical Report 1280). Arlington, VA: U.S.
Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
7

---

BAA Officer Career Progression Sources Sought Notice_Final

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2-.a.ii: Holistic Personnel Assessment
“Influences on Officer Career Progression”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.a.ii: Holistic Personnel Assessment. The United States Army Research Institute for the
Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under
the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the
competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not related to the
development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this
BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full
compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984,"
and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest
will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related
to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds
availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or
other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
julia.h.whitaker@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 13 September 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V,
Deadlines, for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types
(e.g., contract, grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the
intention of the Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Julia Whitaker, (703) 383-4791,
julia.h.whitaker.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
2

---

Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Influences on Officer Career Progression
Empirical research on Army officer careers is important and impacts personnel development and retention
policy. This project is a 4-year effort to support ARI’s longitudinal cohort research on officer careers. The
overall objective is to examine how individual, organizational, and other factors support or constrain
career continuance and progression.
Previous research has modeled officer careers, including continuance (e.g., Schneider et al., 2011) and
other related outcomes, such as performance and attitudes (e.g, Zaccaro et al., 2012). Additional research
is needed to evaluate relationships among variables and test and improve models. Further, this project is
designed to advance research by collecting multiple waves of data to better understand how and when
key variables change over time.
This longitudinal cohort effort was initiated in 2018 (Carre et al., 2023) and will track the careers of the
FY17-27 officer cohorts. Annually, survey data is collected from officers to track their attitudes,
experiences, and outcomes over time from initial entry to mid-career. The survey data is integrated with
additional Army data sources to develop a database for analyzing officer career influences and outcomes.
Key project considerations include:
1) Data requirements include collecting annual survey data and leveraging and Army administrative
data and research data sources.
2) Construction of a longitudinal database to track multiple years and waves of recent and future
survey data for up to ten officer cohorts. Data from administrative and archival sources will be
integrated with survey data.
3) Measurement and analysis of project data will require advanced statistical methods and modeling
approaches to accommodate challenges such as irregularly timed data and missing data.
4) Conceptualize and provide data-driven recommendations to inform effective policies for
recruiting, managing, and retaining talent.
The award period of performance is approximately 48 months (12 months Base, 12 months Option
1, 12 months Option 2, 12 months Option 3). The total budget will not exceed $1,350,000 and the
budget for each PoP will not exceed the following: $325,000 in Base period, $325,000 in Option 1,
$350,000 in Option 2, and $350,000 in Option 3.
3

---

The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
4

---

1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
julia.h.whitaker.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Influences on Officer Career Progression” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
5

---

Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Influences on
Officer Career Progression” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 13
September 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and
Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will
be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 14 August 2023, and
ending 13 September 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of
White Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact
reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation
timeline is extended beyond 13 September 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
6

---

ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Julia Whitater, (703) 383-4791,
julia.h.whitaker.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Carre, J., Striler, J., Owens, K., D’Mello, S., Yu, M., Reeder, M., Posnock, S., Ellis, B., & Walton., W.
(2023). Impact of army policies on personnel career progression: Base year report. (ARI Research Note
2023-05). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Schneider, R.J., Johnson, J.W., Cochran, C.C., Hezlett, S.A., Folder, H.J., & Ervin, K.S. (2011).
Development and evaluation of a career continuance model for company grade officers in the United
States Army. (ARI Research Note 2011-05). Arlington, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the
Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Zaccaro, S.J, Gilrane, V.L., Robbins, J.M., Bartholomew, L.N., Young, M.C., Kilcullen, R. N., Connelly,
S.,& Young, W. (2012). Officer individual differences: predicting long-term continuance and
performance in the U.S. Army. (ARI Technical Report 1324). Arlington, VA: U.S. Army Research
Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
7

---

BAA Sources Sought Notice - Metacognition_Final.pdf

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.b.ii:
MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS
“Enhancing metacognition across the leader development lifecycle”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on FedBizOpps and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.b.ii: MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC
LEADERS. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad
Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the
Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and
that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement.
A Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full
and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition
in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D)
within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each
budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested
by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award
due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and
copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC), james.m.nye7.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide
a response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a
proposal”. as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and
cost associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for
funding. Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be
eligible to submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be
submitted electronically no later than 31 August 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V,
Deadlines, for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g.,
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

contract, grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the
intention of the Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A GOVERNMENT
CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL
INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. James Nye, (202) 579-8174,
james.m.nye7.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - B W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized
and specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
2

---

training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Enhancing metacognition across the leader development lifecycle
The Army Talent Management Framework (ATAF) argues that as leaders progress in their level of
responsibility, they must also progress in their capacity for metacognition. This talent is exemplified as
“Awareness of one’s own thinking and biases. Uses reflective thinking, prior experience, and organizes
information to create knowledge for future application.” The Constructive-Developmental (CD) theory,
as well as other theoretical models, have addressed the challenge of adult development, showing that
higher levels of metacognitive capacity enable one to manage increasingly complex problems and
systems (Kegan, 1982; Jacobs & Lewis, 1992). However, existing competency growth frameworks have
not been well-integrated into the Army’s leader development systems. To address this need, the
proposed research will (a) identify key challenges encountered in officers’ metacognitive development,
and then (b) design, produce, and validate a tool to support officers in diagnosing their level of
metacognitive development, providing tailorable interventions/exercises to enhance individual
metacognitive development.
At its simplest, metacognition can be defined as “thinking about thinking,” but highly adept
metacognition refers to much more than the ability to reflect on one’s thought processes. According to
U.S. Army leadership doctrine and research, metacognition is necessary for the development of effective
strategic thinking because it is a talent underlying the skill of diagnosing assumptions and testing
alternative strategic approaches when navigating complex problems (Department of the Army, 2022;
FM 6-22, Developing Leaders, p. 3-18; Lewis, 1996; Sackett et al., 2016). In short, metacognition is a
critical competency that supports the development and application of a broad array of other cognitive
competencies. Although Army doctrine clearly describes how complexity of leadership responsibility
increases across the career lifecycle (See FM 6-22, pgs. 1-6 & 1-7), the Army would greatly benefit from
an understanding of how to develop a leader’s mind to one that is capable of managing this increasing
responsibility of leadership across the career lifecycle. Such a capability would contribute to ensuring
the Army’s cognitive dominance over peer and near-peer adversaries now and in the future.
The products of this research should be designed to hasten the development of leaders’ metacognitive
competencies to anticipate and meet the evolving demands of leadership they will encounter across the
career lifecycle with respect to a rapidly evolving operational environment, enhancing a critical
competency supporting cognitive dominance in Multidomain Operations (MDO; Department of the
Army, 2022; FM 3-0, Operations) and Large-Scale Combat Operations (LSCO). If the Army does not invest
in metacognitive development, then senior leaders will be faced with challenges that they lack the
cognitive competencies to manage; an experience that developmental psychologists have described as
being “in over our heads” (Kegan, 1994). Theoretical models of adult development propose that
metacognitive competencies may develop over the lifespan (Lewis & Jacobs, 1992). Unfortunately, this
development is not guaranteed; individuals must actively pursue self-development of metacognition
and adapt to challenges that stretch the limits of their current metacognitive capabilities. While some
developmental models have described how metacognitive competencies change across the lifespan,
other models have identified evidence-based interventions to evaluate and enable this transformation.
By integrating these approaches, this research will seek to develop products to enhance leaders’
metacognitive capacities to facilitate their transition from serving as direct-line leaders to leaders of
more complex organizational responsibility (See FM 6-22, pgs. 1-6 & 1-7).
3

---

Ideally, the research project described in the white paper should apply existing developmental models
to address the Army need for tools to enhance leaders’ metacognitive competency development
through the following:
(1) Communicate a concept of the research that integrates theoretical models of adult
development with doctrinal perspectives of levels of leader responsibility across the career
lifecycle (See FM 6-22, pgs. 1-6 & 1-7).
(2) Include plans to conduct interviews with field-grade officers of varying experience (i.e., senior
CPTs to COLs) as well as subject-matter experts of Professional Military Education.
(3) Present a creative vision for a diagnostic and developmental tool, providing a roadmap for
metacognitive development across the leadership career lifecycle.
An ideal white paper would demonstrate the Offeror’s expertise in the following key areas:
(1) The field of Human Development. Team should include a diversity of expertise in theoretical
perspectives and research approaches to Human Development.
a. Principal Investigator should possess a Ph.D. in a field that specializes in the study of
Human Development, such as Developmental Psychology, Educational Psychology,
Clinical Psychology, Cultural Psychology, Moral Psychology, or related field.
Educational requirements can be substituted with sufficient experience conducting
research in the field of Human Development.
b. In addition to the Principal Investigator, an ideal team should include one or more
personnel with a Ph.D. or sufficient expertise in a Human Development field (see 1a)
that is distinct from the Principal Investigator’s expertise.
(2) Relevant experience developing connections and collaborating with Army stakeholders in
research and/or education contexts.
(3) An ideal team would also include relevant research experience in assessment and/or
development of metacognition
ARI is also open to alternative ideas that will creatively accomplish the objectives of this planned
research in accordance with BAA Topic II A.2.b.ii MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS FOR
ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS, and that the Army will consider timely and valuable.
The award will be a 36-month period of performance (Base, 12 months; Option 1, 12 months; Option
2, 12 months) with a total budget not to exceed $800,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
4

---

A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option(s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an
estimate of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in
sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to
the Army mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms must be
compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will be advised
that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any pages
submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software,
personnel or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE),
Government Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or
Government Furnished Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination
that may be required for obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations
or exercises that would demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (e.g.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or
restricted rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume
to have unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White
Paper. Records or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but
must be clearly marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement
5

---

sensitive information before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government
employees or designated support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities
only. Classified, sensitive, or critical information on technologies should not be included in a
White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms
of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
james.m.nye7.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI BAA
W911NF-23-S-0010, Enhancing metacognition across the leader development lifecycle” in the e-mail
subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and
facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other
factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will
be evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
6

---

Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select
any award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite
a full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Enhancing
metacognition across the leader development lifecycle” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern
Daylight Time on 31 August 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted
to SAM.gov and Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received
under this Notice will be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period
beginning 01 August 2023, and ending 31 August 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted
based on the number of White Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated
point of contact reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper
evaluation timeline is extended beyond 31 August 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government
site includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper
or full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified
above, then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and
time specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
7

---

VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. James Nye, (202) 579-8174,
james.m.nye7.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Department of the Army. (2022). Field Manual No. 6-22 Developing Leaders. Author.
Jacobs, T. O., & Lewis, P. (1992). Leadership requirements in stratified systems. In R. L. Phillips & J. G.
Hunt (Eds.), Strategic leadership: A multiorganizational-level perspective (pp 15-25). Quorum
Books.
Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Harvard University
Press.
Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Harvard University Press.
Lewis, P. M., & Jacobs, T. O. (1992). Individual differences in strategic leadership capacity: A
constructive/development view. In R. L. Phillips & J. G. Hunt (Eds.), Strategic leadership: A
multiorganizational perspective (pp. 121-137). Quorum Books.
Lewis, P. M. (1996). Conceptual capacity and officer effectiveness. U.S. Army Research Institute for the
Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Sackett, A. L., Karrasch, A. I., Weyhrauch, W., & Goldman, E. F. (2016). Enhancing the strategic capability
of the army: an investigation of strategic thinking tasks, skills, and development. Army Research
Inst for the Behavioral and Social Sciences Fort Belvoir United States, 1-13.
8

---

BAA Sources Sought Notice C3 2023 final

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.a.ii: HOLISTIC PERSONNEL ASSESSMENT
“Refinement of the Common Cyber Capabilities Assessment”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.a.ii: Holistic Personnel Assessment. The United States Army Research Institute for the
Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under
the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the
competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not related to the
development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this
BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full
compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984,"
and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest
will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related
to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds
availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or
other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
colin.l.omori.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 15 June 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for
additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Colin L. Omori, (571) 460-6803,
colin.l.omori.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - B W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
2

---

development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Refinement of the Common Cyber Capabilities Assessment
A promising strategy to meet the increasing Cyber personnel demands is to select entry-level staff with
little or no formal information technology education, but high potential, and then make investments in
training. One means to identify high-potential candidates for training is to build a measure of the skills
and abilities most typically associated with success across the military Cyber jobs. Cyber training for
enlisted Soldiers is lengthy, challenging, and requires significant investment from the Army. The
necessity of Cyber jobs has led to an increasing demand for quality personnel. By assessing the
underlying skills and abilities associated with success in Cyber work, the Army can identify high-
potential candidates, meet the increasing demand for these personnel, more accurately predict
performance, and reduce attrition during the training process.
To aid in identification of high-potential candidates for Cyber training, the Army Research Institute (ARI)
developed the Common Cyber Capabilities assessment (C^3). The C^3 is a computer-administered, self-
scoring measure that walks participants through a futuristic scenario to assess the skills and abilities that
are most typically associated with success across the multiple cyber jobs. C^3 allows candidates to
demonstrate their potential for success without relying on existing Cyber knowledge. As a result, the C^3
battery resists test obsolescence by assessing job-related cognitive skills rather than Cyber knowledge
itself. In addition, this allows the assessment of individuals who would make good Cyber workers but
may not yet have Cyber-related knowledge.
The specialized, unique skills and abilities used in Cyber jobs require a more finely tuned assessment than
what is provided by measures such as the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB). To
identify the skills and abilities to be measured, Army subject matter experts (SMEs) representing nine
Cyber and related jobs were consulted. Researchers and stakeholders in the Cyber Center for Excellence
and Signal Center for Excellence selected seven capabilities for inclusion on the C^3: Critical Thinking,
Complex Problem Solving, Active Learning, Troubleshooting, Deductive Reasoning, Inductive
Reasoning, and Selective Attention.
Measures of the seven capabilities were created and incorporated into a draft of an assessment. There was
some correlation between capabilities, but each was sufficiently independent to suggest a capability for
nuanced measurement (Adis et al, 2022). Validation with an Army sample led to the C^3 demonstrating
incremental validity above and beyond ASVAB-GT scores in predicting training grades in Phase I of
Advanced Individual Training for Cyber Operations Specialists. This prediction was a modest
improvement, driven by the Active Learning construct. In addition, initial piloting with a non-Army
sample revealed that participants found the instrument challenging and suggested changes to increase
usability and navigation.
3

---

The current measures for all but one construct lack strong, predictive value. The overall objective of this
research is to refine the existing constructs and update the assessment in preparation for future validation
efforts.
To accomplish this, the research has several objectives: to refine the operational definitions of the
identified constructs; refine existing measures and create new measures as needed; and update the
assessment battery to incorporate new measures and improved functionality. To show construct validity,
data will need to be collected, and appropriate analyses conducted. The revised battery should be no more
than 30-40 minutes in length, and be user-friendly in terms of ease-of-use, navigability, and interactivity.
The Army will provide the existing operational definitions and accompanying literature review previously
conducted, as well as the results of previous construct validation efforts, the existing assessment battery,
and a guide to setup and maintenance of the assessment. Efforts should utilize recent research, established
research, and research conducted outside the field of Industrial/Organizational Psychology.
The award will be approximately a 42-month period of performance (Base, 12 months; Option 1, 12
months; Option 2, 18 months) with a total budget not to exceed $1,700,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPER:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
4

---

2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
colin.l.omori.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Refinement of the Common Cyber Capabilities Assessment” in the e-
mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
5

---

4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but teleconss are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the Army mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Refinement of
the Common Cyber Capabilities Assessment” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight
Time on 15 June 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to
SAM.gov and Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under
this Notice will be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 01
May 2023, and ending 15 June 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the
number of White Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of
contact reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper
evaluation timeline is extended beyond 15 June 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
6

---

An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Colin Omori, (571) 460-6803,
.
colin.l.omori.civ@army.mil
VII. REFERENCES:
Adis, C., Wind, A.P., Wisecarver, M., Byrd, C., Martin, J., Engelsted, L., Canali, K. G., & Omori, C. L.
(2022). Common cyber capabilities assessment. (Technical Report 1409). U.S. Army Research Institute
for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
7

---

BAA Sources Sought Notice IIA.2d: Assessing and Developing Technological Fluency for the Future Force

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.d: Assessing and Developing Technological Fluency for the Future Force
“Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems KSBs: Leader training and utilization”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on FedBizOpps and
Grants.gov on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference
to the BAA Topic II A.2.d: Assessing and Developing Technological Fluency for the Future
Force. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad
Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the
Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and
that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A
Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full
and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The
Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and
development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities
set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent
Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to
select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
jonathan.f.kochert.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than August 30, 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines,
for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Jonathan Kochert, (706) 580-7463,
jonathan.f.kochert.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - B W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
2

---

development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems KSBs: Leader training and utilization
The Army Modernization Strategy calls for the Army to modernize "how we fight (strategy and training),
"what we fight with (new technology)", and "who we are (leader development and training)" based on the
needs identified in the Army's Multi-Domain Operations (MDO). Within the MDO, Unmanned Aircraft
Systems (UAS) are one of the key modernization technologies. To increase modernization, we need to
fully understand how this emerging technology is incorporated into "how we fight", "what we fight with",
and "who we are". This need can be addressed by focusing specifically on how Army leaders employ
Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (SUAS).
The use of SUAS on the battlefield is evolving, and this is most evident in the frequent and innovative use
of drones in the conflict in Ukraine. We have observed drones being used by both sides of the conflict as
a critical technology capable of drastically impacting the battlefield, favorably shifting the conflict to the
side that is utilizing the technology most effectively. While the technological superiority of specific
drones should not be underestimated, the heavy use of off-the-shelf drones and creative adaptations in the
strategic use of those drones highlight the human element. To maximize the potential of its SUAS
capabilities, the Army needs to develop the capabilities of its leaders to incorporate the use of SUAS in
their planning and decision-making processes, to employ and adapt the use of the technology to enhance
mission accomplishment, and to design and execute effective training programs to enhance the use of
these organic and attached assets in their formations. To do this effectively, training methodologies need
to be developed that will rapidly transfer the tactical knowledge and strategic employment of SUAS
capabilities to the future fighting force. These training tools will provide the Army's leaders with the
critical Knowledge, Skills, and Behaviors (KSBs) needed to maintain battlefield superiority with SUAS
technology. This research aims to collaborate with the SUAS Master Trainer Course at Ft. Moore, GA
and SUAS trainers at their home stations to push forward cutting-edge SUAS training to the force and
integrate SUAS operations with home station training.
To address this need, the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) is
pursuing advancements in understanding the KSBs that the Army needs to effectively utilize SUAS in the
modern battlefield and develop evidence-based training to instill these skills within the Soldiers and
leaders within the Force. There are three core research questions that ARI is interested in exploring. First,
what are the KSBs that leaders and SUAS operators need to possess to maximize use and training with
SUAS in the current operating environment? By identifying these KSBs, it will be possible to determine
what gaps exist in the current SUAS training and develop prototype training to address these KSBs.
Second, what are the leader and operator KSBs for the effective use of drones in the future operating
environment? How will the current standard operating procedures for SUAS use in the Army change in
2030 and 2040? How will this impact the KSBs needed to effectively utilize SUAS in operations and
training? Based on the identified KSBs, ARI is seeking science-based prototype(s) training and tools that
can be validated and demonstrate the ability to improve SUAS operations.
3

---

A potential approach to addressing these research questions may be to identify KSBs needed by leaders
and operators for effective SUAS operations. Then conduct a gap analysis with existing SUAS training to
identify requirements to further develop SUAS KSBs. This would be supplemented by an in-depth
analysis of current (e.g., the use of commercial drones in Ukraine) and evolving (e.g., micro drones and
swarm drones) SUAS tactics, technology, and training methods to identify current and emerging gaps in
training requirements. Small pilot studies would be conducted to validate the KSBs needed to perform
desired SUAS maneuvers and tactics. Theory-based prototype training and training tools would be
developed and validated to maximize the SUAS KSBs.
White papers should describe research to address the identification of SUAS KSBs, the methodology, and
approach to projecting future SUAS KSBs, and how the prototype training would be developed and
validated. They should clearly outline the scientific and systematic approach to the research questions and
how the training is based on solid training theory.
The award will be approximately a 36-month period of performance (12-month base [FY24 not to
exceed $350,000] with two 12-month option years, respectively, Option Year 1 [FY25 not to exceed
$400,000] and Option Year 2 [FY26 not to exceed $400,000] with a total budget not to exceed
$1,150,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
4

---

2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
jonathan.f.kochert.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite
“ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems KSBs: Leader training and
utilization” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
5

---

4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Small
Unmanned Aircraft Systems KSBs: Leader training and utilization” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM
Eastern Daylight Time on August 30, 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will
be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper
received under this Notice will be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period
beginning August 30, 2023 and ending November 28, 2023. An extension of this timeline may be
granted based on the number of White Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the
designated point of contact reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if
the White Paper evaluation timeline is extended beyond November 28, 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
6

---

An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Jonathan Kochert, (765) 426-5268,
jonathan.f.kochert.civ@army.mil.
7

---

BAA Sources Sought Notice Tactical Decision-Making Exercises to Assess and Develop Leader Critical Thinking Competencies

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2-.b.4: Assessing and Developing Junior Leader Competencies for
Multidomain Operations
“Tactical Decision-Making Exercises to Assess and Develop Leader Critical Thinking
Competencies”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on FedBizOpps and
Grants.gov on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference
to the BAA Topic II A.2.b.4: Assessing and Developing Junior Leader Competencies for
Multidomain Operations. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social
Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of
paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of
basic and applied research and that part of development not related to the development of a specific
system or hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is
considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of
Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments.
Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding
constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White
Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI
may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
jayne.l.allen3.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 17 August 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines,
for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Jayne L. Allen, (706) 761-7611,
jayne.l.allen3.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - B W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
2

---

Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: “Tactical Decision-Making Exercises to Assess and Develop Leader
Critical Thinking Competencies”
As leaders conduct missions and make decisions, they are constantly building and modifying their
understanding of the world around them to facilitate critical thinking and forward planning. While this is
a complex cognitive activity, previous research efforts might provide a means of understanding what
processes are involved and how those processes might lead to success or failure. For example, studies
focused on the science of comprehension have used networks of semantically interconnected propositions
to explain how elements of incoming information, combined with an individual’s background knowledge,
shape the way individuals infer meaning from an ongoing flow of events (Kintsch, 1988; Doane & Sohn,
2000). Making matters more complicated than they might be in other contexts, Army leaders must make
complex decisions with incomplete information based on data sources that may differ greatly in their
precision and reliability. To prepare leaders to deal with such demands, the Army invests in training them
in areas such as doctrine, tactics, troop leading procedures, etc.; but due to constraints of time and
resources there are limited opportunities to probe leaders’ deep understanding of such material and its
impact on their ability to form accurate representations of the problems they face (i.e., what Kintsch
would call “comprehension models”). Tests can provide information about what a student-leader knows
(i.e., the answer is wrong or right), and field exercises can provide information about what a student-
leader knows how to do (e.g., the chosen avenue of approach affords concealment, or it does not). While
these assessments are useful, they do not provide information about the student-leader’s decision-making
process. In a math problem where a student can “show his/her work,” the instructor has an opportunity to
see—and correct if needed—the rationale with which the student approached the problem as well as the
steps the student then took in executing the solution. In other words, the math instructor has the student’s
representation of the problem-space in front of him or her, and the quality of that representation is directly
linked to the decisions the student made during problem-solving. To optimize leaders’ learning and
development, the Army must identify a method that can be used at scale to understand student-leaders’
comprehension of situations and provide feedback targeted toward correcting errors in their
representations of the problems they face.
One way to approach this challenge is to consider the development of critical thinking competencies
across the career trajectory. To what extent does the development of critical thinking rely on the creation
of more nuanced problem representations, and what errors in critical thinking can be expected when these
representations are incomplete and/or incorrect? Striving to address these questions, the U.S. Army
Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) is seeking to leverage advances in
artificial intelligence to develop a diagnostically focused tactical decision-making system. This system
should present tactical decision-making exercises in such a way that a student-leader is required to
explain his/her thought process, thus allowing instructors to diagnose misconceptions and knowledge
3

---

gaps at a deeper level than traditional testing allows. In this way, a model of critical thinking development
across the career trajectory may be developed.
This research should be theory-driven and pursue the goal of building purposeful training exercises that
can probe individuals’ task-relevant problem representations in order to diagnose specific misconceptions
and knowledge gaps. This may involve building a set of small-scale tactical decision-making exercises
focused on isolating specific aspects of a problem-representation (or particular knowledge gaps or
misconceptions) as well as a set of larger scale tactical decision-making exercises where multiple
knowledge elements are brought together to make more complex decisions. Once individuals’ problem-
representations are mapped, predictions can be made about their individual tendencies to make specific
choices (Sohn & Doane, 2002), and feedback can be tailored to refer to knowledge elements
(propositions) a person has access to, ensuring appropriate knowledge scaffolding is available.
Additionally, with recent advances in AI technology, the building of individual problem-representations
can be guided by having student-leaders describe their thought processes during decision-making
episodes and allowing an AI agent to interpret that input and convert it into a human-readable problem
representation (e.g., a proposition network), much like what happens when researchers take notes during
‘think-aloud’ task-execution sessions. This research will move the state of the art in knowledge elicitation
forward. It will also allow for more tailored training experiences as individual knowledge is coded into a
format that can be used to determine the best sequence of training exercises that will expose leaders to
situations that optimally use their existing knowledge as a scaffold for new, as yet unlearned, knowledge.
The award will be approximately a 36-month period of performance (12-month base [FY24
$350,000] with two 12-month option years [$350,000 and $250,000 respectively] with a budget not to
exceed $950,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
4

---

1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
jayne.l.allen3.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Tactical Decision-Making Exercises to Assess and Develop Leader
Critical Thinking Competencies” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
5

---

2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Tactical
Decision-Making Exercises to Assess and Develop Leader Critical Thinking Competencies” by e-
mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 17 August 2023. Any extension to the White
Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note
that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will be evaluated and considered for proposal
requests throughout the period beginning 3 July 2023, and ending 17 August 2023. An extension of this
timeline may be granted based on the number of White Papers submitted or other factors out of the
control of the designated point of contact reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified
by email if the White Paper evaluation timeline is extended beyond 17 August 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
6

---

An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Jayne L. Allen, (706) 761-7611,
jayne.l.allen3.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Doane, S. M., & Sohn, Y. W. (2000). ADAPT: A predictive cognitive model of user visual attention and
action planning. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 10, 1-45.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model.
Psychological review, 95(2), 163.
Sohn, Y. W., & Doane, S. M. (2002). Evaluating comprehension-based user models: Predicting individual
user planning and action. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 12, 171-205.
7

---

BAA Sources Sought Notice- Developmental Experiences Assessment for Officer Strategic Thinking Development

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.b.i:
COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS
Developmental Experiences Assessment for Officer Strategic Thinking Development
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on FedBizOpps and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for white paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.b.i: COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS.
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency
announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal
Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and that
part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A
white paper submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of
full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The
Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and
development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities
set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a white paper and subsequent
proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to
select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
For this specific Sources Sought Notice, the sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for white paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice.
2) Submission of a timely white paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and
copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC), cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil.
3) ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for white papers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a
proposal,” as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the white paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI.
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal.
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III.
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or on other factors.
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and
cost associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for
funding. Note that an interested applicant must submit a white paper electronically in order to be
eligible to submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a white paper be
submitted electronically no later than 28 August 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V,
Deadlines, for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g.,
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

contract, grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the
intention of the Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A GOVERNMENT
CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL
INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a requested white paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The point of contact (POC) for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research
Triangle Park Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Cary Stothart, (254) 392-0530,
cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
white paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized
and specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but Applied Research should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced
Technology Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
2

---

training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and, if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Developmental Experiences Assessment for Officer Strategic Thinking
Development
Field-grade Army officers are largely selected from an internal pool of Army candidates and therefore
share many common developmental experiences. While officers build skills throughout their careers
that will be useful once the officers reach strategic leadership positions, the degree to which
developmental experiences earlier in officers’ careers contribute specifically to the development of
strategic leadership skills is not well understood. Through a better understanding of how developmental
experiences throughout officers’ careers are contributing to their development of strategic thinking
competencies, the Army will be better able to leverage those experiences to ensure the highest quality
talent pool from which to select officers for field-grade positions.
This research will enable the Army to design targeted training and development programs to enhance
strategic thinking competencies among officers, ensuring that the Army’s competency development
initiatives are tailored to effectively address individual learners’ experiences. This proposed research
follows on the FY23 Requirement titled, Roadmap to Develop Complex Cognitive Skills for Officer
Strategic Thinking. The FY23 research will identify and map out developmental experiences for Army
officers to develop strategic thinking skills. This proposed research will seek to establish an empirical
basis for the linkages between career experiences and strategic thinking competency development, and
will seek to capture the qualitative and contextual components of experiences that drive strategic
thinking development (e.g., task complexity, role diversity). A diagnostic assessment will be produced
from this research to serve as a tool for the Army to enhance developmental opportunities for strategic
thinking competencies.
The goal of this research is to link the experiences of officers across their careers, which contribute to
the development of strategic thinking skills. Through the proposed research, a developmental
experience assessment will be produced. This assessment will contribute to enabling the Army to better
address gaps in strategic leadership development by addressing what and how developmental
experiences impact leader readiness. While commercial assessments of individual career leadership
experiences exist, the commercial assessments were developed within business contexts and the
development of executive leadership and are inadequate at accounting for the unique context of
military careers (e.g., Leadership Experience Inventory, VanKatwyk et al., 2004; Developmental
Challenge Profile, McCauley et al., 1994). Moreover, the commercial assessments can be costly. This
research will provide the Army with a better means to assess developmental experiences that prepare
officers for strategic levels of leadership.
This research will be accomplished through the following objectives:
1. Develop a framework presenting the quantitative and qualitative linkages between
officers’ developmental experiences and their strategic thinking competency development,
facilitating the design of a measurement tool.
2. Design, pilot, and refine measurement tools targeting developmental experiences across
Army officer career stages and associated qualitative characteristics of those experiences.
Two versions for:
3

---

a) Professional military education (PME) institutions to better understand the
types of developmental experiences that will complement the curriculum
and enable better alignment of educational goals with follow-on
assignments.
b) Individual Army officers engaged in self-development activities and in need
of resources to help visualize and manage their careers.
3. Empirically test, validate, and transition the measurement tool to Army stakeholders for
use.
4. Develop guidance (e.g., a handbook) presenting the measurement tool, with
recommendations for incorporating the assessment and developmental experiences into
individual career planning and talent management planning for Army officers.
ARI is also open to alternative ideas that will creatively accomplish the objectives of this planned
research in accordance with BAA Topic II A.2.b.i: COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR
ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS, and that the Army will consider timely and valuable.
The award will be a 36-month period of performance (Base, 12 months, not to exceed $325,000;
Option 1, 12 months, not to exceed $300,000; Option 2, 12 months, not exceed $275,000) with a total
budget not to exceed $900,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A white paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an
estimate of total cost for both the base and option approach. White papers should present the effort in
sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to
the Army mission.
A white paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in which
the applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel
(i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research, highlighting
their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms must be compiled into a
single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will be advised that they are only
to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any pages submitted in excess of
the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
4

---

extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software,
personnel or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE),
Government Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or
Government Furnished Data (GFD). The applicant shall indicate any Government coordination
that may be required for obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations
or exercises that would demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the white paper, the applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The applicant must identify any proprietary data the applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the white paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or
restricted rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume
to have unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the white
paper. Records or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the white paper but must
be clearly marked. The Army will treat all white papers as procurement-sensitive information
before the award and will disclose their contents to only Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement-related activities only. Classified, sensitive,
or critical information on technologies should not be included in a white paper.
2. An applicant is cautioned that portions of white papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI BAA
W911NF-23-S-0010, Developmental Experiences Assessment for Officer Strategic Thinking
Development” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
5

---

White papers and full proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit—The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the
proposed research.
2. Potential Contribution—The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities—Proposed principal investigator and key personnel
qualifications, capabilities, related experience and techniques, and institutional resources
and facilities.
4. Cost—Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism,
affordability, and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of
evaluation on other factors.
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a white paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of white
papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a white paper and request a proposal without discussions. The applicant’s initial
submission should contain the applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the white paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will
be evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select
any award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the applicant regarding the white paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the applicant. The written request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the white paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Developmental
Experiences Assessment for Officer Strategic Thinking Development” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM
6

---

Eastern Daylight Time on 28 August 2023. Any extension to the white paper submission deadline will be
posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely white paper
received under this Notice will be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the
period beginning 28 August 2023, and ending 27 October 2023. An extension of this timeline may be
granted based on the number of white papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the
designated point of contact reviewing the white papers. An applicant will be notified by email if the
white paper evaluation timeline is extended beyond 27 October 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full proposal.
An applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic white paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a white paper
or full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified
above, then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and
time specified in this Notice on the first workday on which normal Government processes resume.
An applicant agrees to hold the terms of their white paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Cary Stothart, (254) 392-0530,
cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
McCauley, C. D., Ruderman, M. N., Ohlott, P. J., & Morrow, J. E. (1994). Assessing the developmental
components of managerial jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 544.
7

---

VanKatwyk, P., Laczo, R. M., & Tuzinski, K. (2004). The leadership experience inventory technical
manual. Personnel Decisions International.
8

---

BAA Sources Sought Notice- Envisioning Futures with Probability and Risk

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.b.i:
COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS
Envisioning Futures With Probability and Risk
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on FedBizOpps and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for white paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.b.i: COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS.
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency
announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal
Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and that
part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A
white paper submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of
full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The
Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and
development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities
set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a white paper and subsequent
proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to
select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
For this specific Sources Sought Notice, the sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for white paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice.
2) Submission of a timely white paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and
copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC), cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil.
3) ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for white papers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a
proposal,” as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the white paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI.
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal.
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III.
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or on other factors.
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and
cost associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for
funding. Note that an interested applicant must submit a white paper electronically in order to be
eligible to submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a white paper be
submitted electronically no later than 28 August 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V,
Deadlines, for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g.,
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

contract, grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the
intention of the Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A GOVERNMENT
CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL
INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a requested white paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The point of contact (POC) for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research
Triangle Park Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Cary Stothart, (254) 392-0530,
cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
white paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized
and specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but Applied Research should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced
Technology Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
2

---

training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and, if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Envisioning Futures With Probability and Risk
Strategic planning requires Army officers to account for a wide variety of factors that have implications
for the success of the mission. Many of these factors involve actions that an enemy may take towards
their own goals, leaving it to Army leaders to assess the risk of those actions to their own mission as well
as the likelihood of the enemy taking those actions. While Army doctrine dictates that intelligence
officers describe possible enemy actions and account for the likelihood of those future events, in
practice many assessments simply present enemy actions that are “most likely” and “most dangerous”
(Adamski & Pence, 2019). Army officers require complex cognitive competencies to deal with the future-
oriented aspects of thinking-in-time, supporting risk-informed decision-making under uncertainty
(Schultz et al., 2010). This research will contribute to increasing the Army’s cognitive dominance by
supporting increased adaptability in planning and decision making, enabling Army officers to respond
effectively to changing operational environments with a focus on recognizing and exploiting emerging
threats and opportunities, prioritizing objectives, and allocating resources for maximum effect
(Department of the Army, October 2022).
Prior ARI research (e.g., Shadrick et al., 2008) has examined the training of commanders’ battlefield
visualization and interpretation skills, centered around a framework of four key actions: building,
synchronizing, assessing, and exploiting understanding of the operational context. The proposed project
extends on this prior research by focusing on the training of staff officers who help to shape a
commander’s vision of the operational environment. This research will evaluate methods to enhance
risk-informed decision-making under uncertainty, targeting cognitive and communication skills required
to anticipate a range of adversary actions, and to synthesize and to incorporate predictions into
planning and decision-making processes (e.g., the synchronizing and assessing activities associated with
visualization).
Leveraging prior research on command visualization (Shadrick et al., 2008), this research will focus on
developing tools and resources to enhance officers’ competencies concerning risk-informed decision-
making under uncertainty. The tools and resources will be targeted to active-duty Army officers and
professional military education (PME) faculty. Perspectives will be collected from the officers and the
PME faculty regarding best practices when envisioning future events and when assessing the impact of
the future events on mission success. Additionally, subject matter experts will be sought to inform the
design of tools and resources focused on best practices in prioritizing and presenting key operational
events to a commander or to a decision maker. The following research objectives will be addressed:
1. Develop a competency framework for course-of-action development processes, aligned to the
criterion space for risk-informed decision making under uncertainty. The competency
framework will inform the design of tools and resources targeting perceptual, cognitive, and
communication competencies required to anticipate a range of enemy actions, to build a
coherent narrative from intelligence information, and to synthesize and incorporate predictions
into planning and decision-making.
2. Apply the competency framework in the design of prototype tools and resources to address a
variety of operational vignettes presenting situations that officers will need to distill and to
communicate when generating and evaluating possible future events and when communicating
mission impact. Subject matter experts will evaluate each vignette for likelihood of the event,
3

---

risk of the event to mission success, and level of commander influence on event occurrence to
enable development of a scoring rubric.
3. Produce and validate tools and resources to enhance risk-informed decision making under
uncertainty, incorporating candidate techniques for visualizing and for prioritizing operational
events. For example, Adamski and Pence (2019) have developed a five-step process for
brainstorming, plotting, and prioritizing possible future events and the risks the events present
to mission success. Other candidate approaches may utilize different sets of techniques to
manage the process.
ARI is also open to alternative ideas that will creatively accomplish the objectives of this planned
research in accordance with BAA Topic II A.2.b.i: COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR
ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS, and that the Army will consider timely and valuable.
The award will be a 36-month period of performance (Base, 12 months, not to exceed $200,000;
Option 1, 12 months, not to exceed $300,000; Option 2, 12 months, not exceed $300,000) with a total
budget not to exceed $800,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A white paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an
estimate of total cost for both the base and option approach. White papers should present the effort in
sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to
the Army mission.
A white paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in which
the applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel
(i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research, highlighting
their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms must be compiled into a
single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will be advised that they are only
to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any pages submitted in excess of
the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
4

---

2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software,
personnel or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE),
Government Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or
Government Furnished Data (GFD). The applicant shall indicate any Government coordination
that may be required for obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations
or exercises that would demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the white paper, the applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The applicant must identify any proprietary data the applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the white paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or
restricted rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume
to have unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the white
paper. Records or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the white paper but must
be clearly marked. The Army will treat all white papers as procurement-sensitive information
before the award and will disclose their contents to only Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement-related activities only. Classified, sensitive,
or critical information on technologies should not be included in a white paper.
2. An applicant is cautioned that portions of white papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI BAA
W911NF-23-S-0010, Envisioning Futures With Probability and Risk” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
White papers and full proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit—The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the
proposed research.
5

---

2. Potential Contribution—The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities—Proposed principal investigator and key personnel
qualifications, capabilities, related experience and techniques, and institutional resources
and facilities.
4. Cost—Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism,
affordability, and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of
evaluation on other factors.
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a white paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of white
papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a white paper and request a proposal without discussions. The applicant’s initial
submission should contain the applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the white paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will
be evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select
any award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the applicant regarding the white paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the applicant. The written request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the white paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Envisioning Futures
With Probability and Risk” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 28 August 2023.
Any extension to the white paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov an
amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely white paper received under this Notice will be evaluated
and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 28 August 2023, and ending 27
October 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of white papers
submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact reviewing the white
6

---

papers. An applicant will be notified by email if the white paper evaluation timeline is extended
beyond 27 October 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full proposal.
An applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic white paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a white paper
or full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified
above, then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and
time specified in this Notice on the first workday on which normal Government processes resume.
An applicant agrees to hold the terms of their white paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Cary Stothart, (254) 392-0530,
cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Adamski, M., & Pence, S. (2019). Thriving in uncertainty from predictive-to-probability-based
assessments. Military Review, 99(2), 54-63.
Department of the Army (2022, October). FM 3-0 Operations. Headquarters, U.S. Department of the
Army. https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN36290-FM_3-0-000-WEB-2.pdf
Schultz, M. T., Mitchell, K. N., Harper, B., & Bridges, T. S. (2010). Decision making under uncertainty
(Publication No. ERDC TR-10-12). https://erdc-
library.erdc.dren.mil/jspui/bitstream/11681/8570/1/3453.pdf
7

---

Shadrick, S. B., Bell, J., Manning, D., Leedom, D. K., & Lickteig, C. W. (2008, January). Development and
Assessment of Battlefield Visualization Training for Battalion Commanders [Paper No. 8236].
Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC) 2008. Orlando,
FL, United States. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA501650.pdf
8

---

BAA Sources Sought Notice-Systems Thinking: State of the Science and Practice.

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.b.i:
COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS
“Systems Thinking: State of the Science and Practice”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on FedBizOpps and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.b.i: COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS.
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency
announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal
Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and that
part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A
Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full
and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition
in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D)
within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each
budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested
by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award
due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and
copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC), ava.j.loer.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide
a response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a
proposal”. as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and
cost associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for
funding. Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be
eligible to submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be
submitted electronically no later than 28 August 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V,
Deadlines, for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g.,
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

contract, grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the
intention of the Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A GOVERNMENT
CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL
INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Ava Loer, (913) 702-5057,
ava.j.loer.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - B W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized
and specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
2

---

training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Systems Thinking: State of the Science and Practice
Army officers need to develop their systems thinking skills to conceptualize, to understand, to work
with, and to manage interdependent systems across multiple domains. Ten years ago, the U.S. Army
Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) published an anthology that examined
one aspect of systems thinking (i.e., sociocultural systems thinking) against the backdrop of
counterinsurgency operations in the Middle East and Africa (Strong et al., 2013). With the shift in
concept of operations to multidomain operations, and looking toward large-scale combat operations,
Army leaders require broader systems thinking competencies. Such competencies include and transcend
sociocultural systems thinking to understand how to make sense of and to exploit cross-domain
opportunities for decisive action in their decision-making and their risk assessment (Department of the
Army, October 2022, p. 1-3). Efforts to broadly develop Army officers’ systems thinking skills have been
occurring in parallel across various Army organizations, such as professional military education (PME)
institutions, Combat Training Centers (CTCs), the Center for Army Leadership (CAL), and ARI, as well as
other military service components.
ARI defines systems thinking as a cognitive approach that applies a holistic perspective to identify and to
understand interrelationships and emergent properties among elements (Wisecarver et al., 2023). ARI
conceptualizes systems thinking as a component of strategic thinking, alongside action learning,
comprehensive information gathering, creative thinking, critical thinking, and thinking-in-time (Sackett
et al., 2015). Because systems thinking has been examined from a wide variety of disciplines and schools
of thought, other Army organizations may have different definitions of systems thinking, different
conceptualizations of how systems thinking is related to strategic thinking and other complex cognitive
skills, and different methods to develop Army officers’ systems thinking skills. It is time for the Army to
take stock of the different initiatives, perspectives, and approaches to supporting Army officers in
developing their systems thinking skills. Examinations of various works on systems thinking development
in civilian domains exist, but to date there has been no examination of various works on systems
thinking development in military organizations. This project will serve to integrate efforts and awareness
across military organizations to provide a statement on the current state of the science, theory, and
practice of systems thinking assessment, training, and education.
The primary product of this project will be an anthology of how Army officers’ systems thinking skills are
being developed, culminating in a synthesis chapter that will recommend ways forward for the Army.
ARI sees the successful Offeror doing the following:
(1) Identifying relevant organizations, predominantly within the Army but also including other
military branches, whose viewpoints are important to include in the systems thinking anthology.
(2) Fostering and maintaining relationships with the anthology contributors.
ARI is also open to alternative ideas that creatively accomplishes the objective of producing a systems
thinking anthology that is in line with BAA Topic II A.2.b.i: COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR
ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS and that the Army will consider timely and valuable.
3

---

The award will be a 24-month period of performance (Base, 12 months, not to exceed $200,000;
Option 1, 12 months, not to exceed $200,000) with a total budget not to exceed $400,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an
estimate of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in
sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to
the Army mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms must be
compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will be advised
that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any pages
submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software,
personnel or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE),
Government Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or
Government Furnished Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination
that may be required for obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations
or exercises that would demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
4

---

RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or
restricted rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume
to have unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White
Paper. Records or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but
must be clearly marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement
sensitive information before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government
employees or designated support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities
only. Classified, sensitive, or critical information on technologies should not be included in a
White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms
of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC), ava.j.loer.civ@army.mil, in
electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Systems
Thinking: State of the Science and Practice” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and
facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other
factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
5

---

guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will
be evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select
any award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite
a full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Systems Thinking:
State of the Science and Practice” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 28 August
2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov
an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will be
evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 28 August 2023, and
ending 27 October 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of White
Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact reviewing the
White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation timeline is
extended beyond 27 October 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government
site includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
6

---

If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper
or full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified
above, then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and
time specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Ava Loer, (913) 702-5057,
ava.j.loer.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Department of the Army (2022, October). FM 3-0 Operations. Headquarters, U.S. Department of the
Army. https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN36290-FM_3-0-000-WEB-2.pdf
Sackett, A.L., Karrasch, A.I., Weyhrauch, W.S., & Goldman, E.F. (2016). Enhancing the strategic capability
of the Army: An investigation of strategic thinking tasks, skills, and development (Research
Report 1995). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social
Sciences.
Strong, B.E., Brooks Babin, L., Ramsden Zbylut, M., & Roan, L. (2013). Sociocultural systems: The next
step in Army cultural capability (Research Product 2013-02). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army
Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Wisecarver, M., Byrd, C., Loer, A., Engelsted, L., Adis, C., & Kaplan, M. (2023). A conceptual model of
Army leader systems thinking (Technical Report 1420). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research
Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
7

---

BAA Sources Sought Notice_Creative Performance

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.: ASSESSING AND DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGICAL FLUENCY FOR
THE FUTURE FORCE
“Creative Performance Behaviors with Technology”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.: ASSESSING AND DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGICAL FLUENCY FOR THE
FUTURE FORCE. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
(ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph
6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and
applied research and that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or
hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is
considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of
Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments.
Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding
constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White
Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI
may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
margaret.j.toich.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI.
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal.
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III.
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors.
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 26 September 2024, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V,
Deadlines, for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types
(e.g., contract, grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the
intention of the Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Margaret Toich, (571) 595-6997,
margaret.j.toich.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
2

---

Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Creative Performance Behaviors with Technology
The Army Strategy specifically outlines a focus on innovating, prototyping, and fielding the next
generation of combat systems in addition to researching and developing emerging technologies (U.S.
Army, 2018). These new technologies will impact Soldiers in Future Operating Environments (FOEs) by
creating the need to develop a Force that is technologically fluent (TF) or able to creatively use, adapt,
and synthesize new technologies to enhance performance. Ongoing research at ARI seeks to enable the
creation, assessment, and development of a technologically fluent force across General Purpose Forces.
Multiple current ARI projects focus on assessing the nomological network of TF constructs. However, a
measure of creative performance with technology is needed to help determine the efficacy of the
assessments in creating a TF Force. As the Army continues to develop and field next generation
technologies, training requirements will continue to increase. These requirements will outpace the Army’s
ability to ensure Soldiers are fully prepared to use novel technologies in the FOE. This gap necessitates
technological fluency in Soldiers for the Army to benefit from creative uses of technologies that Soldiers
may not be formally trained on. The measurement of those creative performance behaviors will be critical
to demonstrating the utility of classification and assignment efforts based on TF assessments. Thus, the
aim of this project is to develop a criterion measure of individual-level creative performance with
technology for future assignment and classification validation efforts within the U.S. Army.
Within the literature, creativity has been conceptualized and examined as both an antecedent (e.g., Yang
& Hung, 2021; Zhang & Bartol, 2010) and an outcome (e.g., Liu et al., 2022; Tierney & Farmer, 2011).
In a recent review by Lua et al. (2024), the authors discuss creativity behaviors like idea implementation,
innovative behavior, and personal initiative. Teng et al. (2020) examined the relationship between
creative self-efficacy and innovative behavior. In the study, the authors used Scott and Bruce’s (1994)
measure of innovative behaviors which includes items such as “generates creative ideas” and “develops
adequate plans and schedules for the implementation of new ideas” (p. 607). For the purpose of this
effort, we are interested in creativity as an outcome and, more specifically, creative performance with
technology.
Creativity research is not novel to the U.S. Army, but largely exists at the antecedent level. Two previous
job analysis projects included innovation and creativity in surveys of talent requirements (Boyle et al.,
2022) and personnel characteristics (Royston & Lin, 2022) across military occupational specialties
(MOS). Additional ARI efforts have examined divergent thinking (Russell et al., 2017) and creative
thinking (Zaccaro et al., 2012). Results for these reports indicate the importance of creativity across MOS
and ranks but are not specific to creative performance behaviors with technology.
3

---

The purpose of this project is to develop and validate a measure of creative performance with technology.
Measure items should capture individual-level indicators of creative performance that are relevant for
Soldiers. This measure may capture a single domain or may involve multiple subscales. In turn, this
metric will be used to inform assignment and classification decisions based on Soldier TF.
OBJECTIVES
In order to meet the research objectives under this request:
1. The Offeror shall describe the methods that they will use to answer the following questions:
a. What content should be included in the measure?
b. What, if any, typology should be used as a basis for the measure?
c. What method of assessment should be used for the measure (e.g., SJT, self-report,
computerized, simulations)?
A successful White Paper will:
a. Be designed and scalable for use in General Purpose Forces.
b. Apply to multiple MOS.
c. Apply to deployment and garrison settings.
d. Consider novel hardware and software technologies in the FOE.
e. Leverage existing ARI creativity research efforts in scoping project tasks.
2. The Offeror shall describe the method that they will use to develop the creative performance with
technology measure.
A successful White Paper will:
a. Describe how the measures will be developed and refined to improve reliability and
validity.
b. Outline the method used to develop a product that is scalable to General Purpose Forces.
c. Describe a plan for preliminary measure validation to include gathering evidence for
concurrent convergent and discriminant validity and face validity.
The award will be a 12-month period of performance with a budget not to exceed $320,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed contract.
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
4

---

A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the white paper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
5

---

White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
margaret.j.toich.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Creative Performance Behaviors with Technology” in the e-mail subject
line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
6

---

Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Creative
Performance with Technology” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 26
September 2024. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and
Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will
be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 26 August 2024, and
ending 26 September 2024. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of
White Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact
reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation
timeline is extended beyond 26 September 2024.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Margaret Toich (571) 595-6997,
margaret.j.toich.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
7

---

Boyle, B. E., Darbor, K. E., Cato, C. R., Kammerer, W., & Thurston, J. (2022). Survey of talent
requirements: Talents, skills, and abilities of Army Officers by branch and functional area.
(Technical Report 1418). U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Liu, F., Li, P., Taris, T. W., & Peeters, M. C. W. (2022). Creative performance pressure as a double‐
edged sword for creativity: The role of appraisals and resources. Human Resource Management,
61(6), 663–679. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22116
Lua, E., Liu, D., & Shalley, C. E. (2024). Multilevel outcomes of creativity in organizations: An
integrative review and agenda for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior (John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.), 45(2), 209–233. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2690
Ohly, S., Sonnentag, S., & Pluntke, F. (2006). Routinization, work characteristics and their relationships
with creative and proactive behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(3), 257–279.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.376
Royston, R. P., & Lin, N. (2022). Army-wide job analysis for Officers: Branch and functional area-
specific knowledge, skills, and behaviors requirements from the Army Talent Attribute
Framework Volume I: Main report. (Technical Report 1425). U.S. Army Research Institute for
the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Russell, T. L., Paullin, C. J., Legree, P. J., Kilcullen, R. N., & Young, M. C. (2017). Identifying and
validating selections tools for predicting officer performance and retention. (Research Note
2017-01). U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual
innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580–607.
https://doi.org/10.2307/256701
Teng, C.-C., Hu, C.-M., & Chang, J.-H. (2020). Triggering creative self-efficacy to increase employee
innovation behavior in the hospitality workplace. Journal of Creative Behavior, 54(4), 912–925.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.419
Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2011). Creative self-efficacy development and creative performance over
time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020952
U.S. Army. (2018). The Army Strategy. https://www.army-
mil.us/e2/downloads/rv7/the_army_strategy_2018.pdf
Yang, Z., & Hung, I. W. (2021). Creative thinking facilitates perspective taking. Journal of Personality &
Social Psychology, 120(2), 278–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000259
Zaccaro, S. J., Gilrane, V. L., Robbins, J. M., Bartholomew, L. N., Young, M. C., Kilcullen, R. N.,
Connelly, S., & Young, W. (2012). Officer individual differences: Predicting long-term
continuance and performance in the U.S. Army. (Technical Report 1324). U.S. Army Research
Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Zhang, X., & Bartol, K. M. (2010). The influence of creative process engagement on employee creative
performance and overall job performance: A curvilinear assessment. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 95(5), 862–873. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020173
8

---

BAA Sources Sought Notice_Transportable MTS Competencies final

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2-c.3: DEVELOPING TEAMS FOR THE FUTURE OPERATIONAL
ENVIRONMENT
“Identifying, Operationalizing, and Developing Transportable Multiteam System Competencies
for the Future Operational Environment”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 30 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2-c.3: DEVELOPING TEAMS FOR THE FUTURE OPERATIONAL
ENVIRONMENT. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
(ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph
6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and
applied research and that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or
hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is
considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of
Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments.
Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding
constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White
Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI
may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
nathanael.l.keiser.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 15 July 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for
additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Nathanael Keiser, (254) 392-8439,
nathanael.l.keiser.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - B W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
2

---

Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Identifying, Operationalizing, and Developing Transportable Multiteam
System Competencies for the Future Operational Environment
The Army is increasingly focused on ensuring readiness to meet the challenges of the future operational
environment (FOE). Much has been written about the expected characteristics of the future battlefield,
best articulated in the multi-domain operations (MDO) framework. At its most fundamental level, the
FOE will be characterized by extensive complexity and require the ability of Army Soldiers and leaders to
operate in highly ambiguous and contested environments. Army doctrine on the topic has advanced
considerably in recent years, but there remain a variety of specific unknowns about the FOE, including
how best to prepare Soldiers and teams for it. For instance, little attention has been directed at articulating
how to train systems of semi-independent teams for the future battlefield.
Army operations rely on multiteam systems, or “teams of teams”, which face considerable challenges
stemming from changes over time in their goals, task requirements, structural configuration, and system
composition (i.e., dynamism; Luciano et al., 2018). These considerations are expected to become more
pronounced in the FOE. Effectively responding to these challenges necessitates the development of
competencies that are transferable across multiteam systems, also described as transportable competencies
(Mathieu et al., 2017; Salas et al., 2018; Tannenbaum et al., 2012). Ultimately, the Army needs training
methods to develop the key competencies in its Soldiers to effectively perform in multiteam systems.
There are a variety of unknowns about what specific transportable competencies will be most impactful in
the FOE and how best to incorporate those into training. The aim of this research is to identify and
operationalize transportable multiteam system competencies for the FOE and develop a set of preliminary
training recommendations. This aim will be accomplished in three broad steps. The first step is to
identify, describe, and conceptually articulate transportable multiteam system competencies for future
operations according to recent guidance on construct development and validation (Lambert & Newman,
2022; Podsakoff et al., 2016). The second step will involve an integration of these transportable
competencies with the organizational training literature to provide a list of recommendations about how to
develop multiteam system competencies for the FOE. The third step will include an initial proof of
concept to train Soldiers/units in multiteam systems, followed by a field test of this training.
The award will be a 48-month period of performance (Base, 12 months; Option 1, 12 months;
Option 2, 12 months; Option 3, 12 months) with a total budget not to exceed $800,000.00
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
3

---

Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
4

---

or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
nathanael.l.keiser.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite
“ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Identifying, Operationalizing, and Developing Transportable
Multiteam System Competencies for the Future Operational Environment” in the e-mail subject
line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
5

---

identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Identifying,
Operationalizing, and Developing Transportable Multiteam System Competencies for the Future
Operational Environment” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 15 July 2023.
Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov an
amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will be evaluated
and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 30 May 2023, and ending 15 July
2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of White Papers submitted
or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact reviewing the White Papers. An
Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation timeline is extended beyond 15
July 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
6

---

ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Nathanael Keiser, (254) 392-8439,
nathanael.l.keiser.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Lambert, L. S., & Newman, D. A. (2022). Construct development and validation in three practical steps:
Recommendations for reviewers, editors, and authors. Organizational Research Methods.
Luciano, M. M., DeChurch, L. A., & Mathieu, J. E. (2018). Multiteam systems: A structural framework
and meso-theory of system functioning. Journal of Management, 44, 1065-1096.
Mathieu, J. E., Hollenbeck, J. R., van Knippenberg, D., & Ilgen, D. R. (2017). A century of work teams in
the Journal of Applied Psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 452-467.
Podsakoff P. M., MacKenzie S. B., Podsakoff N. P. (2016). Recommendations for creating better concept
definitions in the organizational, behavioral, and social sciences. Organizational Research Methods, 19,
159-203.
Salas, E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Kraiger, K., & Smith-Jentsch, K. A. (2012). The science of training and
development in organizations: What matters in practice. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13,
74-101.
Tannenbaum, S. I., Mathieu, J. E., Salas, E., & Cohen, D. (2012). Teams are changing: Are research and
practice evolving fast enough?. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5, 2-24.
7

---

BAA TOPIC 1. BASIC RESEARCH AREAS OF INTEREST “Theories of Self-Regulated Learning”

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC 1. BASIC RESEARCH AREAS OF INTEREST
“Theories of Self-Regulated Learning”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic 1. Basic Research Areas of Interest. The United States Army Research Institute for the
Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under
the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the
competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not related to the
development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this
BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full
compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984,"
and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest
will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related
to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds
availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or
other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
meghan.i.huntoon.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 05 January 2024, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines,
for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a Grant.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Meghan Huntoon, (703) 383-4813,
meghan.i.huntoon.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Basic Research.
The Mission of the Basic Research Program is to execute high-risk, high-reward foundational research to
develop state-of-the-art theory, methods, and models to create the innovative concepts required to support
the Army’s future capabilities and needs related to personnel readiness. We strongly encourage
Applicants to propose novel, state-of-the-art, and multidisciplinary approaches that address the stated
2

---

primary research objectives of the topic areas. A key consideration in the decision to support a research
proposal is that its findings are likely to stimulate new, basic behavioral research, which in turn, will lead
to improved performance of Army personnel and their units. ARI will not support proposals through this
SSN that are primarily applied research projects (e.g., human factors studies, specific-use technology
development and validation, or training program evaluations) or purely focused on physiology,
psychopathology, or behavioral health.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Theories of Self-regulated Learning
The Army is committed to developing Soldier talent to meet its future needs and achieve total Army
readiness (US Department of the Army, 2019). Readiness for a complex and unpredictable future will
require utilizing all available learning vehicles. Soldiers are a unique set of adult learners who are faced
with learning through operational experiences, institutional education, and self-development practices.
Increasingly, this will require informal and self-guided learning. All of these domains, in some way, rely
on a cycle of self-regulated learning whereby learners plan, monitor, and reflect on learning and adjust
strategies for future learning (Zimmerman, 2002). As such, theory that explains the conditions that
optimize and the mechanisms that fuel authentic self-regulated learning is imperative to understanding
how to facilitate efficient and effective learning of complex skills in ever-changing complex
environments.
With adult learners, most self-regulated learning takes place in informal settings, over time, and with
interspersed demands on the learner’s time and attention. Despite this, most models of self-regulation in
learning are based on formal or laboratory scenarios, involve single or very few data collection, and do
not account for competition for the learners’ cognitive and affective resources. Investing in this basic
research now will support future applied work leveraging these foundational theoretical models to inform
the best practices used to promote learning among Soldiers in the future.
The aim of this project is to develop ecologically valid theories and models of adult self-regulated
learning that better explain under what conditions and through what mechanisms self-regulated learning
can be optimized over a sustained period of time. While most research on self-regulated learning focuses
on knowledge and specific capabilities development, there is an opportunity to further understand other
categories of learning outcomes such as interpersonal and soft skills, higher-order capabilities, and leader
development.
The purpose of this project is to develop use-inspired theory that may inform future applied work. For this
project, there is interest in further explaining various aspects of self-regulated learning, to include
understanding how characteristics of the learning environment and characteristics of the learner, as well
as the potential interplay among them, promote self-regulated learning. Proposed work should have the
potential to advance self-regulated learning theory, particularly in some of the following areas:
• Ecologically valid in situ self-regulation
• Sustained self-regulation over time
• Self-regulation of multiple learning goals (with other competing demands)
• Self-regulated learning to develop interpersonal and soft skills
• Self-regulated learning of higher-order capabilities (e.g., systems thinking, strategic thinking,
thinking in time)
• Self-regulated learning for leader development
A successful white paper will propose research that is basic in nature. Basic research does not use Soldier
data, does not have direct applications, and does not propose development of a specific tool or
intervention as its primary contribution. Basic research does support novel high-risk work that has a
3

---

potential for high rewards such as leap ahead scientific gains in theory or methods. Interdisciplinary work
is encouraged.
OBJECTIVES
To meet the research objectives under this request:
1) The Proposer shall describe a novel program of basic research that furthers science in the area of
self-regulated learning addressing the following:
a. To what specific theoretical space(s) does the proposed effort contribute?
b. What research questions would be addressed?
c. What methods, data, and analyses will be used to address the research questions and
further self-regulated learning theory?
d. What is novel about the proposed research, and what are the benefits and risks of the
method(s) chosen?
Most basic research awards are awarded in response to proposals provided by Applicants with
experienced researchers. In recent years, the performance period of these has typically been two to
three years with a mean total award of approximately $750,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the concept's
technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
4

---

1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software contained
in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted rights
respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have unlimited
rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records or data
bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly marked. It is
the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information before the
award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated support
contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or critical
information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
meghan.i.huntoon.mil@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite
“ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Your Title” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
5

---

1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Your Title” by
e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 05 January 2024. Any extension to the White
Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note
that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will be evaluated and considered for proposal
requests throughout the period beginning 07 November 2023, and ending 05 January 2024. An
extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of White Papers submitted or other
factors out of the control of the designated point of contact reviewing the White Papers. An
Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation timeline is extended beyond 05
January 2024.
6

---

Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Meghan Huntoon, (703) 383-4813,
meghan.i.huntoon.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
US Department of the Army. The Army People Strategy. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office,
2019.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2),
64-70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
7

---

BAA TOPIC II A.2- c.iii: DEVELOPING TEAMS FOR THE FUTURE OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENT

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2- c.iii: DEVELOPING TEAMS FOR THE FUTURE OPERATIONAL
ENVIRONMENT
“Mitigating the Impacts of Personnel Turnover for Teams in the FOE”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 30 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2. c.iii: DEVELOPING TEAMS FOR THE FUTURE OPERATIONAL
ENVIRONMENT. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
(ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph
6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and
applied research and that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or
hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is
considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of
Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments.
Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding
constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White
Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI
may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
barton.c.crum.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 30 June 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for
additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Barton Crum, (254) 383-1192,
barton.c.crum.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - B W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
2

---

Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Mitigating the Impacts of Personnel Turnover for Teams in the FOE
The Army expects the Future Operational Environment (FOE) will present challenges not just in the
operational context, but also in enabling, training, and adapting Soldiers to the changing composition of
team members and their knowledge, skills, and behaviors (KSBs) while in theater. The multi-domain
operations (MDO) concept requires Army teams to operate semi-independently but also to utilize the
capabilities across multiple domains to conduct sustained missions in highly contested environments.
Additionally, high personnel turnover for teams is expected in the FOE as casualty counts increase, rapid
teaming is required, and ad hoc teams become common. Teams must be capable of maintaining mission
effectiveness despite this expected high personnel turnover. To reduce the impacts, the Army must train
the KSBs needed within normally formed and ad hoc teams to maintain effectiveness and to mitigate the
anticipated negative impacts of turnover before those teams reach theater. Unfortunately, neither the
necessary KSBs nor appropriate training methods are currently known. This research will identify the
necessary combination of KSBs needing to remain on a team to ensure sufficient stability and mission
effectiveness during team member trade-offs and will develop proofs of concept for a future Army
capability to conduct focused, deliberate pre-deployment training for those KSBs.
Researchers have outlined the quickly evolving nature of teams in organizations and have called on the
scientific community in the teams space to adjust research and practice “to remain aligned with emerging
needs” (Tannenbaum et al., 2012). Those authors went on to discuss the lack of research related to the
characteristics of team members and urged researchers to explore the question of “how does the fluidity
of team membership (leavers and joiners) influence team composition of KSAOs and subsequently team
processes and performance?” (Tannenbaum et al., 2012). More recently, the focus has turned to dynamic
team composition defined as “a change in presence, amount, relevance, or accessibility of team members’
attributes over time” (Wolfson et al., 2021). Thus, in order to “perform, improve, solve problems, and
innovate” (Edmondson, 2012), organizations must create teams in response to dynamic environments to
ensure the right capabilities and KSBs are available and ready for the situation at hand (Wolfson et al.,
2021).
The main objective of the proposed research is to identify the type of KSBs teams need to ensure
sufficient stability and negate harmful consequences during a team member trade-off in the FOE. The
research will focus on cross-mission KSBs (e.g., cooperation/teamwork, coordination, team orientation)
that exist across Army teams and are essential to maintaining team effectiveness during changes in team
personnel. First, the research will identify critical individual and collective KSBs that teams must have to
maintain mission effectiveness after personnel turnover, with a particular focus on those KSBs that could
be trained at home station before deployment. Second, the research will identify training needs in how the
Army currently trains the KSBs and will provide recommendations on how to meet these needs. Finally,
3

---

one or more proof-of-concept training methods will be developed for critical KSBs. To accomplish these
objectives, reviews of the academic literature on the knowledge sharing structure of teams, the fluidity of
transformation of membership, consequences of team membership change, and team
disruption/adaptation will be conducted in connection with doctrine on the FOE, followed by an analysis
of the type of KSBs lost, gained, or both lost and gained during personnel turnover. The needs analysis
will include interviews, focus groups, and questionnaires with Soldiers and leaders across MOS, but
likely specific to domains that will be critical for maneuver units to integrate into their operations in the
FOE (e.g., Signal, Cyber). This research will also include observations of current training in those
domains at home station.
The research is intended to produce a final report describing critical individual and collective team KSBs
needed to maintain a high level of functioning and to combat negative consequences during team member
turnover. The report will also provide recommendations for how to put the findings into action,
suggestions for altering existing team training, and a pathway towards developing novel training (based
on scientific literature, industry best practices, current Army approaches, etc.) that meets the unique needs
of the FOE. Interim technical reports will be written in years 1 and 2 detailing the steps taken to
accomplish the overall goals of the project. In addition, a proof of concept method for developing one or
more critical KSBs will be created. White papers will be reviewed based on the rigor of their planned
approach to design and develop those products.
The award will be approximately a 36-month period of performance, with a base (12 months),
Option 1 (12 months), and Option 2 (12 months), with a total budget not to exceed $750,000.00
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
4

---

1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
barton.c.crum.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Mitigating the Impacts of Personnel Turnover in the FOE” in the e-mail
subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
5

---

2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Mitigating the
Impacts of Personnel Turnover in the FOE” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time
on 30 June 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and
Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will
be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 30 May 2023, and
ending 30 June 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of White
Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact reviewing the
White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation timeline is
extended beyond 30 June 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
6

---

An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Barton Crum, (254) 383-1192,
barton.c.crum.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Edmondson, A. C. (2012). Teaming: How organizations learn, innovate, and compete in the
knowledge economy. Wiley.
Tannenbaum, S. I., Mathieu, J. E., Salas, E., & Cohen, D. (2012). Teams are changing: Are
research and practice evolving fast enough? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5,
2-24.
Wolfson, M. A., D’Innocenzo, L., & Bell, S. T. (2021). Dynamic team composition: A
theoretical framework exploring potential and kinetic dynamism in team capabilities.
Journal of Applied Psychology.
7

---

BAA TOPIC II A.2.b.ii: MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS “Self-Development Decision-Making in Army Officers

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.b.ii:
MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS
“Self-Development Decision-Making in Army Officers”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on FedBizOpps and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.b.ii MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC
LEADERS. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad
Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the
Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and
that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement.
A Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full
and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition
in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D)
within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each
budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested
by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award
due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and
copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC), stefanie.s.stancato.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide
a response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a
proposal”. as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and
cost associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for
funding. Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be
eligible to submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be
submitted electronically no later than 1 September 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V,
Deadlines, for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g.,
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

contract, grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the
intention of the Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A GOVERNMENT
CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL
INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Stefanie Stancato, (913) 702-5269,
stefanie.s.stancato.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - B W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized
and specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
2

---

training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Self-Development Decision-Making in Army Officers
Field Manual (FM) 6-22 recognizes the importance of officers’ self-development, emphasizing
that Army leaders need to “set time aside for self-development” (Department of the Army, 2022).
However, competing professional demands can disrupt officers’ intentions to engage in self-
development. When professional demands are high, officers may subjectively devalue the outcomes
associated with self-development, and therefore choose to refrain from engaging in self-development
altogether. The Army requires research-informed courses of action to support the design of self-
development interventions and tools that are tailored to officers’ motivations, learning needs, and time
constraints to maximize their engagement in professional self-development. This research will provide
the Army with an improved capability to tailor self-development interventions and tools to the
individual officer to maximize their engagement in professional self-development. Specifically, this
research would create guidance and recommended courses of action (in the form of a handbook/job
aid) to enable the Army Coaching Program, Army schoolhouses, operational unit training managers, and
instructional designers: (a) to incorporate knowledge of how and under what conditions Army officers
value and engage in self-development opportunities across a career lifecycle, (b) to structure, frame,
and design self-development opportunities to increase more beneficial outcomes associated with
engaging in these opportunities, and (c) to leverage officers’ time perspective with regard to how they
perceive the value of self-development opportunities with different implied (or explicit) time horizons
for application to their job tasks.
Self-development is a critical component of officers’ competency growth, contributing to
individual differences in development across the career lifecycle. While standardized education
processes, such as professional military education, establish a baseline of required knowledge, skills, and
behaviors for Army officers, self-development is driven by individual agency, interests, and decisions,
and is a key contributor to variation in competency profiles between officers. This research will apply
behavioral economic principles to develop guidance and recommended courses of action to support the
design of self-development interventions for Army officers. For instance, research has looked at
discounting rates with a variety of desired outcomes, both monetary and non-monetary, and how the
subjective value of rewards increases or decrease over time (Green et al 2013; Odum, et al 2020;
Madden & Johnson, 2010; Raineri & Rachlin, 1993). Furthermore, research has shown that non-
monetary rewards are discounted at a steeper rate (i.e., they lose their subjective value faster across
comparable delays) than with monetary rewards. Engaging in self-development may result in several
outcomes, both monetary and non-monetary, such as promotion potential (with its increased pay,
autonomy, prestige) or career prospects outside of military service. However, if officers do not value
these opportunities, they are unlikely to invest in them. A behavioral economic approach to the design
of self-development opportunities may enable the Army Coaching Program, schoolhouses, operational
unit training managers, and instructional designers to leverage individual leaders’ self-development
decision-making processes to improve and tailor self-development training programs to fit the Army’s
intent for career-long, progressive, and sequential leader development.
An ideal white paper will:
3

---

1) Focus on the range of behavioral economic principles by building a framework for how Army
leaders perceive the value of self-development opportunities in relation to time.
2) Develop assessment/diagnostic tools to measure key decision-making processes in relation to
self-development outcomes among Army leaders.
3) Produce a handbook/job aid that provides guidance and recommended courses of action to
leverage behavioral economic principles in the timing and design of self-development opportunities.
Key products of this research should include a knowledge product and scientific report
presenting evidence from evaluating temporal discounting rates concerning how Army officers make
choices surrounding self-development courses and guidance on how the Army can improve the process
by which leaders’ complete self-development opportunities. This research should result in three focal
products:
1) Empirical evidence of behavioral economic decision-making behaviors by different groups of
Army leaders in relation to different self-development options.
2) Science-based recommendations for interventions to influence decision-making mindsets and
better frame messaging about self-development options.
3) An assessment tool measuring individual officers’ discounting curve(s) and the factors driving
their valuation of self-development choices, which will inform tailored development tools that
overcome those barriers.
This research should provide the Army with an understanding of how Soldiers subjectively value
self-development opportunities and apply behavioral economic principles to identify recommended
courses of action to enable the Army to improve the timing and design of self-development
opportunities for Army leaders. Furthermore, this research should enhance and support the Army’s
efforts to manage talent across the officer life cycle and provide the Army with models and tools that
will support the self-development of officers. The research will address a line of effort intended to
explore the impact of individual agency in competency development. This line of effort broadly concerns
limiting and/or enhancing factors that affect the growth of leaders’ competencies based on their
individual goals, motivations, priorities, preferences, and orientation toward development.
Army leaders choose the areas in which they would like to develop based on their professional
and personal goals, and then also choose when to engage in these developmental opportunities. Two
related initiatives within the Army should inform the research project. First, Project Athena (Center for
Army Leadership) is a self-development tool that was designed for Army leaders to inform and motivate
them to engage in both personal and professional development. The Project Athena tool has a variety of
assessment batteries which are strategically selected to complement the skills being developed by each
individual officer. This research could support the ability to tailor the menu of resources available
through Project Athena. Second, the forthcoming cohort of certified Army coaches in the Army Coaching
Program could benefit from possessing new Army-focused tools for understanding and assessing the
factors that are influencing how Soldiers make decisions surrounding personal and professional self-
development. The Army Coaching Program will provide Soldiers with certified professional coaching for
a specific period of time to assist with developing, and improving their knowledge, skills, and abilities as
they relate to the Soldiers own developmental goals. The proposed research would support the goals of
4

---

these programs to improve Soldiers’ self-awareness and development in support of the mission of the
Army.
Research in the field of operant behavioral economics may also be informative to study how
Soldiers make decisions when there are competing demands for their time, resources, and attention.
This field is a subfield of behavior analysis that integrates behavioral psychology with micro-economics
and measures decision-making under constraints (e.g., responding to changes in prices, competing
contingencies). The measures and models of this field have been highly successful at predicting future
choice behaviors across a myriad of contextual situations (e.g., health, financial, social). For example,
delay discounting is a behavioral phenomenon where the subjective value of a reward/outcome
decreases as the delay to receiving that outcome increases (Mazur, 1987). Conversely, probability
discounting is a behavioral phenomenon where the subjective value of a reward decreases as the
probability of receiving the reward also decreases. Previous research has shown that non-monetary
rewards are discounted at a steeper rate (i.e., they lose their subjective value faster across comparable
delays) than with monetary outcomes. Holt and colleagues (2014) have shown that participants will
discount delayed food at higher rates than delayed money (i.e., food loses its value faster over time than
money) (Holt et al, 2014).
Previous research on discounting has also looked at timing as a relevant factor influencing
choice and has shown that people with limited time horizons (i.e., those focused on immediate rather
than distal events in the future) have steeper discounting rates than those who are more future
oriented in their thinking (Daugherty & Brase, 2010; Rung et al., 2019; Teuscher & Mitchell, 2011).
Additionally, Bidwell and colleagues (2003) evaluated delay discounting rates on retirement age, where
they found that steeper discounting rates were associated with younger preferred retirement ages,
suggesting that delay discounting also predicts retirement age. However, delay discounting rates have
not been specifically examined in relation to choices made in pursuit of personal growth opportunities,
such as personal and professional development. Engaging in self-development may result in several
outcomes, both monetary and non-monetary, such as promotion potential with increased autonomy,
pay, prestige, personal growth, satisfying curiosity or career ambition, or to enhance career prospects
inside or outside of military service. However, if Army leaders are discounting the value of these
outcomes, then they are less likely to invest time and effort in personal and professional development
activities.
The purpose of this research is to provide the Army with a better understanding of how Army
leaders subjectively value self-development opportunities and will apply operant behavioral economic
principles to identify recommended courses of action to enable the Army to enhance the timing and
design of self-development opportunities and messages for Army leaders. Application of this technique
may improve the utilization of self-development opportunities, addressing a critical driver of
competency change across the leader life cycle. Furthermore, this research should enhance and support
the Army’s efforts to manage talent across the leader lifecycle, providing the Army with guidance and
tools to enhance the design of interventions to support the self-development of officers, senior NCOs,
and warrant officers. Technical proposals to accomplish this research should include the following
objectives:
A good white paper will demonstrate the offeror’s expertise in the following areas:
1) Operant behavioral economics and delay, probability, and effort discounting research
5

---

2) The economic side of behavioral economics including prospect theory, loss aversion, and
nudges.
3) Self-development, learning sciences, assessment design/psychometrics, etc.
4) Army Subject Matter Experts, preferably with relevant experience as field-grade Army officers.
5) A principal investigator who possesses a Ph.D. in either behavioral psychology or experimental
psychology. Substitutions may be acceptable based on relevant research background.
ARI is also open to alternative ideas that will creatively accomplish the objectives of this planned
research in accordance with BAA Topic II A.2.b.ii MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS FOR
ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS, and that the Army will consider timely and valuable.
The award will be approximately a 24-month period of performance (Base, 12 months, not to exceed
$250,000; Option 1, 12 months, not to exceed $250,000) with a total budget not to exceed $500,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an
estimate of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in
sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to
the Army mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms must be
compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will be advised
that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any pages
submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
6

---

2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software,
personnel or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE),
Government Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or
Government Furnished Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination
that may be required for obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations
or exercises that would demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or
restricted rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume
to have unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White
Paper. Records or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but
must be clearly marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement
sensitive information before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government
employees or designated support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities
only. Classified, sensitive, or critical information on technologies should not be included in a
White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms
of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
stefanie.s.stancato.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Self-Development Decision-Making in Army Officers” in the e-mail subject
line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
7

---

1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and
facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other
factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will
be evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select
any award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite
a full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Self-Development
Decision-Making in Army Officers” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 01
September 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and
Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will
be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 2 August 2023, and
8

---

ending 01 September 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of
White Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact
reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation
timeline is extended beyond 01 September 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government
site includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper
or full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified
above, then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and
time specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Stefanie Stancato, (913) 702-5269,
stefanie.s.stancato.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Bidwell, L., MacKillop, J., Murphy, J.G., Grenga, A., Swift, R.M., & McGeary, J.E. (2013). Biphasic effects of
alcohol on delay and probability discounting. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharacology,
21(3), 214-221. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032284
9

---

Daugherty, J.R., & Brase, G.L. (2010). Taking time to be healthy: Predicting health behaviors with delay
discounting and time perspective. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(2), 202-207.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.10.007
Department of the Army (2022, November). FM 6-22 Developing Leaders. Headquarters, U.S.
Department of the Army. https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN36735-FM_6-
22-000-WEB-1.pdf
Green, L., Myerson, J., Oliveira, L., & Chang, S.E. (2013). Delay discounting of monetary rewards over a
wide range of amounts. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 100(3), 269-281.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.45
Holt, D., Newquist, M.H., Smits, R.R., & Tiry, A.M. (2014). Discounting of food, sex, and money.
Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 21, 794-802. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0557-2
Jarmolowicz, D.P., Reed, D.D., Francisco, A.J., Bruce, J.M., Lemley, S.M., & Bruce, A.S. (2018). Modeling
effects of risk and social distance on vaccination choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of
Behavior, 110(1), 39-53. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.438
Johnson, M.W., Johnson, P.S., Herrman, E.S., & Sweeney, M.M. (2015). Delay and probability discounting
of sexual and monetary outcomes in individuals with cocaine use disorders and matched
controls. PLOS One.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128641
Johnson, M.W., Herrman, E.S., Sweeney, M.M., LeComte, R.S., & Johnson, P.S. (2017). Cocaine
administration dose-dependently increases sexual desire and decreases condom likelihood: The
role of delay and probability discounting in connecting cocaine with HIV. Psychopharmacology,
234(4), 559-612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-016-4493-5
Lawyer, S.R., & Mahoney, C.T. (2018). Delay discounting and probability discounting, but not response
inhibition, are associated with sexual risk taking in adults. Journal of Sex Research, 55(7), 863-
870. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2017.1350627
Madden, G.J., & Johnson, P.S. (2010). A delay discounting primer. In G.J. Madden & W.K. Bickel (Eds.),
Impulsivity: The behavioral and neurological science of discounting (pp.11-37). American
Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12069-001
Mazur, J.E. (1987). An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. In Quantitative Analysis
of Behavior (Vol.5, pp. 55-). Psychology Press.
Odom, A.L., Becker, R.J., Haynes, J.M., Galizio, A., Frye, C.C., Downey, H., Friedel, J.E., & Perez, D.M.
(2020). Delay discounting of different outcomes: Review and theory. Journal of the Experimental
Analysis of Behavior, 113(3), 657-679. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.589
Petry, N.M. (2001). Delay discounting of money and alcohol in actively using alcoholics, currently
abstinent alcoholics, and controls. Psychopharmacology, 154(3), 243-250.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s002130000638
Petry, N.M. (2003). Discounting of money, health, and freedom in substance abusers and controls. Drug
and Alcohol Dependence, 71(2), 133-141. https://10.1016/s0376-8716(03)00090-5
10

---

Raineri, A. & Rachlin, H. (1993). The effect of temporal constraints on the value of money and other
commodities. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 6, 77-94.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.3960060202
Rung, J.M., Peck, S., Hinnenkamp, J.E., Preston, E., & Madden, G.J. (2019). Changing delay discounting
and impulsive choice: Implications for addictions, prevention, and human health. Perspectives
on Behavior Science, 42(3), 397-417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-019-00200-7
Strickland, J.C., Reed, D.D., Dayton, L., Johnson, M.W., Latkin, C., Schwartz, L.P., & Hursh, S.R. (2022).
Behavioral economic methods predict future COVID-19 vaccination. Journal of Translational
Behavioral Medicine, 12(10), 1004-1008. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibac057
Sofis, M., Carillo, A., Jarmolowicz, D.P. (2016). Maintained physical activity induced changes in delay
discounting. Behavior Modification, 41(4). https://doi.org/1031177/0145445516685047
Teuscher, U., & Mitchell, S.H. (2011). Relation between time perspective and delay discounting: A
literature review. The Psychological Record, 61, 613-632. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03395780
Vuchinic, R.E., & Simpson, C.A. (1998). Hyperbolic temporal discounting in social drinkers and problem
drinkers. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 6(3), 292-305.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1064-1297.6.3.292
11

---

BAA TOPIC II A.2.b.ii: MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS “Self-Development Decision-Making in Army Officers”

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.b.ii:
MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS
“Self-Development Decision-Making in Army Officers”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov on
01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.b.ii MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC
LEADERS. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad
Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the
Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and
that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement.
A Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full
and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition
in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D)
within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each
budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested
by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award
due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and
copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC), stefanie.s.stancato.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide
a response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a
proposal”. as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and
cost associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for
funding. Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be
eligible to submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be
submitted electronically no later than 08 December 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V,
Deadlines, for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g.,
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

contract, grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the
intention of the Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A GOVERNMENT
CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL
INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Stefanie Stancato, (913) 702-5269,
stefanie.s.stancato.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - B W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized
and specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
2

---

training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Self-Development Decision-Making in Army Officers
Field Manual (FM) 6-22 recognizes the importance of officers’ self-development, emphasizing
that Army leaders need to “set time aside for self-development” (Department of the Army, 2022).
However, competing professional demands can disrupt officers’ intentions to engage in self-
development. When professional demands are high, officers may deprioritize the outcomes associated
with self-development, and therefore choose to refrain from engaging in self-development altogether.
The Army requires research-informed courses of action to support the design of self-development
interventions and tools that are tailored to officers’ motivations, learning needs, and time constraints to
maximize their engagement in professional self-development. This research will provide the Army with
an improved capability to tailor self-development interventions and tools to the individual officer to
maximize their engagement in professional self-development. Specifically, this research would create
guidance and recommended courses of action (in the form of a handbook/job aid) to enable the Army
Coaching Program, Army schoolhouses, operational unit training managers, and instructional designers:
(a) to incorporate knowledge of how and under what conditions Army officers value and engage in self-
development opportunities across a career lifecycle, (b) to structure, frame, and design self-
development opportunities to increase more beneficial outcomes associated with engaging in these
opportunities, and (c) to leverage officers’ time perspective with regard to how they perceive the value
of self-development opportunities with different implied (or explicit) time horizons for application to
their job tasks.
Self-development is a critical component of officers’ competency growth, contributing to
individual differences in development across the career lifecycle. While standardized education
processes, such as professional military education, establish a baseline of required knowledge, skills, and
behaviors for Army officers, self-development is driven by individual agency, interests, and decisions,
and is a key contributor to variation in competency profiles between officers. This research is envisioned
to apply decision science principles to develop guidance and recommended courses of action to support
the design of self-development interventions for Army officers. For instance, research has looked at
discounting rates with a variety of desired outcomes, both monetary and non-monetary, and how the
subjective value of rewards increases or decrease over time (Green et al 2013; Odum, et al 2020;
Madden & Johnson, 2010; Raineri & Rachlin, 1993). Furthermore, research has shown that non-
monetary rewards are discounted at a steeper rate (i.e., they lose their subjective value faster across
comparable delays) than with monetary rewards. Engaging in self-development may result in several
outcomes, both monetary and non-monetary, such as promotion potential (with its increased pay,
autonomy, prestige) or career prospects outside of military service. However, if officers do not value
these opportunities, they are unlikely to invest in them. A decision science approach to the design of
self-development opportunities may enable the Army Coaching Program, schoolhouses, operational unit
training managers, and instructional designers to leverage individual leaders’ self-development decision-
making processes to improve and tailor self-development training programs to fit the Army’s intent for
career-long, progressive, and sequential leader development.
3

---

An ideal white paper will:
1) Focus on building a framework for how Army leaders attribute value to self-development
opportunities in relation to time.
2) Develop assessment/diagnostic tools to measure key decision-making processes in relation to
self-development outcomes among Army leaders.
3) Produce a handbook/job aid that provides guidance and recommended courses of action to
leverage behavioral economic principles in the timing and design of self-development opportunities.
Key products of this research should include a knowledge product and scientific report
presenting evidence from evaluating temporal discounting rates concerning how Army officers make
choices surrounding self-development courses and guidance on how the Army can improve the process
by which leaders’ complete self-development opportunities. This research should result in three focal
products:
1) Empirical evidence of decision-making behaviors by different groups of Army leaders in
relation to different self-development options.
2) Science-based recommendations for interventions to influence decision-making mindsets and
better frame messaging about self-development options.
3) An assessment tool measuring decision-making patterns) and the factors driving their
valuation of self-development choices, which will inform tailored development tools that overcome
those barriers.
This research should provide the Army with an understanding of how Soldiers attribute value to
self-development opportunities and apply decision science principles to identify recommended courses
of action to enable the Army to improve the timing and design of self-development opportunities for
Army leaders. Furthermore, this research should enhance and support the Army’s efforts to manage
talent across the officer life cycle and provide the Army with models and tools that will support the self-
development of officers. The research will address a line of effort intended to explore the impact of
individual agency in competency development. This line of effort broadly concerns limiting and/or
enhancing factors that affect the growth of leaders’ competencies based on their individual goals,
motivations, priorities, preferences, and orientation toward development.
Army leaders choose the areas in which they would like to develop based on their professional
and personal goals, and then also choose when to engage in these developmental opportunities. Two
related initiatives within the Army should inform the research project. First, Project Athena (Center for
Army Leadership) is a self-development tool that was designed for Army leaders to inform and motivate
them to engage in both personal and professional development. The Project Athena tool has a variety of
assessment batteries which are strategically selected to complement the skills being developed by each
individual officer. This research could support the ability to tailor the menu of resources available
through Project Athena. Second, the forthcoming cohort of certified Army coaches in the Army Coaching
Program could benefit from possessing new Army-focused tools for understanding and assessing the
factors that are influencing how Soldiers make decisions surrounding personal and professional self-
development. The Army Coaching Program will provide Soldiers with certified professional coaching for
a specific period of time to assist with developing, and improving their knowledge, skills, and abilities as
4

---

they relate to the Soldiers own developmental goals. The proposed research would support the goals of
these programs to improve Soldiers’ self-awareness and development in support of the mission of the
Army.
Consider, for example, research in the field of behavior analysis that has measured decision-
making under resource constraints (e.g., time, attention, money, competing contingencies) and
uncertainty (e.g., probabilistic outcomes). The measures and models of this field have been highly
successful at predicting future choice behaviors across a myriad of contextual situations (e.g., health,
financial, social). For example, White and colleagues (2022) evaluated how the delays to treatment
outcomes for special education teachers influenced their decision-making behaviors. The found that as
the delays to treatment outcomes increased, discounting rates by special education teachers would
increase (Reed et al, 2022). That is, special education teachers appeared to prefer interventions that
resulted in more immediate behavior change in their students. In another study, Reed and colleagues
(2016) developed a delay-discounting of text messages questionnaire to evaluate excessive reliance on
text messaging as an addictive behavior.
Previous research on discounting has also looked at timing as a relevant factor influencing
choice and has shown that people with limited time horizons (i.e., those focused on immediate rather
than distal events in the future) have steeper discounting rates than those who are more future
oriented in their thinking (Daugherty & Brase, 2010; DeHart & Odum, 2015; Rung et al., 2019). DeHart
and Odum (2015) evaluated the framing of delays on discounting rates, where they presented the delay
as either a specific calendar date or a temporal duration (e.g., 1 week, 1 month, etc.). They found that
when time was presented as a specific calendar date participants’ discounting rates were lower as
compared to when time was presented as a temporal duration (DeHart & Odum, 2015; DeHart et al,
2018). That is, participants subjective value of a delayed outcome was higher when they saw the delay
as a calendar date than when they saw it as a temporal duration. Additionally, Radu and colleagues
(2011) evaluated how reframing the delay to “nothing now but something later” or “something now and
nothing later” decreased discounting rates. They found that a model of temporal attention affected
intertemporal choices by modifying individuals present bias (Radu et al, 2011). Furthermore, Bickel and
colleagues (2012) evaluated how a working memory training influenced delay discounting rates. They
found that participants who had received the working memory training had significantly lower delay
discounting rates than those who did not receive the training (Bickel et al, 2012).
The purpose of this research is to provide the Army with a better understanding of how Army
leaders subjectively value self-development opportunities and will identify recommended courses of
action to enable the Army to enhance the timing and design of self-development opportunities and
messages for Army leaders. Application of this technique may improve the utilization of self-
development opportunities, addressing a critical driver of competency change across the leader life
cycle. Furthermore, this research should enhance and support the Army’s efforts to manage talent
across the leader lifecycle, providing the Army with guidance and tools to enhance the design of
interventions to support the self-development of officers, senior NCOs, and warrant officers. Technical
proposals to accomplish this research should include the following objectives:
A good white paper will demonstrate the offeror’s expertise in the following areas:
1) Theory and empirical results that explain individual and group patterns in the investment of
resources (time, money, effort) into pursuit of future outcomes. For example, research on delay,
probability, and effort discounting.
5

---

2) Self-development, decision-making under constraints, learning sciences, assessment
design/psychometrics, etc.
3) Army Subject Matter Experts, preferably with relevant experience as field-grade Army officers.
4) A principal investigator who possesses a Ph.D. psychology or a closely-related field.
ARI is also open to alternative ideas that will creatively accomplish the objectives of this planned
research in accordance with BAA Topic II A.2.b.ii MULTIFACETED DEVELOPMENT PATHWAYS FOR
ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS, and that the Army will consider timely and valuable.
The award will be approximately a 24-month period of performance (Base, 12 months, not to exceed
$250,000; Option 1, 12 months, not to exceed $250,000) with a total budget not to exceed $500,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an
estimate of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in
sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to
the Army mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms must be
compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will be advised
that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any pages
submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
6

---

2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software,
personnel or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE),
Government Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or
Government Furnished Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination
that may be required for obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations
or exercises that would demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or
restricted rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume
to have unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White
Paper. Records or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but
must be clearly marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement
sensitive information before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government
employees or designated support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities
only. Classified, sensitive, or critical information on technologies should not be included in a
White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms
of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
stefanie.s.stancato.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Self-Development Decision-Making in Army Officers” in the e-mail subject
line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
7

---

3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and
facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other
factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will
be evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select
any award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite
a full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Self-Development
Decision-Making in Army Officers” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 08
December 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and
Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will
be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 24 October 2023,
and ending 08 December 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of
White Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact
reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation
timeline is extended beyond 08 December 2023.
8

---

Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government
site includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper
or full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified
above, then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and
time specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Stefanie Stancato, (913) 702-5269,
stefanie.s.stancato.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Bickel, W.K., Yi, R., Reid, L.D., Hill, P.F., & Baxter, C. (2012). Remember the future: Working memory
training decreases delay discounting among stimulant addicts. Biological Psychiatry, 69(3), 260-
265. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.08.017
Daugherty, J.R., & Brase, G.L. (2010). Taking time to be healthy: Predicting health behaviors with delay
discounting and time perspective. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(2), 202-207.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.10.007
Department of the Army (2022, November). FM 6-22 Developing Leaders. Headquarters, U.S.
Department of the Army. https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN36735-FM_6-
22-000-WEB-1.pdf
9

---

DeHart, W.B. & Odum, A.L. (2015). The effects of the framing of time on delay discounting. Journal of
the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 103(1), 10-21. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.125
DeHart, W.B., Friedel, J.E., Frye, C.C.J., Galizio, A., & Odum, A.L. (2018). The effects of outcome unit
framing on delay discounting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 110(3), 412-429.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.469
Green, L., Myerson, J., Oliveira, L., & Chang, S.E. (2013). Delay discounting of monetary rewards over a
wide range of amounts. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 100(3), 269-281.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.45
Madden, G.J., & Johnson, P.S. (2010). A delay discounting primer. In G.J. Madden & W.K. Bickel (Eds.),
Impulsivity: The behavioral and neurological science of discounting (pp.11-37). American
Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12069-001
Radu, P.T., Yi, R., Bickel, W.K., Gross, J.J., & McClure, S.M. (2011). A mechanism for reducing delay
discounting by altering temporal attention. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,
96(3), 363-385. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2011.96-363
Raineri, A. & Rachlin, H. (1993). The effect of temporal constraints on the value of money and other
commodities. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 6, 77-94.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.3960060202
Reed, D. D., Becirevic, A., Atchley, P., Kaplan, B. A., & Liese, B. S. (2016). Validation of a Novel Delay
Discounting of Text Messaging Questionnaire. The Psychological Record, 66, 253–261.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-016-0167-2
Reed, D. D., Strickland, J. C., Gelino, B. W., Hursh, S. R., Jarmolowicz, D. P., Kaplan, B. A., Amlung, M.
(2022). Applied behavioral economics and public health policies: Historical precedence and
translational promise. Behavioural Processes, 198.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2022.104640
Rung, J.M., Peck, S., Hinnenkamp, J.E., Preston, E., & Madden, G.J. (2019). Changing delay discounting
and impulsive choice: Implications for addictions, prevention, and human health. Perspectives
on Behavior Science, 42(3), 397-417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-019-00200-7
White, A.N., Brodhead, M.T., Reed, D.D., & Walker, A.N. (2022). Further application of delay discounting
on special educator decision-making. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/vm7fd
10

---

C3 SSN Additional Questions and Answers

Question: Is this primarily a validation effort?

Answer: The purpose is to update the construct definitions, how they are measured, and then conduct the necessary construct validation to support the changes.

Question: Would adding new constructs be considered?

Answer: The existing constructs were identified by SMEs as consistent and important across related jobs, and cross-referenced with similar occupations on O*NET. The primary focus of this research is updating definitions, changing how they are measured, and demonstrating construct validity.

Question: Should the proposal take the form of a grant or cooperative agreement?

Answer: As stated in the Sources Sought Notice, the proposal will be a contract.

Question: What are the specifications of the deployment platform?

Answer: The application uses a flexible architecture built on Node.js, Angular.io, and MongoDB. The assessment will need to be uploaded to our research platform, preferably as a .NET DLL. The application cannot use ActiveX control, applets, or flash for scan and must work on Edge, Chrome, or Firefox.

Question: Can a demonstration of the assessment be provided?

Answer: Unfortunately, we cannot do a demonstration. The technical report (Adis et al., 2022) should provide an adequate overview of the assessment.

Question: Why were personality traits were not part of this assessment?

Answer: The Army already has personality assessments that were designed for selection and assignment. C^3 is meant to supplement those assessments by providing a measure of the potential to learn and succeed specifically in cyber jobs.

Question: There is no direct assessment of social cognitive biases that can influence optimal decision making. Is there a reason for this?

Answer: The C^3 is meant to assess the cognitive skills used in cyber work—things like decisions made about problems such as technological errors, rather than situations involving things like anchoring and adjustment, the availability heuristic, and similar decision biases. The constructs we have were identified by SMEs as important and consistent across related jobs, and cross-referenced with similar occupations on O*NET.

Question: How much do you want to keep from the current C^3 assessment, and to what extent are you open to include new items and paradigms?

Answer: The existing constructs were identified by SMEs as consistent and important across related jobs, and cross-referenced with similar occupations on O*NET. The primary focus of this research is updating definitions, changing how they are measured (including adding or changing items), and demonstrating construct validity. We are open to any modifications within those parameters.

Question: Do offerors need to have a security clearance?

Answer: The data for this effort should be collected using Army personnel. In order to analyze the data collected from Army personnel, the contractor will be required to use an Army-provided computer and must be able to obtain a clearance for use of that computer.

Question: How many awards will be given under this BAA?

Answer: Only one contract will be awarded under this announcement.

Question: Can you clarify whether the full existing instrument will be provided to the ultimate recipient of the contract? (i.e. is it just during this whitepaper stage that you are unable to demonstrate the current assessment? Or would all project development be expected to proceed based solely on the technical report descriptions?) And would the existing instrument be available to the contract recipient in an editable form (aka full set of source code) or would any revisions we design need to be built out as new items instead of being able to modify the prior items directly?

Answer: We will provide the existing assessment battery, including its code, as well as a guide to setup and maintenance. The code will be editable.

Question: What we would need to account for on our project team vs. what aspects of the technical platform are supported by ARI?

Answer: Project teams will need to have the capacity to edit the assessment, as well as support the transition of the assessment to the Army’s hosting platform. ARI will not be able to provide technical support.

Additional Questions

Question: Can you provide clarification on what is meant by ‘improve functionality?” Is this asking for hardware solutions? We are referring to “Update the assessment battery to incorporate new measures and improve functionality.”

Answer: Functionality refers to the guidelines that the revised battery should be no more than 30-40 minutes in length, and be user-friendly in terms of ease-of-use, navigability, and interactivity.

Question: Are there specific constraints (test format, hardware/software) that the new and revised measures should adhere to? Is ARI open to changes to the scenarios used in the current C^3, or would they be open to alternative task environments that would be developed with the same priorities of avoiding confounding effects of context and technology familiarity?

Answer: The application uses a flexible architecture built on Node.js, Angular.io, and MongoDB. The assessment will need to be uploaded to our research platform, preferably as a .NET DLL. The application cannot use ActiveX control, applets, or flash for scan and must work on Edge, Chrome, or Firefox.

We are open to changes to the scenarios used in the current C^3, as well as alternative task environments.

Question: The request specifies developing new measures – presumably there are limitations on test length which would need to be considered when incorporating new measures. Are all of the constructs currently in the assessment going to be retained or can we suggest a process for reducing the number of measures?

Answer: The constructs cannot be eliminated, but one major goal is to reduce the test length. This could be achieved by eliminating the existing way a construct is measured and replacing with a new measure.

Question: The request discusses low predictive utility of many of the constructs – are there any publications or tech reports related to those findings?

Answer: A technical report is currently in the review process regarding the results of the criterion validation, but the Adis et al report does discuss definitions of the constructs, their operationalizations in the assessment, and construct validity evidence.

Question: Regarding the research using Army personnel would there be a need of having an IRB approval for human subjects research or do you have one in place through the Army?

Answer: We have an IRB in place through the Army.

---

C^3 SSN Questions and Answers

Question: Is this primarily a validation effort?

Answer: The purpose is to update the construct definitions, how they are measured, and then conduct the necessary construct validation to support the changes.

Question: Would adding new constructs be considered?

Answer: The existing constructs were identified by SMEs as consistent and important across related jobs, and cross-referenced with similar occupations on O*NET. The primary focus of this research is updating definitions, changing how they are measured, and demonstrating construct validity.

Question: Should the proposal take the form of a grant or cooperative agreement?

Answer: As stated in the Sources Sought Notice, the proposal will be a contract.

Question: What are the specifications of the deployment platform?

Answer: The application uses a flexible architecture built on Node.js, Angular.io, and MongoDB. The assessment will need to be uploaded to our research platform, preferably as a .NET DLL. The application cannot use ActiveX control, applets, or flash for scan and must work on Edge, Chrome, or Firefox.

Question: Can a demonstration of the assessment be provided?

Answer: Unfortunately, we cannot do a demonstration. The technical report (Adis et al., 2022) should provide an adequate overview of the assessment.

Question: Why were personality traits were not part of this assessment?

Answer: The Army already has personality assessments that were designed for selection and assignment. C^3 is meant to supplement those assessments by providing a measure of the potential to learn and succeed specifically in cyber jobs.

Question: There is no direct assessment of social cognitive biases that can influence optimal decision making. Is there a reason for this?

Answer: The C^3 is meant to assess the cognitive skills used in cyber work—things like decisions made about problems such as technological errors, rather than situations involving things like anchoring and adjustment, the availability heuristic, and similar decision biases. The constructs we have were identified by SMEs as important and consistent across related jobs, and cross-referenced with similar occupations on O*NET.

Question: How much do you want to keep from the current C^3 assessment, and to what extent are you open to include new items and paradigms?

Answer: The existing constructs were identified by SMEs as consistent and important across related jobs, and cross-referenced with similar occupations on O*NET. The primary focus of this research is updating definitions, changing how they are measured (including adding or changing items), and demonstrating construct validity. We are open to any modifications within those parameters.

Question: Do offerors need to have a security clearance?

Answer: The data for this effort should be collected using Army personnel. In order to analyze the data collected from Army personnel, the contractor will be required to use an Army-provided computer and must be able to obtain a clearance for use of that computer.

Question: How many awards will be given under this BAA?

Answer: Only one contract will be awarded under this announcement.

Question: Can you clarify whether the full existing instrument will be provided to the ultimate recipient of the contract? (i.e. is it just during this whitepaper stage that you are unable to demonstrate the current assessment? Or would all project development be expected to proceed based solely on the technical report descriptions?) And would the existing instrument be available to the contract recipient in an editable form (aka full set of source code) or would any revisions we design need to be built out as new items instead of being able to modify the prior items directly?

Answer: We will provide the existing assessment battery, including its code, as well as a guide to setup and maintenance. The code will be editable.

Question: What we would need to account for on our project team vs. what aspects of the technical platform are supported by ARI?

Answer: Project teams will need to have the capacity to edit the assessment, as well as support the transition of the assessment to the Army’s hosting platform. ARI will not be able to provide technical support.

---

Computational Modeling Sources Sought Notice

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2-.c.ii: TEAM STAFFING AND COMPOSITION
“Computational Modeling for Team-Based Assignment”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 30 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.c.ii: TEAM STAFFING AND COMPOSITION. The United States Army Research
Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010,
issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for
the competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not related to the
development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this
BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full
compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984,"
and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest
will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related
to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds
availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or
other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
jessica.b.darrow.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 30 June 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for
additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Jessica Darrow, (703) 819-1017,
jessica.b.darrow.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
2

---

development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Computational Modeling for Team-Based Assignment
In a recent action plan to prioritize people and teams, the Secretary of the Army, the Chief of Staff of the
Army, and the Sergeant Major of the Army noted that the Army is composed of teams of teams and
argued that the Army’s success depends on composing competent, cohesive, and resilient teams (Grinston
et al., 2020). In support of this emphasis on assembling strong teams, the U.S. Army Research Institute
for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) is conducting research to develop team-based assignment
frameworks to better understand the ways in which team staffing decisions can improve team functioning
and performance. A critical aspect of achieving competent, cohesive, and resilient teams is to
appropriately measure and model the impact of team composition on important team-level outcomes.
However, addressing this research topic solely through traditional methods may not be the most feasible
or efficient approach. Collecting data directly from Army teams is costly and time intensive. The
statistical power required for team-level research necessitates significantly large numbers of individual
Soldiers nested within teams to achieve the necessary sample size. Moreover, collecting data can create
undue burden on units in the time required to collect the data as well as in the unit resources required to
organize data collection.
A powerful alternative is computational modeling, which allows complex team issues to be researched
without the limitations of more traditional measurement approaches. Computational modeling allows
researchers to mathematically simulate theories to explore the implications of the theory and make
predictions (Weinhardt & Vancouver, 2012). This technique is useful for “understanding systems with
dynamic variables and in facilitating prediction regarding the behavior of these types of systems”
(Vancouver & Weinhardt, 2012). Organizational researchers have demonstrated the utility of using
computational modeling to study team-level emergent phenomena (e.g., Kozlowski et al., 2013, 2016).
This approach could be particularly beneficial for studying team composition and effectiveness because it
allows researchers to simulate these theories without collecting large amounts of data. Computational
modeling has the potential to leverage team composition and effectiveness theories to better understand
the implications of team staffing decisions in dynamic systems.
The purpose of this project is to develop and validate computational approaches to the problem of team
composition. Specifically, the approach should yield a tool that can optimize team composition with
respect to team effectiveness (e.g., tangible outcomes and emergent states). The tool should also be driven
by extant team research literature and be explicitly multi-level.
The model or models underlying the tool may include, but are not limited to, network-based approaches,
agent-based models, neural networks, or genetic algorithms. In addition, the tool must be useable by team
researchers without an advanced knowledge of modeling and simulation. It must also be scalable and not
be so large that it cannot be used on Army networks. The tool should minimize the “black box” nature of
simulation and be transparent in its conclusions and how they were reached. The tool should allow user
control over model parameters, permitting the user to see how changes in parameters affect outcomes.
3

---

Finally, the tool should include functionality and guidance for the user to add additional factors to the
model.
OBJECTIVES
In order to meet the research objectives under this request:
1) The Offeror shall describe the methods that they will use to identify a theory upon which to base
the model and determine data requirements.
A successful White Paper response will:
a. Demonstrate understanding of team effectiveness factors that are relevant to the Army.
2) The Offeror shall describe the methods that they will use to develop, evaluate, and validate a
proof-of-concept computational model for team composition.
A successful White Paper response will:
a. Demonstrate expertise in both the social sciences and computer science.
3) The Offeror shall describe the methods that they will use to develop a tool and guidebook based
on the prototype model.
A successful White Paper response will:
a. Consider the audience that is likely to use the tool.
The award will be a 36-month period of performance (12-month base period and two 12-month
option periods) with a budget not to exceed $910,000.00.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
4

---

research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
jessica.b.darrow.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Computational Modeling for Team-Based Assignment” in the e-mail
subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
5

---

A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Computational
Modeling for Team-Based Assignment” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on
30 June 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and
Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will
be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 30 May 2023, and
ending 30 June 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of White
Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact reviewing the
6

---

White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation timeline is
extended beyond 30 June 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Jessica Darrow, (703) 819-1017,
jessica.b.darrow.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Grinston, M. A., McConville, J. C., & McCarthy, R. D. (2020). Action Plan to Prioritize People and
Teams. https://www.army.mil/article/239837/action_plan_to_prioritize_people_and_teams
Kozlowski, S. W., Chao, G. T., Grand, J. A., Braun, M. T., & Kuljanin, G. (2013). Advancing multilevel
research design: Capturing the dynamics of emergence. Organizational research methods, 16(4),
581-615.
7

---

Kozlowski, S. W., Chao, G. T., Grand, J. A., Braun, M. T., & Kuljanin, G. (2016). Capturing the
multilevel dynamics of emergence: Computational modeling, simulation, and virtual
experimentation. Organizational Psychology Review, 6(1), 3-33.
Vancouver, J. B., & Weinhardt, J. M. (2012). Modeling the mind and the milieu: Computational modeling
for micro-level organizational researchers. Organizational Research Methods, 15(4), 602-623.
Weinhardt, J. M., & Vancouver, J. B. (2012). Computational models and organizational psychology:
Opportunities abound. Organizational Psychology Review, 2(4), 267-292.
8

---

NCO Promotion SJT Additional Q&A for BAA

Q&A for BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 “Developing NCO Promotion Situational Judgment Test”

Is the intent of this effort to develop a single assessment to be used across all junior NCO ranks and MOS? Yes.

Would an approach that initially addresses one rank/MOS and scales to additional ranks/MOS be acceptable?  Yes.

Similarly, the Army Talent Attribute Framework lists many leadership KSAOs. Is the intent to develop a single assessment that measures all of them, or would a subset be acceptable as an initial effort? If there is a subset in mind, where should we focus? The job analysis report that is referenced identifies NCO ratings of KSAOs by importance.

What is meant by “high stakes?” Does it mean that if a Soldier does not pass, they do not get promoted, or does it refer to the challenging situations NCOs often find themselves in? A high-stakes assessment results in an outcome that is important to the test taker. The intended application, assuming the research is successful, is for use in the promotion process.

What are the requirements to host and deliver the adaptive test? What sort of platform do you plan to use to host and deliver it? Army Analytics Group supports ARI’s hosting and delivery needs. Programmers from AAG will attend the project kickoff meeting to answer questions and will be included in follow-on consultation to ensure the project plan and test development align with AAG requirements. In the past, many different types of files and computer languages have been acceptable, e.g., JSON, Python, .net although the versions and types have changed as security risks have been identified. It is critical that the files can be scanned for vulnerabilities and corrections may be required.

Given the vision for the adaptive assessment is a narrative that unfolds based on responses, what would be considered “innovative?” For example, would a simulation-based or virtual environment-based approach be acceptable? Or is the vision something text-based, potentially with multimedia (e.g., videos)? We welcome a variety of ideas for a computer adaptive SJT but note there may be limitations based on what the Army Analytics Group can support.

In addition to item difficulty, there are a variety of ways of adapting items. Are we limited to adapting based on increasing or decreasing difficulty? The goal is to develop a computer adaptive SJT that assesses Army leader attributes in the most efficient way possible.

Will ARI provide access to participants for multiple data collections to collect critical incidents, select SJT items, and perform validation studies? Yes, ARI will assist in gaining access to NCO participants when it is required and efforts have been made to minimize the burden for data collection support (e.g., build on prior research, capitalize on external SME consultants, when appropriate)

Should the prototype be a comprehensive and fully realized version that’s near-ready for deployment or a more rudimentary, proof-of-concept version?

The computer-adaptive SJT deliverable is intended to represent significant development towards a computer-adaptive measure. It is not expected to yield a deployment-ready computer-adaptive test.

• Should the computer adaptive prototype be fully validated within the scope of this project, or is that something that would occur outside the scope of the project?

• Criterion-related validation of the computer-adaptive SJT is not a requirement for this project.

---

Q&As SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE: REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS BAA TOPIC II A.2.: ASSESSING AND DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGICAL FLUENCY FOR THE FUTURE FORCE “Creative Performance Behaviors with Technology”

Questions and answers for BAA SSN for Creative Performance Behaviors with Technology

Q: Has ARI already identified a population to support the validation data collection? Or should coordinating those collections be factored into the project tasks and timeline?

A: The project plan should include a timeline for preliminary validation. If needed, a contractor may request government support for data collection.

Q: Regarding objective 1.e, can you elaborate on the existing and/or ongoing ARI creativity research that should be leveraged to scope project tasks?

A: I cited previous ARI research projects that examined creativity in the SSN that have publicly available technical reports.

Q: Will ARI research to establish a nomological network of TF constructs be completed in time to be leveraged for this research?

A: There are projects establishing the nomological network of TF that are underway. These projects have made significant progress and results will be shared at the start of this project.

Q: One specific question that I have is whether the number of anticipated awards is currently known?

A: Only one contract will be awarded.

Q: Are you able to outline the vision for how this project will fit into ARI’s greater effort to promote technological fluency in Future Operating Environments?

A: There are projects establishing the nomological network of TF that are underway. These projects have made significant progress and results will be shared at the start of this project. This project will help further the establishment of the nomological network of technological fluency.

Q: Who would be the anticipated end user of the derivative from this work?

A: The anticipated end user includes General Purpose Force Soldiers. Other stakeholders may be identified during the project.

Q: Is this related to an ongoing effort?

A: Yes, as referenced in the sources sought notice, this is related to other ongoing efforts within ARI.

Q: The solicitation mentioned that the instrument can be anything ranging from a self-report to an SJT to a simulation. Is there a preference for one over the other? For instance, is the instrument intended to be a self-evaluation (performing a task, SJT, self-report) or a supervisor-rated evaluation on various dimensions of their subordinates' creative performance? In our experience different operational boundary conditions can be conducive to one instrument versus another.

A: There is no preference. We are open to any type of measure and invite proposals of all types. Be mindful that we are specifically looking for an outcome measure.

Q: Has the funding for this effort already been committed? Or is this a solicitation for which the funding may be pulled?

A: Funding is planned for this project for the next fiscal year. Funding cannot be committed until a full procurement package is given to our budget office.

Q: The solicitation mentions that the scope of work includes the development and concurrent validation of the measure. With a concurrent validation of the measure, is there an expectation that the contractor will provide their own participants who will provide both the predictor and outcome data or is the expectation that the ARI will provide the participants and will oversee the execution of the study? In other words, does the validation part of the scope of work include the contractor conducting the studies, collecting data, and analyzing or just supporting the ARI with the design of the study and then analyzing the data?

A: If needed, a contractor may request government support for conducting the studies and completing data collection and analyses. This is a 12-month contract. We purposely put “preliminary measure validation” in the sources sought notice. We want some validation evidence but understand time constraints.

Q: Is there any background/pre-work that is directly related to this effort?

A: There are projects establishing the nomological network of TF that are underway. These projects have made significant progress, and results will be shared at the start of this project. In the sources sought, I cited publicly available technical reports for reference. Others will become available to the public likely once this effort begins.

Q: Who is available to participate in data collection?

A: Soldiers are the expected sample.

Q: Are there additional funds for future efforts? Specifically, to continue collecting validation evidence?

A: Not at this time.

Q: You want a criterion measure. Do you know if this would be a proximal or distal predictor of performance? Could this measure be used as a predictor measure in the future.

A: This measure could be both a proximal and distal predictor. It is possible that this measure could be used as a predictor measure in the future.

Q: When will this be awarded?

A: We are unsure of a specific timeline. Awards can vary.

Q: Is it known who will be the longer term POC for the project?

A: Not at this time.

---

> Download RTF file: Questions and Answers Enlisted Soldier Career Progression.rtf

---

Questions and Answers for NCO Promotion SJT

Q&A for BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 “Developing NCO Promotion Situational Judgment Test”

Is the intent of this effort to develop a single assessment to be used across all junior NCO ranks and MOS? Yes.

Would an approach that initially addresses one rank/MOS and scales to additional ranks/MOS be acceptable?  Yes.

Similarly, the Army Talent Attribute Framework lists many leadership KSAOs. Is the intent to develop a single assessment that measures all of them, or would a subset be acceptable as an initial effort? If there is a subset in mind, where should we focus? The job analysis report that is referenced identifies NCO ratings of KSAOs by importance.

What is meant by “high stakes?” Does it mean that if a Soldier does not pass, they do not get promoted, or does it refer to the challenging situations NCOs often find themselves in? A high-stakes assessment results in an outcome that is important to the test taker. The intended application, assuming the research is successful, is for use in the promotion process.

What are the requirements to host and deliver the adaptive test? What sort of platform do you plan to use to host and deliver it? Army Analytics Group supports ARI’s hosting and delivery needs. Programmers from AAG will attend the project kickoff meeting to answer questions and will be included in follow-on consultation to ensure the project plan and test development align with AAG requirements. In the past, many different types of files and computer languages have been acceptable, e.g., JSON, Python, .net although the versions and types have changed as security risks have been identified. It is critical that the files can be scanned for vulnerabilities and corrections may be required.

Given the vision for the adaptive assessment is a narrative that unfolds based on responses, what would be considered “innovative?” For example, would a simulation-based or virtual environment-based approach be acceptable? Or is the vision something text-based, potentially with multimedia (e.g., videos)? We welcome a variety of ideas for a computer adaptive SJT but note there may be limitations based on what the Army Analytics Group can support.

In addition to item difficulty, there are a variety of ways of adapting items. Are we limited to adapting based on increasing or decreasing difficulty? The goal is to develop a computer adaptive SJT that assesses Army leader attributes in the most efficient way possible.

Will ARI provide access to participants for multiple data collections to collect critical incidents, select SJT items, and perform validation studies? Yes, ARI will assist in gaining access to NCO participants when it is required and efforts have been made to minimize the burden for data collection support (e.g., build on prior research, capitalize on external SME consultants, when appropriate)

---

REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS BAA TOPIC II A.2.a.i: IMPROVING TALENT MANAGEMENT THROUGH DATA SCIENCE “Army Resume Profiling and Matching System”

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.a.i: IMPROVING TALENT MANAGEMENT THROUGH DATA
SCIENCE
“Army Resume Profiling and Matching System”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.a.i: Improving Talent Management through Data Science. The United States Army
Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-
23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation,
provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not
related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in
response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full and open competition
and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of
1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of
interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award
related to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to
funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of
funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC), naiqing.lin.civ@army.mil
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 4 October 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for
additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Naiqing Lin, (917) 517-2347,
naiqing.lin.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II-A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
2

---

Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Army Resume Profiling and Matching System
As part of internal Army Talent Alignment Process (ATAP), Army units and hiring managers receive
numerous resumes and other pieces of information on potential candidates, but it is unclear how easily
they can use that information to identify candidates that may be a good fit for the position.
The fit between a job and an individual can be assessed in multiple ways: for example, demands-abilities
fit and needs-supplies fit. Demands-abilities fit measures how well the individual’s skills and abilities
match the job requirements, while needs-supplies fit measures how well the job rewards match the
individual’s needs and preferences. However, it is not clear whether the information provided to officers
by units within ATAP provides sufficient information for officers to properly understand what a unit
might be looking for – and by extension, what sort of information the officers need to provide to the units.
This leads to resumes that can vary significantly in terms of usefulness to units.
To make the talent marketplace function more effectively, units need resume profiling capabilities that
can help units and hiring managers assess both types of fit, by analyzing the resumes of potential
candidates and comparing them with the position descriptions. This capability could potentially be
developed through the use of natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning techniques to help
extract relevant features from resumes, such as qualifications, past assignments, skills, education,
interests, and preferences. Research into this kind of capability could lead to improved tools to help units
identify officers to fill positions, and more efficient, effective talent management processes.
White papers will ideally suggest research to address the following objectives:
1. Identify features of officer resumes that are relevant to person-job fit (and to unit hiring decisions more
generally), as well as identify which KSAOs (Knowledge, Skills, Abilities or Other characteristics – or in
Army terminology, Knowledge, Skill, and Behaviors, or KSBs) are amenable to extraction from officer
resumes.
2. Develop and test a proof-of-concept approach for extracting and analyzing KSAOs/KSBs from officer
resumes and related data (e.g., biodata, certification and training data, etc.), using approaches such as
Natural Language Processing (NLP).
3. Develop recommendations for end-users regarding best practices on the issues of (a) how to create and
structure resumes to allow more optimal processing using natural language tools and be more useful to
3

---

hiring units with the Talent Marketplace, (b) how to present resume or other data to units to best facilitate
decisions about next steps (e.g., interviews, requests for additional information, etc.).
We anticipate any proposed research will involve the following stages:
1. Conduct a review of the literature on person-job fit from an officer perspective, supplemented by
SME feedback; and review the kinds of officer resume data currently available (e.g., semi-
structured resumes currently available within the AIM 2.0 system, structured career data from
TAPDB, resumes available through the Transition Assistance Program, etc.). Based on these
reviews, identify several sets of KSBs and other characteristics likely to be amenable to NLP-
based extraction and model development.
2. Develop and evaluate procedures to extract relevant features from officer resumes, including
particular KSBs and other characteristics (as determined in step 1 above), as well as make more
general predictions, such as relevance to unit hiring decisions. Because this is a proof of concept,
it would be acceptable to focus on a smaller number of branches, and (possibly) a reduced set of
KSBs. Models will be based on the lexical and semantic content of resumes, possibly in
combination with SME ratings of relevant features.
3. On the basis of these models and data, and of a literature review, (a) summarize findings on the
features that might make a resume usable/effective within the talent marketplace system, and that
will make them more amenable to NLP-based methods in the future, (b) develop a proof-of-
concept implementation for a software tool that might inform the future development of a more
complete Army Resume Profiling System (ARPS), to demonstrate how KSBs and other
information can be extracted from resumes, and how such information might be used to help
recommend actions to hiring units.
The award will be a 36-month period of performance (Base, 12 months, not to exceed $400k;
Option 1, 12 months, not to exceed $400k; Option 2, 12 months, not exceed $400k) with a total
budget not to exceed $1,200k.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed.
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
4

---

A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
5

---

White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
naiqing.lin.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
W911NF-23-S-0010, Army Resume Profiling and Matching System” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
6

---

Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Army Resume
Profiling and Matching System” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 4
October 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and
Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will
be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 5 September 2023
and ending 4 October 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of
White Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact
reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation
timeline is extended beyond 4 October 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Naiqing Lin, (917) 517-2347,
naiqing.lin.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
The following documents may be useful references for understanding Army personnel-related processes
and background:
7

---

• DA PAM 600-3. Officer Professional Development and Career Development. Washington, DC:
U.S. Army.
• AR 611-5. Personnel and Classification Testing. Washington, DC: US Army.
• AR 621-5. Army Continuing Education System. Washington, DC: US Army.
• U.S. Army (2019). The Army People Strategy. Washington, DC: U.S. Army.
• U.S. Army (2021). Army Modernization Strategy: Investing in the Future. Washington, DC: U.S.
Army.
• U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command. (2019). Training Development in Support of the
Operational Training Domain. Fort Eustis, VA: U.S. Army
• U.S. Army War College. 2021-2022 How the Army Runs: A Senior Leader Reference Handbook.
Carlisle, PA: U.S. Army War College.
• U.S. Department of the Army. (2023). Army Talent Management Strategy. Retrieved
from https://talent.army.mil/about/army-talent-management-strategy/
• U.S. Department of Defense (2020). DoD Data Strategy: Unleashing Data to Advance the
National Defense Strategy. Washington, DC: Department of Defense.
• U.S. Department of Defense (2017). Report of the 3rd Quadrennial Quality of Life Review.
Retrieved from https://www.militaryonesource.mil/data-research-and-statistics/reports/
• U.S. Department of Defense. (2015). Talent management concept of operations for Force 2025
and beyond . Retrieved from
https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/140
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Strengthening Data Science
Methods for Department of Defense Personnel and Readiness Missions. Washington, DC:
8

---

SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE: BAA TOPIC II A.2-8.a.2: Enhancing Job Classification and Assignment "Review of Army Aptitude Area Composites of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB)"

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2-8.a.2: Enhancing Job Classification and Assignment
“Review of Army Aptitude Area Composites of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery
(ASVAB)”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2-8.a.2: Enhancing Job Classification and Assignment . The United States Army
Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-
23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation,
provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not
related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in
response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full and open competition
and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of
1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of
interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award
related to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to
funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of
funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
kirby.j.hockensmith.civ@army.mil.
3) ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for white papers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 19 July 2024, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for
additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Kirby Hockensmith, (703) 712-
3037, kirby.j.hockensmith.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
2

---

development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Review of Army Aptitude Area Composites of the Armed Services
Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB)
The Army is interested in improving the military occupational specialty (MOS) assignment
process. Current Army MOS assignment relies heavily on recruit performance on the Armed Services
Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB). Prior research has linked higher scores on specific ASVAB
subtests to higher performance in specific Army occupations, therefore, ASVAB test scores determine the
careers that recruits are eligible to choose when they enlist in the Army. However, updates to the
assessment suggest there may be room for improvement in the way ASVAB subtest scores are combined
to predict future performance. The overall objective of this research is to review the current ASVAB
composite scores that are used to place recruits in different MOS, determine the degree of overlap across
the different composites, and update the composites to include newer subtests, if needed. Improved
composites will lead to more accurate performance prediction for specific Army MOS.
The ASVAB measures 10 distinct cognitive aptitudes and abilities, or subtests. The ASVAB can
be administered as both a computerized adaptive test (CAT-ASVAB) that varies item presentation based
on test taker performance and in a paper and pencil format where all test takers are administered the same
items. The aptitudes and abilities measured by the ASVAB include General Science, Arithmetic
Reasoning, Word Knowledge, Paragraph Comprehension, Mathematics Knowledge, Electronics
Information, Auto Information, Shop Information, Mechanical Comprehension, and Assembling Objects.
Test takers receive a standardized score from 1-100 for each of these subtests.
The Army combines scores on the ASVAB subtests into composites, also known as aptitude areas
(AAs) or line scores, to determine eligibility into each initial-entry MOS. For example, a Soldier would
be eligible to enlist in the Fire Control Specialist MOS (13J) if they score an 83 on the Field Artillery
composite AA that includes the subtests Arithmetic Reasoning, Mathematics Knowledge, and Mechanical
Comprehension. There are currently 10 AA composites that are used to determine MOS eligibility:
Clerical, Combat, Electronics, Field Artillery, General Maintenance, General Technical, Mechanical
Maintenance, Operators and Food, Surveillance and Communications, and Skilled Technical. Effective
classification and assignment of Soldiers is dependent on being able to discriminate the different abilities
of Soldiers based on how well they score on the AA composites of the ASVAB. The overarching
objective of this effort is to conduct research to determine if the Army would benefit from updated AA
composites used to determine MOS fit.
The current project aims to identify potential redundancy within the current ASVAB AA
composites, provide empirical evidence for removing certain AA composites, and create new AA
composites that more optimally predict performance across varied Army MOS. To accomplish this, the
research has several objectives:
1. Review modern cognitive ability/attribute theory and provide preliminary recommendations.
3

---

a. Identify potential gaps in the existing composite structure and make well-researched
recommendations for changes to AA composites.
2. Empirically examine relationships between current AA composites.
a. Using archival data, identify potential redundancy across AA composites in predicting
desired outcomes across varied military occupations.
3. Explore creating new AA composites from existing ASVAB subtests.
a. Develop new composites that include scores on ASVAB subtests that are not utilized in
current composites (e.g., Assembling Objects).
b. Using archival data, demonstrate that new AA composites capture unique combinations of
abilities/aptitudes.
c. Provide evidence that novel AA composites improve performance prediction for relevant
Army occupations without increasing group mean differences in composite scores and
leading to adverse impact for protected groups (e.g., race, sex).
The award will be a 24-month period of performance (Base, 12 months; Option 1, 12 months) with
a total budget not to exceed $1,000,000
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
4

---

2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
kirby.j.hockensmith.civ@army.mil , in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite
“ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Review of Army Aptitude Area Composites of the Armed Services
Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB)” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
5

---

4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Your Title” by
e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 19 July 2024. Any extension to the White
Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note
that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will be evaluated and considered for proposal
requests throughout the period beginning 04 June 2024, and ending 19 July 2024. An extension of this
timeline may be granted based on the number of White Papers submitted or other factors out of the
control of the designated point of contact reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified
by email if the White Paper evaluation timeline is extended beyond 19 July 2024.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
6

---

An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Kirby Hockensmith, (703) 712-
3037, kirby.j.hockensmith.civ@army.mil .
VII. REFERENCES:
7

---

SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE: REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS BAA TOPIC II A.2-.a.ii: Holistic Personnel Assessment “Developing NCO Promotion Situational Judgment Test” Per Special Notice, White Paper submissions are due no later than 2 August 2023; 5:00 PM Easter

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2-.a.ii: Holistic Personnel Assessment
“Developing NCO Promotion Situational Judgment Test”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on FedBizOpps and
Grants.gov on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference
to the BAA Topic II A.2.a.ii: Holistic Personnel Assessment. The United States Army Research
Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010,
issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for
the competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not related to the
development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this
BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full
compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984,"
and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest
will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related
to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds
availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or
other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
jamie.n.striler.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 2 August 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for
additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Jamie Striler, (703) 819-8672,
jamie.n.striler.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
2

---

development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Developing NCO Situational Judgment Test
The Army regularly conducts research to develop and validate assessments for non-
commissioned officers (NCO) promotion and assignments, and a suite of assessments is required across
NCO ranks and occupations (e.g., Knapp et al., 2002). Situational judgment tests (SJTs) are an effective
method of assessment for a wide variety of constructs and jobs, and they show incremental validity above
and beyond standard measures of cognitive ability and personality, and reduced adverse impact compared
to cognitive ability tests. SJTs have historically been pen and paper or video-based, and unlike other
measures of ability or personality, SJTs are rarely computer adaptive. A few studies exist on the idea of
branched SJTs (e.g., Kanning et al., 2006; Olson-Buchanan et al., 1998; Richman-Hirsch et al., 2000),
which are conceptually similar to computer adaptive tests such that they present a narrative that unfolds
based on the test taker’s responses. Developing the science around computer adaptive testing for SJTs has
benefits in terms of more precise and efficient measurement and item pools reduce the possibility of
faking in high stakes situations.
The goal of this research is twofold. First, to support enhanced talent management, the Army
needs validated measures for NCOs that assess leadership potential and better predict performance,
conduct, and attitudes. Thereby, the main objective of this research is to build a high stakes assessment
that can be integrated into the junior NCO, i.e., semi-centralized, promotion system to identify Soldiers
with higher leadership potential. The target assessment is a valid and reliable situational judgment test
(SJT) which may ultimately improve leadership across the force.
Alongside developing a static SJT, the secondary goal of this research is to create a computer
adaptive SJT prototype. The Army can benefit from the implementation of novel methods of assessment,
especially when such assessments take less time to administer and provide more precise information. To
accomplish these goals, the research has multiple objectives:
1. Review key Army resources on NCO attributes and leader development (e.g., Army Talent
Attribute Framework, Army Leader Requirements Model) to inform NCO research
2. Develop and validate (criterion-related) a static version of an SJT tailored for junior NCO
promotion
3. Extend beyond the static SJT with a scientific, innovative approach and develop a computer
adaptive SJT prototype applicable across NCO ranks
The award period of performance is approximately 48 months (12 months Base, 12 months Option
1, 12 months Option 2, 12 months Option 3). The total budget will not to exceed $1,800,000 and the
budget for each PoP will not exceed the following: $350,000 in Base period, $350,000 in Option 1,
$550,000 in Option 2, and $550,000 in Option 3.
3

---

The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
4

---

rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
jamie.n.striler.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Developing NCO Promotion Situational Judgment Test” in the e-mail
subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
5

---

identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Developing
NCO Promotion Situational Judgment Test” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time
on 2 August 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and
Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will
be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 3 July 2023 and
ending 2 August 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of White
Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact reviewing the
White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation timeline is
extended beyond 2 August 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
6

---

The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Jamie Striler, (703) 819-8672,
jamie.n.striler.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Kanning, U. P., Grewe, K., Hollenberg, S., & Hadouch, M. (2006). From the Subjects' point of
view. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 22(3), 168-176.
Knapp, D. J. (2002). Development of predictor and criterion measures for the NCO21 research
program (Vol. 1128). US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences: Fort Belvoir,
VA.
Olson-Buchanan, J. B., Drasgow, F., Moberg, P. J., Mead, A. D., Keenan, P. A., & Donovan, M. A.
(1998). Interactive video assessment of conflict resolution skills. Personnel Psychology, 51(1), 1-24.
Richman-Hirsch, W. L., Olson-Buchanan, J. B., & Drasgow, F. (2000). Examining the impact of
administration medium on examinee perceptions and attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6),
880.
Royston, R. P., Goodwin, G. F., Ness, A. M., Keil, C. T., Lockhart, L. P. G., & Jones, M. (2022). Army
Talent Attribute Framework: A Unified Framework for Defining Personnel Characteristics. Technical
Report 1421). US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences: Fort Belvoir, VA.
7

---

SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE: REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS BAA TOPIC II A.2-.a.ii: Holistic Personnel Assessment "Influences on Enlisted Soldier Career Progression

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2-.a.ii: Holistic Personnel Assessment
Influences on Enlisted Soldier Career Progression
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on FedBizOpps and
Grants.gov on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference
to the BAA Topic II A.2.a.ii: Holistic Personnel Assessment. The United States Army Research
Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010,
issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for
the competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not related to the
development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this
BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full
compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984,"
and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest
will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related
to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds
availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or
other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
kimberly.s.owens10army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 04 November 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines,
for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Kim Owens, (703) 712-3041,
kimberly.s.owens10.civ@army.mil
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
2

---

development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Influences on Enlisted Soldier Career Progression
Empirical research on the careers of enlisted Army personnel is important and impacts talent management
policy. This project is a 4-year effort to support ARI’s longitudinal cohort research on enlisted Soldier
careers. The overall objective is to examine how individual, organizational, and other factors support or
constrain career continuance and progression.
Previous research has modeled enlisted careers, including continuance (e.g., Young et al., 2010), attrition
(Strickland, 2005) and other related outcomes, such as performance and attitudes (e.g., Knapp, Owens &
Allen, 2012; Nesbit, Knapp, & Kirkendall, 2023). Additional research is needed to evaluate relationships
among variables and test and improve models. Further, this project is designed to advance research by
collecting multiple waves of data to better understand how and when key variables change over
time.
This longitudinal cohort effort was initiated in 2018 (Carre et al., 2023) and will track the careers of the
FY17-27 enlisted accessions cohorts. Annually, survey data is collected from Soldiers to track their
attitudes, experiences, and outcomes over time from initial entry to mid-career. The survey data is
integrated with additional Army data sources to develop a database for analyzing enlisted career
influences and outcomes.
Key project tasks include:
1) Data requirements include collecting annual survey data and leveraging and Army administrative
data and research data sources.
2) Construction of a longitudinal database to track multiple years and waves of recent and future
survey data for up to ten Soldier accessions cohorts. Data from administrative and archival
sources will be integrated with survey data.
3) Measurement and analysis of project data requires advanced statistical methods and modeling
approaches to accommodate challenges such as irregularly timed data and missing data.
4) Conceptualize and provide data-driven recommendations to inform effective policies for
recruiting, managing, and retaining talent.
ARI is interested in a variety of approaches and innovative ideas for modeling enlisted career progression
as we continue this longitudinal research effort.
The award period of performance is approximately 48 months (12 months Base, 12 months Option
1, 12 months Option 2, 12 months Option 3). The total budget will not exceed $1,350,000 and the
3

---

budget for each PoP will not exceed the following: $325,000 in Base period, $325,000 in Option 1,
$350,000 in Option 2, and $350,000 in Option 3.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
4

---

Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
kimberly.s.owens10.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite
“ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, “Enlisted Soldier Career Progression” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
5

---

the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Enlisted Soldier
Career Progression” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 04 November 2023.
Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov an
amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper received under this Notice will be evaluated
and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 05 October 2023, and ending 04
November 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of White
Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact reviewing the
White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if the White Paper evaluation timeline is
extended beyond 04 November 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
6

---

then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Kim Owens, (703) 712-3041,
kimberly.s.owens10.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Carre, J., Striler, J., Owens, K., D’Mello, S., Yu, M., Reeder, M., Posnock, S., Ellis, B., &
Walton., W. (2023). Impact of Army policies on personnel career progression: Base year report.
(ARI Research Note 2023-05). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the
Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Horgen, K.E., Nye, C.D., White, L.A., LaPort, K.A., Hoffman, R.R., Drasgow, F.,
Chernyshenko, O., Stark, S., & Conway, J.S. (2013). Validation of the Noncommissioned
Officer Special Assignment Battery. (ARI Technical Report 1328). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S.
Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Knapp, D.J., Owens, K.S., & Allen, M.T. (2016). Validating Future Force performance measures
(Army Class): Concluding analyses. (ARI Technical Report 1355). Fort Belvoir, VA: U.S.
Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Strickland, W.J. (2005). A longitudinal examination of first term attrition and reenlistment
among FY1999 enlisted accessions (Technical Report 1172). Arlington, VA: U.S. Army
Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Young, M.C., Kubisiak, U.C., Legree, P.J., Tremble, T.R. (2010). Understanding and managing
the career continuance of enlisted Soldiers. (ARI Technical Report 1280). Arlington, VA: U.S.
Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
7

---

SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE: REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS BAA TOPIC II A.2.a.i: Improving Talent Management Through Data Science “Understanding Organizational and Profession Identity influence on Career Pathing and Retention”

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.a.i: Improving Talent Management Through Data Science
“Understanding Organizational and Profession Identity influence on Career Pathing and
Retention”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.a.i: Improving Talent Management through Data Science. The United States Army
Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-
23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation,
provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and that part of development not
related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in
response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full and open competition
and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of
1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of
interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award
related to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to
funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of
funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
ryan.p.royston.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 7 October 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for
additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Ryan Royston, (571) 536-1610,
ryan.p.royston.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II-A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
2

---

Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Understanding Organizational and Profession Identity influence on
Career Pathing and Retention
Army personnel fill a large number of professional roles, each of which requires position-specific
education and training. Many key Army jobs (including many highly-trained professions such as
physicians, lawyers, cyber staff, and acquisitions professionals) have direct (or near-direct) civilian
analogues. In such jobs, the Army is directly competing against the private sector for qualified personnel.
Due to the high cost associated with specialized training (e.g., pilot, law, medical, and dental education
frequently cost hundreds of thousands of dollars), people may join the military to help fund their
education but separate from the Army as soon as their commitment is fulfilled. This cycle means the loss
of highly capable personnel for critical positions, as well as significant increases in overall costs to the
Army.
Consequently, the Army is interested in identifying effective retention strategies for those careers where
Soldiers may have a number of more immediately visible options outside of the military, and where
training is especially expensive or time-consuming. Importantly, approaches to retention used for other
positions may not be effective for Army professions with direct civilian equivalents, which frequently
offer increased compensation and flexibility.
To effectively recruit and retain people in professions requiring extensive training, the Army especially
needs to better understand the reasons people in such positions join and make decisions about whether to
remain, especially non-monetary reasons – for example, identification with the Army, beliefs about the
importance of their mission, etc. Research on organizational and professional identities, along with how
individuals hold multiple, sometimes conflicting identities has a long history (e.g., Burke, 2003; Deaux &
Burke, 2010; Hogg et al., 1995; Ramarajan, 2014; Stets & Burke, 2000; Stryker & Burke, 2000; Tajfel,
1978). Individuals commonly hold multiple social identities, including professional, family, and cultural
identities (e.g., Benet-Martinez & Haritatos, 2005; Carminati & Héliot, 2022; Chen et al., 2013).
However, there is less research on how Army personnel manage their Army and professional identities
and how related social and psychological factors influence their intentions to stay in the Army.
The Army needs to better understand how such professional beliefs and identifies develop and evolve
across a career, the conditions under which other non-Army identities and beliefs could potentially
conflict with or supplement Army identities (e.g., for medical or dental officers, beliefs about the role of
doctors generally, as opposed to beliefs about Army medicine specifically, or in the case of Army
lawyers, the role of a lawyer generally vs. practicing law specific to military contexts), and how the issues
surrounding such beliefs relate to individuals’ career plans.
3

---

White Papers on this topic should discuss how any proposed effort will (a) identify characteristics of
profession identities, (b) identify and differentiate professional identities from overall Army identify, and
(c) outline a mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative) approach to examine these retention-related
issues in specific Army jobs with civilian analogues, with an emphasis on understanding the role of
professional and Army identities.
Specifically, the proposed approach should:
• Develop a sampling plan for positions with direct civilian equivalents and the Knowledge Skills
and Abilities (KSAs) that tend to characterize such positions in at least five critical areas:
Cyber
o
Aviation
o
Health Services (e.g., Medical/Dental/Veterinary Corps)
o
Logistics
o
Judge Advocate General
o
• Propose quantitative and qualitative research methods to examine ways in which individuals in
such professions identify with the Army (for example, the kind of beliefs they hold about their
profession both inside and outside the Army), how such identities and beliefs change over time,
and how they interact or conflict with other relevant identities and roles (e.g., non-Army
professional expectations). Potential approaches may involve using both active-duty Army
personnel and civilians in equivalent job positions and using Likert and open-ended survey items
and focus groups to identify KSA requirements, occupation and organizational identity, relevant
work contexts, work satisfaction, motivation, and engagement.
• Describe analytic approaches (e.g., text mining and natural language processing techniques to
assess text data collected in open-ended survey items, focus groups, or interviews) to understand
the role of professional and Army identities in recruitment, career pathing, and retention
strategies for the five critical and high demand career fields mentioned above; and
• Develop practical recommendations for recruitment, career pathing, and retention strategies
tailored to the five career fields mentioned above. Recommendations for these positions should
consider the unique KSAs and work context requirements for these positions, identification of the
benefits or perks existing within the Army that may counterbalance compensation alone, and
current reasons for exiting the Army.
The results of this effort will support The Army People Strategy (2019) of acquiring, developing,
employing, and retaining talent by understanding unique work contexts and the role of competing
identities that influence Soldier decisions on career pathing and decisions to stay in the Army.
This research will also facilitate ARI’s understanding of how Soldier career development and trajectories
may be impacted by competing identities and contexts in which they work, allowing the development of
more valid and reliable assessments tailored to the needs of Soldiers working in specific contexts. It will
also facilitate Army Talent Management’s identification of training, employment, and retention needs for
Soldiers who are pursuing particular career trajectories or will be working in specific work environments
(e.g., field, garrison, deployment). Results can also be used to identify and develop efficient methods for
assessing Soldier attributes and aligning these individuals to professional career paths in ways that will
provide greater work satisfaction and meet professional goals.
4

---

The award will be a 36-month period of performance (Base, 12 months, not to exceed $400k;
Option 1, 12 months, not to exceed $400k; Option 2, 12 months, not exceed $400k) with a total
budget not to exceed $1,200k.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
5

---

Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
ryan.p.royston.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Understanding Organizational and Profession Identity influence on
Career Pathing and Retention” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
6

---

submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Understanding
Organizational and Profession Identity influence on Career Pathing and Retention” by e-mail no
later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 7 October 2023. Any extension to the White Paper
submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a
timely White Paper received under this Notice will be evaluated and considered for proposal requests
throughout the period beginning 8 September 2023 and ending 7 October 2023. An extension of this
timeline may be granted based on the number of White Papers submitted or other factors out of the
control of the designated point of contact reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified
by email if the White Paper evaluation timeline is extended beyond 7 October 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
7

---

An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Ryan Royston, (571) 536-1610,
ryan.p.royston.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Benet‐Martínez, V., & Haritatos, J. (2005). Bicultural identity integration (BII): Components and
psychosocial antecedents. Journal of Personality, 73(4), 1015-1050.
Burke, P. J. (2003). Relationships among multiple identities. In P. J. Burke, T. J. Owens, R. T. Serpe, P.
A. Thoits, P. J. Burke, T. J. Owens, ... P. A. Thoits (Eds.), Advances in identity theory and
research (pp. 195-214). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9188-1_14
Carminati, L., & Héliot, Y. G. (2022). Between multiple identities and values: Professionals' identity
conflicts in ethically charged situations. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 2022.813835.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.813835
Chen, S. X., Benet‐Martínez, V., Wu, W. C., Lam, B. C., & Bond, M. H. (2013). The role of dialectical
self and bicultural identity integration in psychological adjustment. Journal of Personality, 81(1),
61-75.
Deaux, K., & Burke, P. (2010). Bridging identities. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73(4), 315-320.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272510388996
Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J., & White, K. M. (1995). A tale of two theories: A critical comparison of
identity theory with social identity theory. Social psychology quarterly, 255-269.
Ramarajan, L. (2014). Past, present and future research on multiple identities: Toward an intrapersonal
network approach. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 589-659.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2014.912379
Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly,
63(3), 224-237.
Stryker, S., & Burke, P. J. (2000). The past, present, and future of an identity theory. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 63(4), 284-297. https://doi.org/10.2307/2695840
Tajfel, H. E. (1978). Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup
relations. London, UK: Academic Press.
8

---

SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE: REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS BAA TOPIC II A.2.b.v: DEVELOPING NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICERS FOR THE FUTURE FORCE “Enhancing Interpersonal Competencies of Junior Noncommissioned Officers” **Per Special Notice, White Paper submissions are

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.b.v: DEVELOPING NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICERS FOR THE
FUTURE FORCE
“Enhancing Interpersonal Competencies of Junior Noncommissioned Officers”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 31 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.b.v: DEVELOPING NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICERS FOR THE FUTURE
FORCE. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad
Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the
Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and
that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A
Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of full
and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The
Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and
development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities
set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White Paper and subsequent
Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to
select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil,
and copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC),
james.c.deller2.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
electronically no later than 16 July 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for
additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. James Deller, (254) 392-5593,
james.c.deller2.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
2

---

Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Enhancing Interpersonal Competencies of Junior Noncommissioned
Officers
One objective of the Army People Strategy is to develop and leverage the talents of Army leaders to build
cohesive teams (“The Army People Strategy”, 2019, p. 3). As noncommissioned officers (NCO) are
tasked with leading and training their Soldiers, it is imperative that they have the interpersonal skills
required to effectively manage their units and remain composed and levelheaded in all environments –
whether deployed or in garrison. However, research shows that softer skills, including interpersonal skills,
are an area where NCOs can struggle (e.g., Riley et al., 2019) and desire additional developmental
resources (e.g., Orvis et al., 2019).
Though the Army has taken steps to enhance written and verbal communications skills of junior NCOs, a
leader’s ability to effectively interact with others goes beyond communication skills. For example, leaders
must also understand how they are perceived and come across to their Soldiers, peers, and superiors. This
is in line with the Army Talent Attribute Framework (ATAF) which highlights the importance of the
interpersonal talent domain for Army leaders (U.S. Army Human Capital Enterprise, 2016). Although the
ATAF identifies the specific knowledge, skills, and behaviors (KSB) under the interpersonal talent
domain (e.g., social perceptiveness, perspective taking, interpersonal tact, interpersonal relationship
building, conflict management, interpersonal adaptability, etc.), it does not identify where in an NCO’s
career these KSBs are required nor how these KSBs are best developed. Thus, research is now needed to
identify development gaps and to develop and validate tools and resources to support the development of
interpersonal KSBs for junior NCOs.
The primary goal of this research is to design, develop, and validate developmental tools and resources to
support and/or accelerate the development of key interpersonal KSBs for junior NCOs. White papers
should address the following research objectives:
1. Identify the pertinent NCO interpersonal KSBs and their current developmental methods at the
junior NCO level.
2. Identify gaps that exist between those interpersonal KSBs and current Army developmental
methods.
3. Design and develop developmental tools and resources (e.g., training, job aids, etc.) to address the
most critical gaps.
4. Refine and validate these developmental tools and resources for use by junior NCOs.
This research supports Part B (Train) of LOE 2 of the Army People Strategy, which emphasizes “the
development and implementation of new tools, methods, and processes to enhance individual talents for
3

---

the benefit of the Army and the individual” and “investment in the development of Army leaders and
supervisors who will provide purpose, motivation, and direction to meet our MDO-capable force
objectives by 2035” (“The Army People Strategy”, 2019, p. 7). The research proposed in this new
requirement request will design, develop, and refine developmental methods and resources to enhance
critical interpersonal KSBs of junior NCOs to develop more effective leaders for the future force.
The award will be a 36-month period of performance (Base, 12 months, not to exceed $300k;
Option 1, 12 months, not to exceed $300k; Option 2, 12 months, not exceed $300k) with a total
budget not to exceed $900k.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
4

---

Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
james.c.deller2.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Enhancing Interpersonal Competencies of Junior Noncommissioned
Officers” in the e-mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
5

---

submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Enhancing
Interpersonal Competencies of Junior Noncommissioned Officers” by e-mail no later than 5:00
PM Eastern Daylight Time on 16 July 2023. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline
will be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely White Paper
received under this Notice will be evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period
beginning 31 May 2023, and ending 16 July 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted
based on the number of White Papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the
designated point of contact reviewing the White Papers. An Applicant will be notified by email if
the White Paper evaluation timeline is extended beyond 16 July 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
6

---

An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. James Deller, (254) 392-5593,
james.c.deller2.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Department of the Army (2019). The Army People Strategy. Washington, DC: Headquarters, Department
of the Army. https://people.army.mil/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/The-2020-Army-
People-Strategy-Final.pdf
Orvis, K. L., Kay, K. M., Shenberger-Trujillo, J., Ratwani, K. A., & Sanders, A. D. (2019).
Communication skills development for noncommissioned officers (NCOs) [Paper presentation].
Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC). AD1093050
Riley, R. P., Mihalco, K., Harvey, J., Fallesen, J. J., Lambourne, K., & McDonough, M. A. (2019).
2018 Center For Army Leadership Annual Survey Of Army Leadership (CASAL): Military and
civilian leader findings (Technical report 2019-01). Center for the Army Profession and
Leadership.
U.S. Army Human Capital Enterprise (2016). Army Talent Attribute Framework.
https://talent.army.mil/ataf/
7

---

SSN for White Papers - Accelerating Innovative Thinking Proficiency

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.b.i:
COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS
“Accelerating Innovative Thinking Proficiency in Army Officers”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on FedBizOpps and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for white paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.b.i: COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS.
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) Broad Agency
announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) of the Federal
Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and applied research and that
part of development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement. A
white paper submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is considered to be the result of
full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, “The
Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments. Funding of research and
development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding constraints and priorities
set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a white paper and subsequent
proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI may choose not to
select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
For this specific Sources Sought Notice, the sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for white paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice.
2) Submission of a timely white paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and
copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC), cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil.
3) ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for white papers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a
proposal,” as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the white paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI.
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal.
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III.
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or on other factors.
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and
cost associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for
funding. Note that an interested applicant must submit a white paper electronically in order to be
eligible to submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a white paper be
submitted electronically no later than 31 August 2023, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V,
Deadlines, for additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g.,
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

contract, grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the
intention of the Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A GOVERNMENT
CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL
INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a requested white paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The point of contact (POC) for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research
Triangle Park Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Cary Stothart, (254) 392-0530,
cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
white paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized
and specific Army need. Applied research precedes system-specific technology investigations or
development, but Applied Research should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced
Technology Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
2

---

team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and, if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Accelerating Innovative Thinking Proficiency in Army Officers
In multidomain operations (MDO), Army leaders will require innovative thinking to harness the effect of
strategic surprise by anticipating and counteracting advantages adversaries may seek to gain
(Department of the Army, 2022; FM 3-0 Operations). Innovative thinking—the cognitive process of
generating novel ideas, concepts, and approaches, independent of conventual norms (Sackett et al.,
2016)—is a strategic thinking competency that will be critical for Army officers to excel in to face the
future challenges of 2030-2040. Accelerating officers’ development of innovative thinking competencies
is critical, inasmuch as a peer or a near-peer conflict will likely be characterized by unconventional
applications of emerging technologies and faster decision cycles. The Army needs an accelerated
proficiency program for innovative thinking that is geared towards Army officers. To produce this
accelerated proficiency program, the Army needs the following knowledge products and development
tools: (a) a viable framework for understanding how innovative thinking competencies progress from
novice toward expert levels, (b) specification of the performance characteristics of expert-level
innovative thinking among Army officers, (c) a measurement tool to differentiate the features of
different levels of innovative thinking proficiency, and (d) a training application that utilizes leading-edge
design approaches to accelerate development of innovative thinking competencies. This planned
research will address the need for an accelerated competency development program for innovative
thinking, a program that will help Army officers in the future operational environment to expedite
decision cycles in a time-constrained and an unpredictable decision-making environment.
The requested research will pursue the following objectives across a 36-month period of performance:
1. Framework for Expert-Level Innovative Thinking. Build a framework for expert-level innovative
thinking competencies, informed by the results of measures/tasks designed to capture expert-
level mental representations, to construct a problem set to elicit innovative thinking.
2. Specify Features of Innovative Thinking on the Trajectory from Novice to Expert. To support
prototype design for a competency development tool targeting innovative thinking
competencies, the differences between innovative thinkers at various levels of proficiency will
be specified by comparing each participant’s performance to expert-level performance. This
objective will result in a standardized set of innovative thinking problems informed by expert
input. A rubric will be produced for the prototype problem set that will be used to differentiate
(e.g., score) performance at different levels of proficiency.
3. Leverage Approaches to Accelerating Innovative Thinking. This phase of the product design will
leverage various design features to be incorporated into a deliberate practice model for
innovative thinking competency development, en route to designing an accelerated competency
development program for validation with an Army sponsor. The approaches will be informed by
the expert model. Prototype problem sets will serve as criteria with which to further refine the
prototype research product, utilizing design features related to deliberate practice (Ericsson et
al., 1993), and leveraging memory effects of elaboration, interleaving, retrieval practice, and
spaced repetition.
3

---

4. Produce Training Exemplar for Accelerating Innovative Thinking Proficiency in Army Officers.
The training exemplar (a) will be doctrinally framed, (b) will closely follow the principles of
deliberate practice, and (c) will incorporate design features to leverage the memory effects of
elaboration, interleaving, retrieval practice, and spaced repetition. Additionally, the program will
be (a) designed to be incorporated into existing Army Professional Military Education (PME)
courses, (b) designed for self-development to be completed on the job (Ericsson & Pool, 2016),
and/or (c) designed to be spaced across an officer’s career and be tailored to an officer’s current
stage in their career.
ARI is also open to alternative ideas that will creatively accomplish the objectives of this planned
research in accordance with BAA Topic II A.2.b.i: COMPLEX COGNITIVE COMPETENCIES FOR
ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRATEGIC LEADERS, and that the Army will consider timely and valuable.
The award will be a 36-month period of performance (Base, 12 months, not to exceed $300,000;
Option 1, 12 months, not to exceed $300,000; Option 2, 12 months, not to exceed $300,000) with a
total budget not to exceed $900,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A white paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an
estimate of total cost for both the base and option approach. White papers should present the effort in
sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to
the Army mission.
A white paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in which
the applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel
(i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research, highlighting
their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms must be compiled into a
single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will be advised that they are only
to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any pages submitted in excess of
the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
4

---

the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software,
personnel or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE),
Government Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or
Government Furnished Data (GFD). The applicant shall indicate any Government coordination
that may be required for obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations
or exercises that would demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the white paper, the applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The applicant must identify any proprietary data the applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the white paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or
restricted rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume
to have unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the white
paper. Records or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the white paper but must
be clearly marked. The Army will treat all white papers as procurement-sensitive information
before the award and will disclose their contents to only Government employees or designated
support contractors for the purpose of procurement-related activities only. Classified, sensitive,
or critical information on technologies should not be included in a white paper.
2. An applicant is cautioned that portions of white papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC),
cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI BAA
W911NF-23-S-0010, Accelerating Innovative Thinking Proficiency in Army Officers” in the e-mail
subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
White papers and full proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
5

---

1. Scientific and Technical Merit—The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the
proposed research.
2. Potential Contribution—The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities—Proposed principal investigator and key personnel
qualifications, capabilities, related experience and techniques, and institutional resources
and facilities.
4. Cost—Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism,
affordability, and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of
evaluation on other factors.
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a white paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of white
papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a white paper and request a proposal without discussions. The applicant’s initial
submission should contain the applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the white paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will
be evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select
any award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the applicant regarding the white paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the applicant. The written request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the white paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Systems Thinking:
State of the Science and Practice” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 31 August
2023. Any extension to the white paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov
an amendment to this Notice. Note that a timely white paper received under this Notice will be
6

---

evaluated and considered for proposal requests throughout the period beginning 1 August 2023, and
ending 31 August 2023. An extension of this timeline may be granted based on the number of white
papers submitted or other factors out of the control of the designated point of contact reviewing the
white papers. An applicant will be notified by email if the white paper evaluation timeline is extended
beyond 31 August 2023.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full proposal.
An applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic white paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a white paper
or full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified
above, then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and
time specified in this Notice on the first workday on which normal Government processes resume.
An applicant agrees to hold the terms of their white paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Wilveria Sanders, (919) 549-4328, wilveria.a.sanders.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this white paper topic is: Dr. Cary Stothart, (254) 392-0530,
cary.r.stothart.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Department of the Army (2022, October). FM 3-0 Operations. Headquarters, U.S. Department of the
Army. https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN36290-FM_3-0-000-WEB-2.pdf
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition
of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 343-406.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.3.363
7

---

Ericsson, K. A., & Pool, R. (2016). Peak: Secrets from the new science of expertise. HarperOne.
Sackett, A. S., Karrasch, A. I., Weyhrauch, W. S., & Goldman, E. F. (2016). Enhancing the
strategic capability of the Army: An investigation of strategic thinking tasks, skills, and
development (Research Report 1995). U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral
and Social Sciences. AD1006147.
8

---

W911NF-23-S-0010 ARI BAA

UNITED STATES ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES (ARI)
BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT
FOR
BASIC, APPLIED, AND ADVANCED
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
W911NF-23-S-0010
01 May 2023 – 30 April 2028
ISSUED BY:
U.S. Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground
Research Triangle Park Division
P. O. BOX 12211
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2211
1

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. OVERVIEW OF THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY: ................................................. 4
A. Required Overview Content…………...………………………………………………….4
B. Additional Overview……………………………………………………………………...5
II. DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY:………7
A. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION……………….………………………………………....…7
1. Basic Research Areas of Interest……………………………………………………....7
2. Applied Research and Advanced Technology Development Areas of Interest………..8
a. Holistic Personnel Assessment and Statistical Innovations for Talent Management.9
b. Leader Competences for Complexity & Uncertainty……………………..………..10
c. Team Assignment & Performance………………………………….………………15
d. Assessing and Developing Technological Fluency for the Future Force….……….18
B. FEDERAL AWARD INFORMATION ............................................................................ 20
1. Procurement Contract……………………………………………………………………20
2. Grant……………………………………………………………………………………..20
3. Cooperative Agreement………………………………………………………………….20
4. Technology Investment Agreement (TIA)……………………………………….………20
5. Other Transaction for Research…………………………………………………………..21
6. Grants and cooperative agreements for institutions of higher education, nonprofit
organizations, foreign organizations, and foreign public entities………………………….21
7. Grants and cooperative agreements for for-profit and nonprofit organizations exempted
from Subpart E - Cost Principles of 2 CFR Part 200……………………………………...21
8. OT for Research/ TIAs…………………………………………………………………...21
9. The following websites may be accessed to obtain an electronic copy of the governing
regulations and terms and conditions……………………………………………………..22
C. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION ...................................................................................... 23
1. Eligible Applicants………………………………………………………………………..23
2. Cost Sharing or Matching…………………………………………………………...…23
D. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION .................................................................... 24
1. Address to View Broad Agency Announcement……………………………………...24
2. Content and Form of Application Submission……………………………………………24
2

---

Section 1 – General Information…………………………………………………………24
Section 2 – Application Process Overview……………………………………………….25
Section 3 – White Paper Preparation……………………………………………………..26
Section 4 – White Paper Submission……………………………………………………..27
Section 5 – Review of White Papers……………………………………………………...27
Section 6 – Preparation of Proposals……………………………………………………...27
Section 7 -- Conference and Symposia Grants……………………………………………35
Section 8 – Submission of Proposals……………………………………………………..36
E. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION…………………………………………….….41
1. Criteria……………………………………………………………………………………41
2. Recipient Qualification……………………………………………………………………42
F. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION………………………………………..44
1. Award Notices…………………………………………………………………………….44
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements………………………………………….44
3. Reporting………………………………………………………………………………..…54
G. FEDERAL AWARD AGENCY CONTACTS………………………………………………56
H. OTHER INFORMATION………………………………………………………………..57
3

---

I. OVERVIEW OF THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
A. Required Overview Content
Agency Name:
U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI)
Issuing Acquisition Office:
U.S. Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground, Research Triangle Park
(ACC-APG-RTP) Division
Research Opportunity Title:
U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences Broad Agency
Announcement for Basic, Applied, and Advanced Research (Fiscal Years 2023-2028)
Announcement Type:
Initial Announcement
Research Opportunity Number:
W911NF-23-S-0010
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number and Title:
12.630 – Basic, Applied, and Advanced Research in Science and Engineering
Response Dates (Submissions):
This BAA is a continuously open five-year announcement valid throughout the period
beginning 01 May 2023 and ending 30 April 2028. New start awards are normally
obligated early within each fiscal year Amendments to this BAA will be posted to SAM.gov
and is now known as Contract Opportunities and will also be posted to
http://www.Grants.gov when they occur. Interested parties are encouraged to periodically
check these websites for updates and amendments.
(End of Section)
4

---

B. Additional Overview Information
INTRODUCTION:
This Broad Agency Announcement (BAA), which sets forth research areas of interest to the
United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI), is issued
under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation
(FAR), which provides for the acquisition of basic and applied research and that part of
development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement
through the competitive selection of proposals, and 10 U.S.C. 4001, 10 U.S.C. 4021, and 10
U.S.C. 4022, which provide the authorities for issuing awards under this announcement for basic
and applied research. Proposals submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award are
considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full compliance with the
provisions of Public Law 98-369, "The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984" and subsequent
amendments.
ARI is the Army’s lead agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for
Army readiness and performance via research advances and applications of the behavioral and
social sciences that address personnel, organization, and Soldier and leader development issues.
Programs funded under this BAA include basic research, applied research, and advanced
technology development that can improve human performance and Army readiness.
Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by
funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Those contemplating submission
of a proposal are encouraged to contact the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) identified in
Section G of this BAA or the responsible ARI Manager noted at the end of the technical area
entry (Part II Section A of this BAA) to determine whether the proposed R&D warrants further
inquiry. If the proposed R&D warrants further inquiry and funding is available, submission of a
white paper or proposal will be entertained. The recommended three-step sequence is (1) initial
contact with the ARI TPOC or responsible ARI Manager, (2) white paper submission, (3)
proposal submission.
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor
and cost associated with submission of proposals that have minimal probability of being selected
for funding. Costs associated with white paper or proposal submissions in response to this BAA
are not considered allowable direct charges to any resulting award. These costs may be
allowable expenses to normal bid and proposal indirect costs specified in FAR 31.205-18.
Applicants submitting proposals are cautioned that only a Government Contracting or Grants
Officer may obligate the Government to any agreement involving expenditure of Government
funds.
To be eligible for an award under this announcement, a prospective awardee must meet certain
minimum standards pertaining to financial resources and responsibility, ability to comply with
the performance schedule, past performance, integrity, experience, technical capabilities,
operational controls, and facilities. In accordance with Federal statutes, regulations, and
5

---

Department of Defense (DoD) and Army policies, no person on grounds of race, color, age, sex,
national origin, or disability shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or
be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving financial assistance from
the Army.
(End of Section)
6

---

II. DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
A. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
1. Basic Research Areas of Interest
Basic Research is defined as systematic study directed toward greater knowledge or
understanding of the fundamental aspects of phenomena and of observable facts that drive theory
forward without being restricted to ideas that have known applications or products. Basic
research may lay the foundation for future research aimed at developing tools, but that is not its
goal. ARI’s Basic Research Program maintains close contact with ARI's applied scientists and
other relevant agencies within the Army to facilitate the transition of basic research to applied
Army efforts. The Basic Research Program seeks to support and execute high-risk, high-reward
fundamental research to develop state-of-the-art theory, methods, and models to create the
innovative concepts required to support the Army’s future capabilities and needs. Basic Research
seeks to support efforts in the following focal areas:
• Science of Measurement of Individuals & Collectives: Maintaining readiness requires
that the Army be comprised of high-quality personnel who are optimally distributed
throughout the force. Accurate, efficient, predictive, and informative measurement of
individuals and collectives is the means to meeting this charge. The program goals of this
focal area are to develop new (a) means to concurrently measure more than one factor
with a single testing behavior without sacrificing precision; (b) approaches to capture and
analyze continuous behavioral processes unfolding within and between fluid social
situations; (c) models and methods for combining information from diverse and
potentially archival sources to better understand the nature and antecedents of
performance; and (d) construct validation models and methods consistent with the nature
and antecedents of performance. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to,
psychometrics for modeling dynamic data, measurement theory for dynamic constructs,
context-sensitive measures of adaptability and flexibility, and embedded assessments of
individual and group attributes.
• Understanding Multilevel and Organizational Dynamics: The Army organization is a
complex, often fluid structure based on both formal and informal work roles and social
hierarchies. It is critical to better understand the multilevel and cross-level influences at
the individual, small unit, and organizational level, and how these influences relate to
organizational effectiveness. The program goals of this focal area are to (a) develop new
theories that capture the multilevel and multifactored nature of organizations and the
mechanisms underlying their coordination and restructuring processes, and (b) identify
and define top-down and bottom-up factors, and their interactions, that influence
organizational effectiveness. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, non-linear
models for assessing team processes, process-oriented models of individual and group
dynamics, modeling dynamic organizational restructuring, and models of complex multi-
layered organizations.
• Context of Behavior in Military Environments: The Army must thrive in various and
unpredictable situations. There are known gaps in current theory to address how
7

---

contextual factors, including leadership behaviors, combine to impact individual and
group behavior. The program goals of this focal area are to develop new (a) models or
refine existing models that capture critical environmental characteristics that influence
human behavior, and (b) theories understanding effective leadership and developing
effective leaders efficiently; developing new measures that advance the current
understanding of leadership and leader behaviors. Topics of interest include, but are not
limited to, developing leadership theory for complex organizations, identifying external
factors that impact social and decision-making processes, understanding multilevel
contextual effects on organizational behavior, and models for strategically activating
organizationally relevant identities.
• Formal and Informal Learning and Development: The Army not only trains personnel
for specific jobs, tasks, and roles, but also develops Soldiers across their careers. Thus, it
is important to understand how to maximize opportunities for learning throughout that
timespan. The program goals of this focal area are to develop (a) longitudinal theories of
adult learning within a variety of environments from a multidisciplinary perspective; (b)
innovative methods for maximizing collective learning; and (c) measurement techniques
that allow for objective and/or automatic assessment of learning processes. Topics of
interest include, but are not limited to, understanding the role of narratives in learning,
individual and collective mental models of learning experiences, non-linear models of
learning and development, and models of development across the career span.
For additional information on these domains, and potential areas of interest, Applicants may also
consult the following reports by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Science
(available from the National Academies Press http://www.nap.edu):
• “Measuring Human Capabilities: An Agenda for Basic Research on the Assessment of
Individual and Group Performance Potential for Military Accession” (2015) supervised
by the Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences
• “The Context of Military Environments: Social and Organizational Factors” (2014)
supervised by the Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences “Sociocultural
Data to Accomplish Department of Defense Missions: Toward a Unified Social
Framework: Workshop Summary” (2011) supervised by the Board on Human-System
Integration
The ARI Manager is Dr. Alexander Wind, (703) 851-9372, Alexander.P.Wind.civ@army.mil
2. Applied Research and Advanced Technology Development Areas of Interest
ARI seeks Applied Research proposals that provide a systematic expansion and application
of knowledge to design and develop useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures
that provide the means to meet a recognized and specific Army need. Applied Research
precedes specific technology investigations or development and should have high potential to
transition into advanced technology.
The ARI Advanced Technology Development program includes the development of
technologies, components, or prototypes that can be tested in field experiments and/or
simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct relevance to identified
8

---

military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or cost
reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and
retention; advanced data analytics and models applied to talent management; development of
higher-order competencies for Soldiers and Leaders; holistic assessment of unit readiness;
and team and unit mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and, if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
Topic areas of the applied research and advanced technology development include the following:
a. Holistic Personnel Assessment and Statistical Innovations for Talent Management
i. Improving Talent Management through Advanced Analytics
“Big Data” can be characterized by large sample sizes and high dimensionality, sparsity, noisy
and irregular measurements, complex interdependencies (including social and temporal), and
heterogeneity (e.g., of data types and structures). Legal or ethical considerations also may
place restrictions on how data and models should be used (e.g., creating new forms of
assessment that result in adverse impact). Finally, the utility of data and models for making
decisions depends on getting the right kind of information to the right people at the right time.
Leaders and Soldiers need information that is understandable, reliable, valid, and timely.
Given these challenges, research is necessary to develop new ways of generating, analyzing,
and using data for the purpose of talent management.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• New statistical and computational methods for assessing individuals and groups.
Examples include new approaches to generate, deploy, and score assessments; statistical
innovations in addressing faking and response distortion; predictive models to improve
talent management; new methods for augmenting assessments with non-traditional data;
and methods to reduce response burden.
• New methods to support timely, valid, and efficient data-based personnel management and
leader decision-making. Examples include innovations in job analysis/competency
modeling and statistical/computational methods to optimally assign individuals to
specialties and units.
• New metrics and models for group and individual effectiveness in organizations.
Examples include network effects associated with individual training and performance, as
well as metrics to more accurately integrate the value, costs, and likelihood of relevant
performance behaviors across contexts and careers.
• Novel or non-traditional data sources for behavioral/social science research in military
contexts. Examples include archival, physiological, relational, sensor, and qualitative data
-- especially data related to Soldier performance, staffing and personnel decisions,
leadership development, attitude assessment, and group/organizational behavior.
• Other applications of Big Data analytics, predictive modeling, or new computational
methods to address talent management and personnel management. Examples include
testing and assessment, counter-productive work behaviors, recruitment, retention, career
development, promotions, improving person-job fit, enhancing readiness and resilience,
and decision-support systems for leaders.
9

---

The ARI Managers are Dr. Andrew Slaughter, (703) 545-2353,
andrew.j.slaughter.civ@army.mil, and Dr. Garett Howardson, (703) 545-2429,
garett.n.howardson.civ@army.mil.
ii. Holistic Personnel Assessment
The ARI personnel assessment program includes research to advance the science underlying
talent management. The overarching objective is to devise means to attract, select, assign,
promote, and retain enlisted and officer personnel, both Active and Reserve, whose abilities
and interests will fit the Army’s current and future organizational and job requirements. Our
approach to enlisted and officer job performance reflects a “whole person”, compensatory
perspective, incorporating both the ability to perform and the motivation to perform. Our
selection and assignment research must incorporate both elements in a holistic fashion. Areas
of research include theory, methods, techniques, and tools to:
• Enhance the measurement of individual differences, both cognitive and non-cognitive,
for personnel assessment using both classical and innovative measurement approaches;
• Refine and expand the measurement and evaluation of job performance to include
innovative approaches and analysis techniques for job analysis and holistic job
performance assessment;
• Enhance personnel management, e.g., selection, assignment, promotion, from
application to the Army until separation using innovative methods, tools, and techniques;
• Evaluate and validate personnel assessments across the Soldier lifecycle to include
evaluating the impact of new and proposed personnel policies on personnel management
and performance; and
• Improve personnel management through application and enhancement of longitudinal
data and analysis.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Tonia Heffner, 703-545-4408, tonia.s.heffner.civ@army.mil
b. Leader Competences for Complexity & Uncertainty
As the Army prepares to execute the potential range of future military operations, it must
continue to develop a bench of officers and non-commissioned officers (NCOs) who possess the
competencies to perform well across a variety of conventional and emerging contexts.
Developing such competencies requires time and experience over a career, innate ability, and
deliberate leader development and training interventions. Leaders at all levels in the Army—
including junior and senior NCOs, cadets, and junior and senior officers—must develop the
critical cognitive skills that underlie tactical and technical expertise. Leaders also must possess
refined interpersonal and communication skills to mentor subordinates, build teams comprised of
diverse individuals, effectively cooperate with interagency and coalition partners, and
appropriately influence a variety of individuals and groups (e.g., the media, local populations).
Innovations in leader development and training require understanding of the competencies
required for effective performance in future operational contexts, as well as an understanding of
how ability and experience help or hinder competency progression. This area of research
addresses methods and techniques to identify, train, develop, and assess higher-order
competencies and requisite skills for successful leader performance within the Army.
10

---

i. Complex cognitive competencies for organizational and strategic leaders
The Army invests significant time and effort to develop leaders over their careers. Army
leaders are given immensely complex and dynamic missions that can have serious
implications at both local and global levels. The development of complex cognitive
competencies in Army leaders is essential for a successful and an effective organization.
Unless these complex cognitive competencies are continuously developed in Army leaders,
they may lose the ability to anticipate change. When organizational and strategic leaders are
continually developing their complex cognitive skills, they gain the power to explore all
options rather than just react with last minute changes to existing plans with respect to what
may have become an outdated concept of the operational and strategic environment. There is
need for scientific innovative research that will enhance the Army’s capability in assessment
of complex cognitive skills in its leaders and in the creation of improved methods to
accelerate the development of such skills at opportune times during their career lifecycle.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• How to better develop, identify, and assess individuals with the capacity for strategic
leadership and higher-order cognitive competencies (e.g., systems thinking,
innovative thinking, thinking-in-time, action learning, comprehensive information
gathering, critical thinking).
• Identification of the competencies, knowledge, skills, and abilities that must be
developed over a career to build officers’ capacity for strategic thinking and
leadership; identification of how the competencies develop over time and across a
career.
• Methods to assess, develop, and accelerate acquisition of cognitive competencies at
different phases in an officer’s career. Cognitive competencies of interest include,
but are not limited to, strategic thinking, systems thinking, creativity and innovation,
thinking-in-time, related complex cognitive skills.
• On-the-job approaches to building cognitive competencies and expertise. Examples
include examining the value of broadening opportunities to develop strategic
leadership skills, and methods to improve how leaders use mentoring to build
strategic thinking in others.
• Methods to develop the competencies, knowledge, and skills to improve a leader’s
ability to perform well in a variety of operational and mission contexts (e.g.,
visualizing the operational environment).
The ARI Manager is Dr. Rhett Graves, (913) 684-9758, thomas.r.graves5.civ@army.mil
ii. Multifaceted development pathways for organizational and strategic leaders
Deterring adversaries and winning the nation’s wars are accomplished through the
coordinated actions of cohesive and effective organizations working toward the same
purpose. The leader’s role in shaping and directing these organizations is significant.
Moreover, as leaders advance in their careers, the organizations they lead grow in
complexity. Army leaders advance from the direct level of leadership to leading
organizations to leading the Army enterprise. At each stage, leaders are expected to continue
learning and developing themselves, as well as developing the subordinates and
11

---

organizations they lead. To be effective across different performance environments and
across a career, leaders must therefore develop and improve a wide range of knowledge,
skills, and abilities—both within themselves and within others. Army leaders have a diversity
of backgrounds, interests, talents, etc., that result in the development of competencies that are
individualized to particular developmental paths. A better understanding is required of
individual, multifaceted, and asynchronous patterns of competency development.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Research is needed to identify how leaders grow over time and over unique
developmental paths, as well as how leaders develop and mentor their subordinates.
• Development of innovative measures and models of leadership performance; leader
competencies, knowledge, skills, abilities, and other attributes; and leader growth.
This includes developing and validating methods to assess competency baselines and
progression throughout Professional Military Education.
• Methods for identifying, measuring, and developing operational leadership
competencies for obtaining advantage in future operational environments,
characterized by contextual features such as battlefield transparency, near-peer
adversaries, autonomous systems, human-machine teaming, integrated domains.
• Methods for leader development in contexts extending beyond formal education and
training venues.
• Measures and methods to improve the rate of competency development and leader
capability to develop his or her subordinates. This includes leader development
interventions to improve knowledge and skills related to mentorship, methods to aid
leaders in identifying subordinates’ developmental needs, and methods to improve
performance counselling and feedback.
• Methods to enable leaders to influence and improve the organizations they lead. This
includes methods to develop leader skills and competencies related to promoting
organizational effectiveness, as well as techniques or job aids to help leaders promote
organizational performance (e.g., methods to support the diffusion of innovation,
methods to set conditions for a learning environment).
The ARI Manager is Dr. Rhett Graves, (913) 684-9758, thomas.r.graves5.civ@army.mil
iii. Assessing and Developing Junior Officer Competencies
Research is needed to specifically develop valid measures and targeted interventions that are
designed to provide developmental feedback on critical leader competencies for Junior
Officers. The Leader Requirements Model (LRM) and the Army Talent Attribute Framework
(ATAF) provide foundational and critical attributes and competencies relevant for this leader
echelon. Building on this foundation, research will further explore the anatomy of the targeted
competencies and the contexts in which they are used, ultimately allowing for the design of
diagnostic and developmental tools specific to more granular subcompetencies. By focusing
on the requisite knowledge, skills, abilities (KSAO) necessary for subcompetency proficiency,
research findings will provide the Army with novel developmental methods as well as a more
refined ability to predict performance. Additionally, research also is needed to provide
instructional and institutional guidance, helping trainers/educators to better instill these leader
12

---

competencies to maximize transfer of training to current and future operational environments.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Development of innovative assessment tools to diagnose Junior Officer leader
competency gaps and provide actionable guidance for leader development.
• Development of a stage progression model for Junior Officer competency
development accounting for configural profiles of subcompetency and KSAOs
expertise and how those profiles interact with elements of contextual demands.
• Methods to accelerate the development of leader competencies with novel training
interventions yielding improved performance at earlier stages of Officers’ careers.
• Prototype interventions promoting the transition from one stage of competency
development to the next.
• Methods to predict specific aspects of individuals’ leader performance in a range of
missions/situations enabling more refined talent management decisions.
• Development of enhanced and validated instructional guidance ultimately producing
more ready and lethal Junior Officers.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Jennifer Tucker, Office: 706-545-2490; Work cell: 706-366-7312,
jennifer.s.tucker.civ@army.mil
iv. Assessing and Developing Junior Leader Competencies for Multi-domain Operations
Sustained competition and conflict in the future operational environment (FOE) will impose
novel performance requirements on Army Leaders. Emerging operational demands and
requirements for multidomain operations will require Leaders to augment existing
competencies and to develop new ones. Research is needed to identify critical competencies
supporting Leader performance in the FOE and develop assessment and formative feedback
tools to enhance competency development. Specifically, research is needed to enhance
Leaders’: (a) perceptual and cognitive competencies for ambiguous contexts (e.g., degraded
information environments, spatial cognition, social cognition), (b) adaptive competencies for
rapidly evolving technological contexts (e.g., technological fluency, expert communication,
expert problem-solving, career transitions to technical fields), and (c) self-regulation
competencies for effective performance in demanding environments (e.g., hot cognition,
vigilance, cognitive flexibility).
Additionally, research is needed to understand better the systematic nature of ecological and
transactional aspects of competency development, taking place between the Soldier/Leader and
their context, as they and the Army more broadly recognize, make sense of, respond to, and
adapt to perceived contextual demands. The Army requires novel ways of thinking about,
measuring, and enhancing competencies that incorporate, explore, develop, and refine
ecological, transactional, and contextually focused perspectives, emphasizing perceptual,
cognitive, affective, performative, and experiential facets of competency development.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
13

---

• Methods to identify critical competencies for Leaders to perform effectively in
current and future operational environments, particularly with respect to MDO.
• Development of innovative and valid assessment techniques and tools for measuring
Leader competencies for the FOE.
• Methods to determine the cognitive, affective, sociocultural, and/or other factors
needed to be integrated into training and formative feedback interventions to enhance
competencies for FOE conditions (e.g., simulated realistic training contexts).
• Development of validated formative feedback tools that support and enhance critical
competencies early and throughout Leaders’ career lifecycle.
• Techniques to conceptualize and operationalize ecological and/or transactional
models of competency development, accounting for the role of context in perceptual,
cognitive, affective, performative, experiential, or other facets of competency
development.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Jennifer Tucker, Office: 706-545-2490; Work cell: 706-366-
7312, jennifer.s.tucker.civ@army.mil
v. Developing Noncommissioned Officers for the Future Force
Known as the “Backbone of the Army,” noncommissioned officers (NCO) conduct the daily
operations of the Army and are charged with the care, training, education, and readiness of
every Soldier. For those reasons, NCOs’ ability to coach, train and mentor competent Soldiers
of character is key to the readiness and success of the force. As NCOs transition from direct,
first line leadership (e.g., team leaders, squad leaders, and other equivalent duty positions) to
operational and strategic leadership positions, they must progressively build upon the enduring
leader competencies and knowledge, skills, abilities and other attributes (KSAO) that are
required of all NCOs. They must also develop challenging new competencies and KSAOs that
were not required of them as first line leaders. Although the Army has made great strides in
providing NCOs with rich and impactful professional development opportunities within the
institutional training domain, further research needs to be conducted within the operational and
self-development domains. One important focus of the research is to understand how NCOs
can build, practice, and accelerate their leadership competencies outside of the Army
schoolhouse settings. This research will provide science-based developmental methods and
assessments that 1) address the leader competencies and KSAOs for which NCOs need
additional training and development before being assigned to duty positions that require them,
2) are aligned with Army doctrine and existing leader development training, and 3) can be used
by NCOs in any learning domain.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Identification of emerging challenges that NCOs will face when leading, training, and
taking care of their units and Soldiers over the next decade, and identification of the
KSAOs they will need to meet those challenges.
• Identification of leader competencies and KSAOs for which NCOs need additional
training and development and the best methods to develop those competencies and
KSAOs.
14

---

• Development and validation of developmental methods and assessments to accelerate and
build upon the essential competencies and KSAOs that are required of NCOs across the
entirety of their lifecycle (e.g., leader identity, effective communication, task
prioritization, risk assessment and management).
• Development and validation of developmental methods and assessments to accelerate and
build upon essential leader competencies and KSAOs that are uniquely required of senior
NCO ranks and/or particular senior enlisted organizational and strategic leadership
positions.
• Methods and models that identify, describe, and anticipate how NCO competency and
KSAO requirements change over the course of an enlisted leader’s career.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Brian Crabb (254) 383-1132, brian.t.crabb.civ@army.mil.
c. Team Assignment & Performance
i. Multi-Layered Hierarchical Units
Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) require a dynamic mix of U.S. Army forward presence,
expeditionary forces, and partner forces to deter and defeat the enemy. Future Army units are
projected to operate as disaggregated, highly mobile, self-contained forces that will operate for
extended periods in complex environments without fixed basing. Small units drawing from
diverse personnel across a variety of units will be required to rapidly and organically aggregate
to achieve particular missions, and then disaggregate back into their previous state post-mission.
These teaming arrangements are an adaptive response to the complexity of the problems
encountered in the current global environment. Teams are complex dynamic systems that exist
across different environments, develop over time, and evolve and adapt as situational demands
unfold. Research efforts are needed to develop tools and techniques for teams to be able to
organically aggregate and disaggregate as the mission and operational environment demand,
understand how myriad individual characteristics combine to create highly effective teams, and
determine the contextual factors that impact the success of nested, hierarchical units.
.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Tools and techniques to support the rapid, organic aggregation and disaggregation of
small units within multi-team systems in response to task and environmental
demands.
• Statistical and measurement methods to understand team and multi-team process and
performance dynamics in field settings.
• Understanding of attributes and emergent states of teams related to robustness and a
team’s ability to continue to perform well under duress for extended time periods.
• Understanding the role of trust, cohesion, and other emergent states that influence
performance and effectiveness in multi-team systems; including the establishment
and dynamics of these states in multi-team systems.
• Understanding of how leaders, climate, culture, and other aspects of teams interact
across different echelons and team compositions.
15

---

• Application or revision of concepts such as commander's intent, command intent, and
unity of effort to train and support collaboration and decision-making by collocated
and distributed teams.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Stefanie P. Shaughnessy, (571) 585-1790,
stefanie.p.shaughnessy.civ@army.mil
ii. Team Staffing and Composition
As the Army shifts to the Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) paradigm, there will be an
increased emphasis on ensuring effectiveness of Soldiers and small units, with a recent
emphasis by Army Senior Leaders on small teams (squads, platoons, and companies) as the
foundation of readiness. In order to maintain maximal effectiveness of the force in this
paradigm, the Army will need to efficiently assign and utilize personnel throughout the
formation. This concept is often articulated as “Right Soldier, Right Job, Right Time.” To
achieve this vision, the Army requires the capability to shift to the assignment paradigm
from focusing solely on individual jobs to also accounting for the specific organization,
unit, and/or team context in which that job is performed. The Army requires the tools,
methods, and frameworks for optimally assigning individuals to teams and small units to
ensure the operational effectiveness of these units in future conflicts. Moreover, the Army
would benefit from new assessment systems to collect sufficiently deep and appropriate
information on the individual attributes and capabilities of Soldiers to support a team-based
assignment paradigm. Research in this topic area will address both the methods and
statistical tools, as well as the attributes and capabilities to be assessed in order to support
team-based assignment in the future.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Identifying characteristics that predict individuals’ capacity of working effectively
in team environments.
• Statistical optimization frameworks and models for ensuring team effectiveness
across a large number of teams and team assignment decisions.
• Understanding of team composition and compilation models for predicting team
outcomes (e.g., cohesion, adaptability, performance, effectiveness, readiness).
• Computational tools that embody scientific knowledge of team composition and
compilation, team tasks and environmental conditions related to team outcomes,
and optimization frameworks for personnel officers and leaders to use to assign
members to teams.
• Understanding the impact of team process change over time as team members rotate
in and out of units.
• Analytical tools for aggregating and displaying data and facilitating team-based
assignment decisions, to include taking into account different, or multiple, team
outcomes based on team needs.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Stefanie P. Shaughnessy, (571) 585-1790,
stefanie.p.shaughnessy.civ@army.mil
16

---

iii. Developing Teams for the Future Operational Environment
To be prepared for the future operational environment (FOE), the Army is undergoing a
transformational change with a focus on improving its talent management system. This
change will necessitate optimization of human potential, especially at the small-team
level. Current trends suggest that the FOE will be characterized by an expanded
battlespace across time, domains, geography, and actors, the convergence of capabilities
through technology, and compression among strategic, operational, and tactical levels.
The FOE will present challenges not just in the operational context, but also in training.
The multi-domain operations (MDO) concept requires Army teams to operate semi-
independently, but also to utilize capabilities across multiple domains in order to conduct
sustained missions in highly contested environments. According to the Army People
Strategy (2020), the Army must modernize training through the development of new tools,
technology, and methods to optimize human performance for MDO. To do this, the Army
needs a broad and deep research program that focuses on developing the talent of small
teams as they acquire proficiency of both the critical tactical skills and the requisite team
dimensions that will be required of them in the emerging operational environment. Despite
a burgeoning research literature on teams, there is considerable evidence that current
teams in the Army, and in modern organizations more broadly, are vastly different from
teams in the past (Jones et al., 2020; Shuffler et al., 2020). With some notable exceptions,
researchers largely remain vetted to a traditional understanding of teams as fairly static
and independent entities (Tannenbaum et al., 2012). Thus, the current state of the
scientific literature lacks specific practical insight about how to train Army teams in order
to meet the dynamic complexities that they are expected face in the FOE. This research
will inform the science of teams by providing a better understanding of team processes,
emergent states, and training approaches, while simultaneously equipping Army trainers
through the development of effective tools for optimizing individual and collective talent
during home station training. Such research will thereby allow the Army to maximize its
human potential to meet the challenges of the FOE.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Identification of the individual and team KSAOs, or relationships among them, that
small teams need to build and sustain team effectiveness in the FOE.
• Development of training approaches and tools to build individual team member
KSAOs that enable teams to sustain mission performance in the FOE.
• Development of team training approaches and tools that build team KSAOs and
team processes to enable sustained mission performance of teams in the FOE.
• Identification of the individual KSAOs and team-level characteristics that are
necessary for the effectiveness of teams within multiteam systems.
• Development of training approaches and tools that facilitate optimal teaming and
that enable teams to operate within multiteam systems.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Brian Crabb (254) 383-1132, brian.t.crabb.civ@army.mil
iv. Team Enablers
Performance in the current and future operational environments hinges not only on the
17

---

performance of individuals, but on the performance of teams. This research examines the
relationships and development of innovative measures of critical multilevel constructs,
such as unit resilience, unit cohesion, and unit climate and determines how these key
enablers impact unit-level readiness outcomes. The research also adds to the development
of integrated measures of objective and perceptual data on these key team enablers
• Development and validation of innovative measures and models of collective
constructs (e.g., resilience, cohesion, and command climate).
• Methods to improve unit/collective constructs (e.g., resilience, cohesion, command
climate).
• Development and validation of integrated measures of collective constructs such as
resilience, cohesion, command climate.
• The use of social network analysis to understand and investigate the pattern of
communication among unit members within small Army units to determine how it
influences team resilience.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Alok Bhupatkar, 703-712-3038,
alok.a.bhupatkar.civ@army.mil
d. Assessing and Developing Technological Fluency for the Future Force
In the Future Operating Environment (FOE), Soldiers and squads will be teamed with
increasingly sophisticated and evolving technologies. Soldiers and leaders in specialty
areas (e.g., Cyber, Data Workforce, Technology Workforce) and General Purpose Forces
(GPF) will require increased technological aptitudes and skills in order to adapt emerging
technologies to evolving mission sets and avoid being overmatched by AI-enabled “smart”
technologies. Technological Fluency (TF) - the ability of Soldiers and units to use and
rapidly adapt new and emerging technologies without formal training on these technologies

will be a decisive factor in the FOE. This research will enable the creation of a

“technologically fluent” Force by developing models of technological fluency, methods
and measures to assess and develop the technological fluency of Soldiers across a career,
and technologies to maximize resilience and performance in Soldiers and units.
Modernization is incomplete without critical mass in the Force capable of learning and
using those new technologies and systems. Talent Management reform is incomplete
without foresight of future operational demands and the ability to recruit, assign, and
develop Soldiers to meet those demands. To build a technologically fluent Force, Army
talent management processes must be capable of modeling TF, assessing Soldier and unit
TF, and developing performance for future mission success.
Areas of research include theoretical models or frameworks, methods, techniques, and tools
to:
• Build individual difference assessments that reflect TF competencies leveraging
existing measures and developing new, innovative measures.
• Expand the assessment of job performance to include criterion measures related to
TF, e.g., behavioral inputs to systems, system feedback of coordinated AI-human
interactions, collective performance measures, training performance measures.
18

---

• Develop training and leader development programs to enhance the KSAOs
reflecting TF competencies and to maximize performance in jobs/tasks requiring a
high degree of TF.
The ARI Managers are Dr. Jennifer Tucker, Office: 706-545-2490; Work cell: 706-366-
7312, jennifer.s.tucker.civ@army.mil and Dr. Alok Bhupatkar, 703-712-3038,
alok.a.bhupatkar.civ@army.mil
(End of Section)
19

---

B. FEDERAL AWARD INFORMATION:
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to
award a variety of instruments on behalf of ARI. Anticipated awards may be made in the form
of procurement contracts, grants, cooperative agreements and technology investment agreements
(TIAs), or other transactions for prototypes (OTAs). The ACC (APG) RTP Division reserves the
right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed. Applicants should
familiarize themselves with these instrument types and the applicable regulations before
submitting a white paper or proposal. The following are brief descriptions of the possible award
instruments:
1. Procurement Contract: A legal instrument, which consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6303, reflects a
relationship between the Federal Government and a State, a local government, or other recipient
when the principal purpose of the instrument is to acquire property or services for the direct benefit
or use of the Federal Government.
Procurement contracts awarded by the ACC (APG) RTP Division will contain, where appropriate,
detailed special provisions concerning patent, rights in technical data and computer software,
reporting requirements, equal employment opportunity, etc.. No fee or profit will be allowed on
travel and equipment.
Contracts are primarily governed by the following regulations:
a. Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR)
b. Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations (DFARS)
c. Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS)
2. Grant: A legal instrument, that consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6304, is used to enter into a relationship
in which:
a. The principal purpose is to transfer a thing of value to the recipient to carry out a public purpose
of support or stimulation authorized by a law or the United States, rather than to acquire
property or services for the Department of Defense’s direct benefit or use.
b. Substantial involvement is not expected between the Department of Defense and the recipient
when carrying out the activity contemplated by the grant.
c. No fee or profit is allowed.
3. Cooperative Agreement: A legal instrument which, consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6305, is used to
enter into the same kind of relationship as a grant (see definition "grant"), except that substantial
involvement is expected between the Department of Defense and the recipient when carrying out
the activity contemplated by the cooperative agreement. The term does not include "cooperative
research and development agreements" as defined in 15 U.S.C. 3710a. No fee or profit is allowed.
4. Technology Investment Agreement (TIA): An assistance instrument as described in 32 CFR Part
37. A TIA may be a cooperative agreement or an Other Transaction for Research under 10 U.S.C.
20

---

4021 both with provisions tailored for involving commercial firms or research involving
commercial application. To the maximum extent practicable, TIAs shall provide for a 50/50 cost
share between the Government and the applicant. No fee or profit is allowed on TIAs.
5. Other Transaction for Research. A legal instrument, consistent with 10 U.S.C. 4021, which may
be used for basic, applied, and advanced research projects. The research covered under this
instrument cannot be duplicative of research being conducted under an existing DoD program. To
the maximum extent practicable, OTs for research are to provide for a 50/50 cost share between the
Government and the applicant. An applicant’s cost share may take the form of cash, independent
research and development (IR&D), foregone intellectual property rights, equipment, access to
unique facilities, and/or other means. Due to the extent of cost share, and the fact that an OT for
research does not qualify as a “funding agreement” as defined at 37 CFR 401.2(a), the intellectual
property provisions of this instrument can be negotiated to provide expanded protection to an
applicant’s intellectual property. No fee or profit is allowed on OTs for research. Please refer to
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Other Transaction
Guide version 1.0 dated November 2018 for additional information. This document, along with
additional other transaction agreement (OTA) resources, may be accessed at the following link:
https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/cp/policy/other-policy-areas.html
6. Grants and cooperative agreements for institutions of higher education, nonprofit
organizations, foreign organizations, and foreign public entities are primarily governed by the
following:
a. Federal statutes
b. Federal regulations
c. 2 CFR Part 200
d. 2 CFR 1104
e. 32 CFR Parts 21, 22, 26, and 28
f. DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions
g. Agency-specific Research Terms and Conditions
7. Grants and cooperative agreements for for-profit and nonprofit organizations exempted from
Subpart E - Cost Principles of 2 CFR Part 200, are primarily governed by the following:
a. Federal statutes
b. Federal regulations
c. 32 CFR Part 34 - Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with For-Profit
Organizations
d. 32 CFR Parts 21, 22, 26, and 28
e. DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions
f. Agency-specific Research Terms and Conditions
8. OT for Research/ TIAs are primarily governed by the following:
a. Federal statutes
b. Federal regulations
c. 32 CFR Part 37 – Technology Investment Agreements
21

---

d. DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions
e. Agency-specific Research Terms and Conditions
f. Office of Secretary of Defense implementation guidance titled Other Transactions (OT)
Guide for Prototype Projects (November 2018, Version 1)
9. The following websites may be accessed to obtain an electronic copy of the governing
regulations and terms and conditions:
• FAR, DFARS, and AFARS: https://www.acquisition.gov
• Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): http://www.ecfr.gov
• DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions:
https://www.onr.navy.mil/en/work-with-us/manage-your-award/manage-grant-
award/grants-terms-conditions
• Agency-specific Research Terms and Conditions:
https://www.arl.army.mil/resources/baa-forms/#terms-and-conditions
(End of Section)
22

---

C. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION:
1. Eligible Applicants:
Proposals are sought from institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations, and for-
profit organizations, domestic or foreign, for research and development (R&D) in those areas
specified in SECTION II. A of this BAA. Foreign organization and foreign public entities
are advised that security restrictions may apply that could preclude their participation in
these efforts. Countries included on the U.S. State Department List of Countries that Support
Terrorism are excluded from participation in these efforts.
Government Laboratories, Federal Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs),
and U.S. Service Academies are not eligible to participate as prime Contractors or
Recipients under this BAA. If a proposal selected for award includes the involvement of a
Government laboratory, Federally Funded Research and Development Center, or U.S.
Service Academy, award funds allocated for the involvement of Government laboratories,
FFRDCs, and/or U.S. Service Academies will be directly provided from ARI to the
respective Government laboratory, FFRDC or U.S. Service Academy via a Military
Interdepartmental Purchase Request (MIPR). No award funds will be channeled directly
from a prime awardee (e.g., Contractor or Recipient) to a Government laboratory, FFRDC, or
U.S. Service Academy.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching:
Generally, there is no requirement for cost sharing, matching, or cost participation to be
eligible for award under this BAA. Cost sharing and matching is not an evaluation factor
used under this BAA. Exceptions may exist if the applicant is proposing the use of an OT
for research or prototype as an award instrument. Cost-sharing requirements may be found
at 32 CFR Part 37 and in the DoD Other Transaction Guide for Prototype Projects
(https://www.dau.edu/pdfviewer/Source/Guidebooks/Other-Transactions-(OT)-Guide.pdf).
Applicants are encouraged to consider cost sharing schemes in cooperation with ARI.
(End of Section)
23

---

D. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION:
1. Address to View Broad Agency Announcement:
Grants.gov (www.grants.gov)
Contract Opportunities (sam.gov)
2. Content and Form of Application Submission:
Section 1 – General Information
Completeness of Information: Proposals must include all of the information specified in this
BAA to prevent delays in evaluation. Be sure to specify the Commercial and Government
Entity (CAGE Code), the DUNS Number, and the Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN)
with your submission. Completion of the Representations and Certifications as well as
registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) are prerequisites before receiving
an award.
Classified Submissions: Do not submit any proposals that include classified information.
ACC-APG-RTP is not allowed to accept classified submissions.
Use of Color in Proposals: All proposals received will be stored as electronic images.
Electronic color images require a significantly larger amount of storage space than black-
and-white images. As a result, Applicant’s use of color in proposals should be used only
when necessary to convey specific information.
Government Property/Government Furnished Equipment and Facilities: Normally, title to
equipment or other tangible property purchased with Government funds vests with nonprofit
institutions of higher education or with nonprofit organizations whose primary purpose is
conducting scientific research if vesting will facilitate scientific research performed for the
Government. For-profit organizations are expected to possess the necessary plant and
equipment to conduct the proposed research. Deviations may be made on a case-by-case
basis to allow for-profit organizations to purchase equipment, but regulatory disposition
instructions must be followed.
Post-Employment Conflict of Interest: There are certain post-employment restrictions on
former Federal officers and employees, including special Government employees (Section
207 of Title 18, U.S.C.). If an Applicant believes a conflict of interest may exist, the
Applicant should discuss the situation with the Army legal counsel, Mr. Brian Bentley,
(571) 256-7844, brian.e.bentley2.civ@army.mil, prior to expending time and effort in
preparing a proposal.
24

---

Statement of Disclosure Preference: Please complete Form 52 or 52A stating your
preference for release of information contained in your proposal. Copies of these forms are
available at http://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?page=218. Additionally, proposals
containing data that is not to be disclosed to the public for any purpose or used by the
Government except for evaluation purposes shall include the following statement on their
cover page:
This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall
not be duplicated, used, or disclosed, in whole or in part, for any purpose other than to
evaluate this proposal. If, however, an award is made to this Applicant as a result of, or
in connection with, the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to
duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting award. This
restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this
proposal if the information has been obtained from another source without restriction.
The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets .
The Applicant shall also mark each sheet of data it wants to restrict with the following
legend:
“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title
page of this proposal.”
Section 2 – Application Process Overview
The application process is in three stages as follows:
Stage 1- Provide a valid unique entity identifier (formerly DUNS). Please verify the
accuracy of your Unique Entity Identifier (formerly DUNS) at the Dun and Bradstreet
(D&B) website http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform before registering with the System for
Award Management System (SAM). Prospective Applicants must be registered in SAM at
https://www.sam.gov prior to submitting its application.
Stage 2 - Prospective Applicants are encouraged, but not required, to submit White Papers
prior to the submission of a complete proposal. The purpose of submitting a White Paper is
to minimize the labor and cost associated with the production of a detailed proposal that has
little chance of being selected for funding. Feedback on a White Paper will be provided to
the Applicant with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a
proposal”.
Stage 3 - Interested Applicants are required to submit a proposal. All proposals submitted
under the terms and conditions cited in this BAA will be reviewed regardless of whether an
Applicant submitted a White Paper.
25

---

Section 3 – White Paper Preparation
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research, including how it is
innovative and how it could substantially advance the state of the science. Army relevance and
potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate of total cost for the proposed
effort. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the
concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an
addendum in which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per
individual) of all key personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal
Investigators) who will perform the research, highlighting their qualifications and
experience as discussed below. All files and forms must be compiled into a single PDF file
or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will be advised that they are only to
review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any pages submitted in
excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPER:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives,
approach, relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include
the nature and extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the
work will contribute to the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request
and how this would be demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests
of the Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges,
software, personnel or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment
(GFE), Government Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property
(GFP), or Government Furnished Data (GFD). Applicant shall indicate any Government
coordination that may be required for obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to
perform any simulations or exercises that would demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research
hours, burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the
Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform
the research, highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must clearly identify and mark any proprietary data the Applicant intends
to be used only by the Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data
or computer software contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the
Government as limited rights or restricted rights respectively. In the absence of such
26

---

identification, the Government will assume to have unlimited rights to all technical data
or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records or data bearing a restrictive.
2. An Applicant is cautioned, however, that portions of a White Paper may be subject to
release under terms of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Section 4 – White Paper Submission
A White Paper of the proposed effort may be submitted electronically to the cognizant ARI
Manager listed in Section II. A with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 White
Paper” addressing specific technical area(s) and an estimate of proposed cost.
An Applicant preparing a White Paper for submission may follow any convenient format desired
as long as the submission complies with guidance above in Section 3, “White Paper
Submission.” Please enclose an e-mail address and a telephone number where you can be
reached.
Section 5 – Review of White Papers
ARI TPOCs will receive and consider all whitepapers submitted and will provide a response with
either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
Section 6 – Preparation of Proposals
PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:
General Information: The proposal is the only vehicle available to the Applicant for receiving
consideration for award. The proposal must stand on its own merit; only information provided in
the proposal can be used in the evaluation process leading to an award. The proposal should be
prepared simply and economically, providing straightforward, concise delineation of capabilities
necessary to perform the proposed work. The technical volume must be accompanied by a fully
supported cost volume as cost and technical considerations are reviewed simultaneously; the cost
volume should assume a start date of no earlier than 01 November 2023. In preparing proposals,
it is important that the Applicant keep in mind the characteristics of a proposal acceptable for
evaluation. A proposal must include all the information specified in this announcement in order
to receive consideration. All proposals must include:
1. An Abstract, Background, Application Potential, Technical Approach, Reference List,
Curriculum Vitae/Resumes of proposed researchers, and cost information, as described
below.
2. Contact information such as e-mail addresses and telephone numbers for both the
Principal Investigator and Institutional Representative to allow technical and contracting
questions to be addressed.
3. Institutional endorsement, signature of the proposed Principal Investigator, time frames
27

---

for all phases of the project, and detailed accounts of proposed work and cost by task.
4. Provide the name, address, and phone number of Applicant’s cognizant Defense Contract
Audit Agency (DCAA) office, if known. All Applicants must be registered in the System
for Award Management (SAM) before an award can be made. Applicants must also
provide their DUNS number (Duns and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System).
Proposals should be very well written, and Applicant’s intention should be clear to
technical reviewers who, while having expertise in behavioral sciences, may lack
concentrated knowledge in the proposed domain. Proposals should be sufficiently
detailed to be responsive to the criteria, described below, for evaluation.
Proposal Format and Content: To ensure all proposals receive proper consideration, the
Government-recommended proposal format shown below (Volume I Technical) should be
followed. This format can most easily be incorporated as the proposal table of contents and
serves as a final checklist as well. Proposals must address at least one of the domains for basic
or applied/advanced research cited in SECTION II. A of this BAA.
Proposal documents (excluding illustrations, tables, and required forms) must use the
following page format:
• Page Size – 8 ½ x 11 inches
• Margins – 1 inch
• Spacing – single
• Font – Times New Roman, 12 point
Note: The Abstract, Background, Application Potential and Technical Approach
sections of a proposal, including any appendices, tables, or figures, must be no
greater than 23 pages in length. (The cover page, table of contents, proposal reference
list, curriculum vitae, cost information and institutional information are not included in
the 23-page limit). Reviewers will not review any pages beyond the 23-page limit.
VOLUME I – TECHNICAL
i Cover Page
ii Table of Contents
iii Abstract
1. Background
2. Application Potential
3. Technical Approach
4. Reference List
5. Curriculum Vitae/Resumes of Key Personnel
i. Cover Page: A cover page is required. Proposals will not be processed without:
A SF 424 R&R Form (required for assistance agreement proposals submitted online via
Grants.gov (see section 8- Submission of Proposals).
28

---

Note: If an Applicant elects to submit a contract proposal via Grants.gov instead of via
e-mail, the SF 424 R&R Form is required. Proposals for Grants or cooperative agreements
only require the SF 424 R&R Form.
The cover page should include the BAA number, Research Area(s) of Interest, name and
telephone number for the principal points of contact (both technical and contractual), proposed
project title, and any other information that identifies the proposal. The cover page should also
contain the proprietary data disclosure statement, if applicable (ARO FORM 52 or 52A). The
title of the proposed project should be brief, scientifically representative, intelligible to a
scientifically literate reader, and suitable for use in the public domain. Should the project be
carried out at a branch campus or other component of the submitting organization, that branch
campus or component should be identified in the space provided (Block 12 on the SF 424 R&R).
To evaluate compliance with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 {20 U.S.C. A§
1681 Et. Seq.), the Department of Defense is collecting certain demographic and career
information to be able to assess the success rates of women who are proposed for key roles in
applications in STEM disciplines. To enable this assessment, each application must include the
following forms completed as indicated.
Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) form:
The Degree Type and Degree Year fields on the Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile
{Expanded) form will be used by DoD as the source for career information. In addition to the
required fields on the form, applicants must complete these two fields for all individuals that
are identified as having the project role of PD/Pl or Co-PD/Pl on the form. Additional
senior/key persons can be added by selecting the "Next Person" button.
Research and Related Personal Data form:
This form will be used by DoD as the source of demographic information, such as gender, race,
ethnicity, and disability information for the Project Director/Principal Investigator and all
other persons identified as Co-Project Director{s)/Co-Principal Investigator(s). Each
application must include this form with the name fields of the Project Director/Principal
Investigator and any Co-Project Director(s)/Co-Principal Investigator(s) completed;
however, provision of the demographic information in the form is voluntary. If completing
the form for multiple individuals, each Co-Project Director/Co-Principal Investigator can be
added by selecting the "Next Person" button. The demographic information, if provided,
will be used for statistical purposes only and will not be made available to merit reviewers.
Applicants who do not wish to provide some or all of the information should check or select
the "Do not wish to provide" option.
The proposed duration for which support is requested should be consistent with the nature and
complexity of the proposed activity and associated budget. The Federal awarding agency
reserves the right to make awards with shorter or longer periods of performance. Specification of
a desired starting date for the project is important and helpful. However, requested effective
dates cannot be guaranteed.
Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 7701, as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996
[Section 31001(I)(1), Public Law 104-134], Federal agencies shall obtain each awardee’s
29

---

Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN). This number may be the Employer Identification
Number (EIN) for a business or non-profit entity or the Social Security Number for an
individual. The TIN is being obtained for purposes of collecting and reporting on any delinquent
amounts that may arise out of an awardee’s relationship with the Government. Applicants must
provide their organization's Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. The DUNS
number is a nine-digit number assigned by Dun and Bradstreet Information Services.
Applicants must provide their assigned Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code. The
CAGE code is a 5-character code assigned and maintained by the Defense Logistics Service
Center (DLSC) to identify a commercial plant or establishment.
ii. Table of Contents: It is highly recommended that the Applicant follow the above table of
contents (Volume I, “Technical”) and use it for a final quality-control checklist.
iii. Abstract: The abstract allows the Applicant to present briefly and concisely the important
aspects of its proposal. It should summarize the proposed research objectives, expectations, and
the basic approaches to be used in the proposed effort. The abstract must identify implications
for applied research if the project is successful. The abstract should be 250 words or less.
Abstracts longer than 250 words will not be read.
1. Background: This section should describe the research problem, discuss relevant
theory, and summarize existing research. It is important that the proposal identify specific,
relevant hypotheses following discussion of theory. When integrating theories or research
domains, an overarching framework supporting such integration should be described.
When appropriate, a graphic depiction of the conceptual model and hypotheses may be
provided.
2. Technical Approach: The technical approach should follow and expand upon the
background section and provide a detailed description of the proposed research. This
account should be much like the methods section of a research paper. The technical
approach should include: a description of the data to be collected, the methods for collecting
the data, the number and source of participants (e.g., using power analysis) and how they
will be acquired, the research design, the measures to be used, and the analysis plan.
Proposals for secondary research (e.g., meta- analyses) should provide estimates of the
likely number of primary studies and/or effects available in the research literature for
analysis. If the intermediate or final product of research will include training packages,
simulation models, or other software-based device, the proposal should relate the product to
the research hypotheses and provide sufficient detail to permit understanding and
evaluation.
The technical approach should detail and set a schedule for the major tasks to be performed
and products to be produced. In the case of a one-year proposal, the research plan should
be divided by quarters of the year. In the case of multi-year proposals, it should be divided
semi-annually or by major tasks within a year. The technical approach should specifically
identify what tasks will be performed by which party and why each subcontractor, if any,
was selected to perform its task(s).
30

---

3. Technical Discussion: No technical approach is without its limitations or
shortcomings. Every issue should be identified and compared with the successes/failures
of previous approaches. A trade-off analysis is a good way to make this comparison and
should be supported by theory, simulation, modeling, experimental data, or other sound
engineering and scientific practices. If the Offeror has a "new and creative" solution to
the problem(s), that solution should be developed and analyzed in this section. The
preferred technical approach should be described in as much detail as is necessary or
useful to establish confidence in the approach. The technical discussion should include
the following:
• A complete discussion stating the background and objectives of the proposed work, the
scientific approaches to be considered, the relationship to competing or related research,
and the level of effort to be employed; include the nature and extent of the anticipated
results and how they will significantly advance the scientific state-of-the- art; if known,
include the manner in which the work will contribute to the accomplishment of the Army's
mission; ensure the proposal identifies any scientific uncertainties and describes specific
approaches for the resolution of the uncertainties
• A brief description of your organization
• The names of other Government agencies or other parties receiving the proposal and/or
funding the proposed effort (if none, so state); concurrent or later submission of the
proposal to other organizations will not prejudice its review by ARI if we are kept
informed of the situation
• A statement regarding possible impact, if any, of the proposed effort on the environment
considering as a minimum its effect upon water, atmosphere, natural resources, human
resources, and any other values
• The Offeror shall provide a statement regarding the use of Class I and Class II ozone-
depleting substances. Ozone-depleting substances mean any substance designated as Class
I by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), including but not limited to
chlorofluorocarbons, halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform and any
substance designated as Class II by EPA, including but not
limited to hydrochlorofluorocarbons. See 40 C.F.R. Part 82 for detailed information. If
Class I or II substances are to be utilized, a list shall be provided as part of the Offeror's
proposal. If none, so state.
• Requested support (if any) in the following areas: facilities, equipment, and
materials.
4. Reference List: All cited references must be listed. Do not include publications that
are not referenced. The references list must be in American Psychological Association
format, APA 6th Edition.
5. Curriculum Vitae/Resumes of Key Personnel: Curriculum vitae or résumés
31

---

should be included for all proposed researchers with special emphasis on the Principal
Investigator, Co-Principal Investigator(s), and Consultants; documents are limited to five (5)
pages per investigator to include name, brief biography, and list of recent, relevant publications.
VOLUME II – COST
The cost volume shall justify the need for and amount of major direct expense categories,
including (but not limited to) labor, equipment, and travel. The cost estimate for the proposed
effort should sufficiently detail elements of cost and the need for these items to allow for
meaningful evaluation. The cost volume should clearly and closely align with the planned
methodology presented in the technical approach section. A cost estimate should be detailed for
each task of the proposed work and should include the following:
a. A complete detail of direct labor to include, by category, labor hours and rates
b. Fringe benefits rate and base
c. An itemized list of equipment showing cost of each item and justification for inclusion
d. Description and cost of expendable supplies
e. Complete detail of travel to include number of people and duration of travel, reason/need
for travel, destination, airfare, per diem, rental car, etc. Note that in recent years, travel
costs for one conference per year to present work from the funded research effort has
been a typical request
f. Complete detail of any subcontracts to include labor categories, skill levels, and labor
rates and hours
g. Other direct costs (reproduction, computer, etc.)
h. Indirect cost rates and bases with an indication whether rates are fixed or provisional and
the time frame to which they are applied
i. Proposed fee, if any and if applicable
j. Cost sharing, if any and if applicable
k. Any documentation which supports all items above
l. Applicants should furnish the name and telephone number of their cognizant audit agency
COST PROPOSAL PREPARATION:
1. Cost Reimbursement or Fixed Price Award: Selection of the type of award (cost
reimbursement or fixed price) is based upon various factors, such as (1) award instrument
selected, (2) type of research to be performed, (3) the contractor's experience maintaining cost
records, and (4) the ability to detail and allocate proposed costs and performance of the work.
Cost-type awards are most commonly used because of their suitability in supporting research
and development efforts as they permit some flexibility in the redirection of efforts due to
recent research experiment results or changes in Army guidance. Fixed-price-type awards are
used when the research project costs can be estimated accurately, the services to be rendered
are reasonably definite, and the amount of property, if any, is fixed. The negotiated price is
not subject to any adjustment on the basis of the Applicant’s cost experience in performing
the contract. An Applicant may propose either cost-reimbursable or fixed-price contract
arrangements as well as assistance awards but the award type may vary in accordance with
relevant factors as determined by ARI and ACC (APG) RTP Division. Grants and
Cooperative Agreement awards will be cost reimbursable without profit or fee.
32

---

2. Cost Proposal Content: A proposal should represent an Applicant’s best response to the
solicitation, including cost information. Any inconsistency, whether real or apparent, between
promised performance and cost or price data must be fully explained in the proposal. Failure
to explain any significant inconsistencies may demonstrate an Applicant’s lack of
understanding of the nature and scope of the work required. Accordingly, the cost volume
must be sufficient to establish the reasonableness, realism, and completeness of the proposed
cost/price. Further, any modifications made to the initial proposal resulting in a change in the
cost volume must likewise be thoroughly supported in writing regardless of whether such
changes are made during negotiations or at the time of a proposal revision. The estimate
should be detailed for each task of the proposed work. The cost volume should be limited to
the minimum number of pages necessary to satisfy the specific requirements set forth herein.
Submission of volumes of computer-generated data to support the cost volume is not
necessary or desired. If computer-generated data is essential to support the cost volume, it
may be submitted as an addendum and must be clearly cross-referenced to the material it
supports in the cost volume.
Each proposal must contain a budget for each year of support requested and a cumulative
budget for the full term of requested support. The proposal may list funds under any of the
categories listed so long as the item is considered necessary to perform the proposed work
and is not precluded by applicable cost principles. In addition to the forms, the budget
should include no more than five (5) pages of budget justification narrative for each year.
A signed summary budget page must be included. The documentation pages should be
titled "Budget Explanation Page" and numbered chronologically starting with the budget
form. The need for each cost element should be explained clearly.
All cost data must be current and complete. Costs proposed must conform to the
following principles and procedures:
Before award it must be established that an approved accounting system and financial
management system exist for an Applicant.
The following specific information is required:
1. Summary by cost element and profit or fee for total proposal (Note: Profit/Fee
not allowed for grants, cooperative agreements, or technology investment
agreements for the prime recipient of the award or any subrecipients)
2. Labor summary for total proposal by labor categories, proposed hours per labor
category, and hourly rates per labor category
3. Explanation of how labor rates are computed including base rates (actuals),
fringe, and escalation, if any
4. Interdivisional transfers (detailed breakout of costs), if applicable
33

---

5. Identification of indirect rates by fiscal year and explanation of how established
and base to which they apply
6. Bill of materials detailing items by type, quantity, unit price, total amount, and
source of estimate (provide vendor written quotes)
7. Summary of all travel by destination, purpose, number of people and days, air
fare, per diem, car rental, etc.
8. Consultant(s) by name, hourly rate, and number of hours (furnish copy of
consulting agreement and identify prior agreement(s) under which the consultant
commanded proposed rate)
9. Computer use by type, rate, and quantity
10. Other direct costs by type, amount, cost per unit, and purpose (specifically
identify any costs for printing or publication)
11. DD Form 1861 (if proposing facilities capital cost of money)
12. Forecast of monthly and cumulative dollar commitments for the proposed
performance period
13. Subcontractor's proposal, with prime Applicant’s price/cost analysis of
subcontractor's proposal (if subcontract was not competed, include justification)
3. Subawardee Cost Proposals: Subawardees' cost proposals must be similarly structured.
All subcontracted work must be properly identified as such. If a subcontractor elects to
submit an abbreviated proposal to an Applicant, it is Applicant’s responsibility to see that
the subcontractor simultaneously submits a complete detailed proposal properly identified
directly to the Government Contracting or Grants Officer. An Applicant’s proposal must:
1. Identify principal items/services to be subcontracted
2. Identify prospective subcontractors and the basis on which they were selected
(if non- competitive, provide selected source justification)
3. Identify the type of contractual arrangement contemplated for each
subcontract and the rationale for the same
4. Identify the cost or pricing data or information other than cost or
pricing data submitted by each subcontractor
5. Provide an analysis concerning the reasonableness, realism, and completeness
of each subcontractor's proposal; if the analysis is based on a comparison with
prior research
34

---

efforts, identify the basis on which the prior costs or prices were determined to be
reasonable
Section 7 -- Conference and Symposia Grants
a. Introduction. Through the award of a grant, the Army supports conferences
and symposia (as defined in the DoD Travel Regulations) in areas of science
that bring experts together to discuss recent research or educational findings
or to expose other researchers or advanced graduate students to new research
and educational techniques. The Army encourages the convening in the
United States of major international conferences, symposia, and assemblies
of international alliances.
b. Eligibility. Notwithstanding the Army's authority to provide grant support for
such events, only non-commercial scientific, technical, or professional
organizations that qualify for tax exemption may receive a conference
grant/symposia grant. Those who meet this requirement should also be aware
that the DoD does not permit "co- sponsorship" (as defined in DoD 5500.07-
R) absent additional high-level staffing and approval. In other words, the
conference grant support identified in this BAA is NOT DoD sponsorship or
co-sponsorship since ARI is neither an organizer, nor provider, of any
substantial logistical support for the conferences addressed in this section.
c. Conference Support. Conference support proposals should be submitted a
minimum of six (6) months prior to the date of the conference. It is anticipated
that support for conferences and symposia may take multiple forms including
financial support for the meeting, travel support for speakers, or travel support
to allow attendance and participation by advanced graduate students and junior
faculty.
d. Technical Proposal Preparation. The technical portion of a proposal for
support of conference or symposium should include:
a. A one page or less summary indicating the objectives of the project,
b. The topics to be covered,
c. The location and probable date(s) and why the conference is considered appropriate
at the time specified,
d. An explanation of how the conference and requested support will relate to the
research interests of the Army as identified in Section II. A of this BAA and how it
will contribute to the enhancement and improvement of scientific, engineering,
and/or educational in general and activities as outlined earlier in the research areas of
this BAA,
e. The name of chairperson(s)/(PI)(s) and his/her biographical information,
f. If applicable, a list of proposed participants,
g. The methods of announcement or invitation,
h. A summary of how the results of the meeting will be disseminated, and
i. A signed cover page.
35

---

5. Cost Proposal Preparation. The cost portion of the proposal should show:
a. Total project conference costs by major cost elements.
b. Anticipated sources of conference income and amount from each.
c. Anticipated use of funds requested.
d. A signed budget.
6. Support for Federal Employee Attendance. Funds provided cannot be used for payment to
any federal government employee for support, subsistence, or services in connection with the
proposed conference or symposium.
7. Cognizant POC. It is highly recommended that potential applicants contact the
appropriate POC identified earlier in the research areas of this BAA for advice and
assistance before preparation of a conference/symposia proposal.
Section 8 – Submission of Proposals
Proposals must be submitted through the Applicant’s organizational office having responsibility
for Government business relations. The proposal must contain the signature of an authorized
official. All signatures must be that of an official(s) authorized to commit the organization in
business and financial affairs. The cover of the proposal should be marked with the BAA
Solicitation Number W911NF-23-S-0010 along with the name of the research scientific area of
interest(s) (see Section II. A of this BAA). Applicants are requested to provide their e-mail
addresses upon submission of a proposal and also the name, address, and telephone number of
their cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) office, if known.
Proposals for Contracts, TIAs, OTAs may be submitted via e-mail or online via
Grants.gov. Proposals for Grants or cooperative agreements (assistance) MUST be
submitted online via Grants.gov. Further, it is recommended a copy of any proposal
submitted also be furnished to the cognizant ARI Manager listed in Section II. A.
CONTRACT, TIA, OTA PROPOSAL SUBMISSION:
Proposals for contracts may be e-mailed directly to usarmy.rtp.devcom-arl.mbx.baa@army.mil.
or submitted online via Grants.gov, http://Grants.gov. Proposal also must send a copy of the
proposal to cognizant ARI Manager listed in Section II. A.
a. Proposals for contracts (only) may be e-mailed directly to usarmy.rtp.devcom-
arl.mbx.baa@army.mil. Full proposals MUST be emailed to the cognizant ARI
Manager listed in Section II. A. All submissions must include “ARI BAA
W911NF-23-S-0010” in the subject line.
All e-mailed proposals must contain the information outlined in Section II. D. 2
(Section 6- Preparation of Proposals) including all the electronic forms.
36

---

b. All forms requiring signature must be completed, printed, signed, and scanned into a
PDF document. All documents must be combined into a single PDF formatted file to
be attached to the e-mail.
Proposals are to be provided in electronic MS Word or Adobe PDF format. The proposal
must include the complete technical and cost volumes of the proposal. Electronic versions of
the technical and cost volumes must be combined into one electronic file. The proposal must
include the signature of the authorized institutional representative. If the electronic version
does not include a signature from the appropriate representative of the Applicant, the
Government Procurement Contracting Officer must be provided a signed and dated copy
prior to award if selected.
GRANT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT PROPOSAL SUBMISSION: (mandatory submission
portal for grant and cooperative agreement proposals; optional submission portal for contract proposals).
Please e-mail a courtesy copy of proposals to cognizant ARI Manager listed in Section II. A. Grants.gov
registration (see Section 8) must be accomplished prior to application through this process.
(1) Proposals requesting Assistance agreements must be submitted via Grants.gov; proposals
requesting a Contract or OT may be submitted either via Grants.gov or email (instructions
above).
(2) Grants.gov Registration must be accomplished prior to application submission in Grants.gov.
Each organization that desires to submit applications via Grants.Gov must complete a one-time
registration. There are several one-time actions your organization must complete in order to
submit applications through Grants.gov (e.g., obtain a Unique Entity Identifier, register with the
SAM, register with the credential provider, register with Grants.gov and obtain approval for an
authorized organization representative (AOR) to submit applications on behalf of the
organization). To register please see http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organization-
registration.html
Please note the registration process for an Organization or an Individual can take between
three to five business days or as long as four weeks if all steps are not completed in a timely
manner.
Questions relating to the registration process, system requirements, how an application form
works, or the submittal process should be directed to Grants.gov at 1-800-518-4726 or
support@grants.gov.
NOTE: All web links referenced in this section are subject to change by Grants.gov and may not
be updated here.
(3) Specific forms are required for submission of a proposal. The forms are contained in the
Application Package available at http://www.grants.gov under the specific opportunity you
are submitting under. When viewing an opportunity, select the "Package” tab and then select
"View." A Grant Application Package and Application Instructions are available for this BAA
37

---

through the Grants.gov Apply portal under CFDA Number 12.630 or Funding Opportunity
Number W911NF-23-S-0010. To apply, select “Apply” and then “Apply Now Using
Workspace.”
*NOTE: Effective 31 December 2017, applicants must apply online at Grants.gov using the
application Workspace. For access to complete instructions on how to apply for opportunities
using Workspace refer to https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/workspace-
overview.html.
The following documents are mandatory: (1) Application for Federal Assistance (R&R) (SF 424
(R&R)), and (4) Attachments form.
(4) The SF 424 (R&R) form is to be used as the cover page for all proposals submitted via
Grants.gov. The SF 424 (R&R) must be fully completed. AOR usernames and passwords serve
as “electronic signatures” when your organization submits applications through Grants.gov. By
using the SF 424 (R&R), proposers are providing the certification required by 32 CFR Part 28
regarding lobbying (see Section II.F.2.a.ii of this BAA). Block 11, “Descriptive Title of
Applicant’s Project,” must reference the research topic area being addressed in the effort by
identifying the specific paragraph from Section II.A of this BAA.
(5) The Attachments form must contain the documents outlined in Section II.D.2. under Section
6 – Preparation of Proposals”. All documents must be combined into separate and single PDF
formatted files using the Table of Contents names. Include “W911NF-23-S-0010 in the title so
the proposal will be distinguished from other BAA submissions and upload each document to
the mandatory Attachments form.
(6) The applicant must include with its proposal submission the representations required by
Section II.F.2.a.ii of this BAA. The representations must include applicant POC information
and be signed by an authorized representative. Attach the representations document to an
available field within the Attachments form. Note: If the applicant’s online SAM
Representations and Certifications include its response to the representations, a hard copy
representation is not required with proposal submission.
(7) The Grants.gov User Guide at:
https://www.grants.gov/help/html/help/index.htm#t=GetStarted%2FGetStarted.htm will assist
AORs in the application process. Remember that you must open and complete the Application
for Federal Assistance (R&R) (SF 424 (R&R)) first, as this form will automatically populate
data fields in other forms. If you encounter any problems, contact customer support at 1-800-
518-4726 or at support@grants.gov. If you forget your user name or password, follow the
instructions provided in the Credential Provider tutorial. Tutorials may be printed by right-
clicking on the tutorial and selecting “Print”.
(8) As it is possible for Grants.gov to reject the proposal during this process, it is strongly
recommended that proposals be uploaded at least two days before any established deadline in the
BAA so that they will not be received late and be ineligible for award consideration. It is also
recommended to start uploading proposals at least two days before the deadline to plan ahead for
any potential technical and/or input problems involving the applicant’s own equipment.
38

---

3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM):
Each applicant (unless the applicant is an individual or Federal agency that is exempt from
those requirements under 2 CFR 25.110(b) or (c), or has an exception approved by the
agency under 2 CFR 25.110(d)) is required to: (i) Be registered in the System for Award
Management (SAM) https://www.sam.gov prior to submitting its application; (ii) provide a
valid DUNS number in its application; and (iii) continue to maintain an active SAM
registration with current information at all times during which it has an active Federal award
or an application or plan under consideration by an agency. An award will not be made to an
applicant until the applicant has complied with all applicable DUNS (call 1-866-705-5711
toll free or visit http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform) and SAM requirements.
4. Submission Dates and Times:
Proposals will be accepted via the methods noted previously through 11:59 PM Eastern
Daylight Time on 30 April 2028.
It is the Applicant’s responsibility to assure that a proposal submission is received by the
respective date and time specified above. If your proposal submission is not received at the
initial point of entry to the Government (received through web based system, e-mail or post-
marked if applicable) by the exact date and time specified above, it will be determined late
and will not be evaluated. The submission of a courtesy copy of an assistance (non-
contract) proposal to the cognizant ARI Manager listed in Section II. A does not fulfill the
timeliness requirement.
Grants.gov: After a proposal is submitted to Grants.gov, the AOR will receive a series of three
emails from Grants.gov. The first two emails will be received within 24 to 48 hours after
submission. The first email will confirm time of receipt of the proposal by the Grants.gov system
and the second will indicate that the proposal has either been successfully validated by the
system prior to transmission to the grantor agency or has been rejected due to errors. A third
email will be received once the grantor agency has confirmed receipt of the proposal. Reference
the Grants.gov User Guide at
https://www.grants.gov/help/html/help/index.htm#t=GetStarted%2FGetStarted.htm for
information on how to track your application package.
For the purposes of this BAA, an applicant’s proposal is not considered received by ARI until the
AOR receives email #3.
5. Intergovernmental Review:
Not Applicable
6. Funding Restrictions:
39

---

There are no funding restrictions associated with this BAA.
7. Other Submission Requirements:
Information to be Requested from Successful Applicants: Applicants whose proposals are
accepted for funding may be contacted before award to provide additional information
required for award. The required information is normally limited to clarifying budget
explanations, representations, certifications, and some technical aspects.
For Contracts Only- Performance Work Statements (PWS): Prior to award, the Contracting
Officer may request that the contractor submit a PWS for the effort to be performed, which
will be incorporated into the contract at the time of award.
(End of Section)
40

---

E. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION:
1. Criteria: Proposals will initially be evaluated as to whether they constitute basic, applied, or
advanced technology development research.
Basic research is defined as systematic study directed toward greater knowledge or
understanding of the fundamental aspects of phenomena and of observable facts without specific
application of processes or products in mind, whereas applied research provides a systematic
expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop useful strategies, techniques,
methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and specific Army need.
Advanced Technology Development program includes the development of technologies,
components, or prototypes that can be tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments.
Projects in this category have a direct relevance to identified military needs. These projects
should demonstrate the general military utility or cost reduction potential of technology in the
areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention; advanced data analytics and models
applied to talent management; development of higher-order competencies for Soldiers and
Leaders; holistic assessment of unit readiness; and team and unit mission effectiveness. These
projects should be focused on a more direct operational benefit and, if successful, the technology
should be available for transition.
Proposals received in response to this BAA will be evaluated by scientific peers internal, and
possibly external to the Army, using the following criteria. ARI may solicit input on technical
aspects of proposals from non-Government consultants/experts who are strictly bound by non-
disclosure requirements. Criterion (a) is most important; the other criteria are of equal
importance to one another. All evaluation factors/criteria other than cost, when combined, are
significantly more important than cost or price:
(a) Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the
proposed research;
(b) Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission;
(c) Qualifications/Capabilities – Proposed principal investigator and key personnel
qualifications, capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional
resources and facilities;
(d) Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism,
affordability, and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of
evaluation on other factors.
41

---

Review and Selection Process:
(a) All Proposals are treated as privileged information prior to award and the contents are disclosed
to Government employees or designated support contractors only for the purpose of evaluation.
The Applicant must indicate on the appropriate proposal form or in the proposal any limitation to
be placed on disclosure of information contained in the proposal form (ARO Form 52 or 52A)
any limitation to be placed on disclosure of information contained in the proposal to non-
Government evaluators.
(b) All Proposals will be evaluated based on the merit and relevance of the specific R&D proposed
as it relates to the overall ARI research program, rather than against other proposals in the same
general area. Each evaluated proposal will receive a recommendation of “select” or “do not
select” as supported by the evaluation
(c) In accordance with OMB guidance in 200 of Title 2, CFR, it is DoD policy that DoD
Components must report and use integrity and performance information in the Federal Awardee
Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), or any successor system designated by
OMB, concerning Grants, Cooperative Agreements, and TIAs.
2. Recipient Qualification
a. Grant, Cooperative Agreement, and OT Proposals:
i. The Grants Officer is responsible for determining a recipient’s qualification prior to award. In
general, a Grants Officer will award grants or cooperative agreements only to qualified recipients
that meet the standards at 32 CFR 22.415. To be qualified, a potential recipient must:
(1) Have the management capability and adequate financial and technical resources, given those that
would be made available through the grant or cooperative agreement, to execute the program of
activities envisioned under the grant or cooperative agreement;
(2) Have a satisfactory record of executing such programs or activities (if a prior recipient of an
award);
(3) Have a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics; and
(4) Be otherwise qualified and eligible to receive a grant or cooperative agreement under applicable
laws and regulations.
Applicants are requested to provide information with proposal submissions to assist the Grants
Officer’s evaluation of recipient qualification.
Applicants are requested to provide information with proposal submissions to assist the Grants
Officer’s evaluation of recipient qualification.
ii. In accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance in parts 180 and
42

---

200 of Title 2, CFR, it is DoD policy that DoD Components must report and use integrity
and performance information in the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity
Information System (FAPIIS), or any successor system designated by OMB, concerning
grants, cooperative agreements, and OTs for research as follows:
If the total Federal share will be greater than the simplified acquisition threshold on any Federal
award under a notice of funding opportunity (see 2 CFR 200.88 Simplified Acquisition
Threshold):

The Federal awarding agency, prior to making a Federal award with a total amount of

Federal share greater than the simplified acquisition threshold, will review and consider any
information about the applicant that is in the designated integrity and performance system
accessible through SAM (formerly FAPIIS) (see 41 U.S.C. 2313);

An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and

performance systems accessible through SAM and comment on any information about itself
that a Federal awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated integrity
and performance system accessible through SAM;

The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in

addition to the other information in the designated integrity and performance system, in
making a judgment about the applicant's integrity, business ethics, and record of performance
under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in
2 CFR 200.205 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants.
b. Contract Proposals:
i. Contracts shall be awarded to responsible prospective contractors only. See FAR 9.104-1
for a listing of the general standards against which an applicant will be assessed to determine
responsibility.
Applicants are requested to provide information with proposal submission to assist the
Contracting Officer’s evaluation of responsibility.
ii. FAPIIS will be checked prior to making an award. The web address is: https://cpars.gov.
The applicant representing the entity may comment in this system on any information about
the entity that a federal government official entered. The information in FAPIIS will be
used in making a judgment about the entity’s integrity, business ethics, and record of
performance under Federal awards that may affect the official’s determination that the
applicant is qualified to receive an award.
(End of Section)
43

---

F. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION:
1. Award Notices:
An Applicant whose proposal is recommended for award will be contacted by a
Government Contract/Grant Specialist to discuss any additional information required for
award. Additional information required may include representations and certifications,
revised budgets or budget explanations, certificate of current cost or pricing data,
subcontracting plan for small businesses, and other information as applicable to the
proposed award. The anticipated award start date will be determined at this time. The
appropriate award document, when signed by the Government Contracting/Grants
Officer, is the authorizing award document.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements:
a. Required Representations and Certifications:
i. Contract Proposals:
(1) Representations and certifications shall be completed by successful applicants prior to award.
FAR Online Representations and Certifications are to be completed through SAM at
https://www.SAM.gov. As appropriate, DFARS and contract-specific certification packages will
be provided to the contractor for completion prior to award to include, but not limited the
following contractual requirements:
(2) FAR 52.203-18, PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES THAT
REQUIRE CERTAIN CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS OR STATEMENTS—
REPRESENTATION (JAN 2017)
(a) Definition. As used in this provision--
“Internal confidentiality agreement or statement”, “subcontract”, and “subcontractor”, are
defined in the clause at 52.203-19, Prohibition on Requiring Certain Internal
Confidentiality Agreements or Statements.
(b) In accordance with section 743 of Division E, Title VII, of the Consolidated and
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L. 113-235) and its successor
44

---

provisions in subsequent appropriations acts (and as extended in continuing resolutions),
Government agencies are not permitted to use funds appropriated (or otherwise made
available) for contracts with an entity that requires employees or subcontractors of such
entity seeking to report waste, fraud, or abuse to sign internal confidentiality agreements
or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting such employees or subcontractors from
lawfully reporting such waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated investigative or law
enforcement representative of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive such
information.
(c) The prohibition in paragraph (b) of this provision does not contravene requirements
applicable to SF 312, (Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement), Form 4414
(Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement), or any other form
issued by a Federal department or agency governing the nondisclosure of classified
information.
(d) Representation. By submission of its offer, the applicant represents that it will not
require its employees or subcontractors to sign or comply with internal confidentiality
agreements or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting such employees or
subcontractors from lawfully reporting waste, fraud, or abuse related to the performance
of a Government contract to a designated investigative or law enforcement representative
of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive such information (e.g., agency
Office of the Inspector General).
(3) FAR 52.204-26, COVERED TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT OR SERVICES-
REPRESENTATION (OCT 2020)
a) Definitions. As used in this provision, "covered telecommunications equipment or
services" and "reasonable inquiry" have the meaning provided in the clause 52.204-25,
Prohibition on Contracting for Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance
Services or Equipment.
(b) Procedures. The Offeror shall review the list of excluded parties in the System for
Award Management (SAM) ( https://www.sam.gov) for entities excluded from
receiving federal awards for "covered telecommunications equipment or services".
(c)(1) Representation. The Offeror represents that it [ ] does, [ ] does not provide covered
telecommunications equipment or services as a part of its offered products or services to the
Government in the performance of any contract, subcontract, or other contractual instrument.
(2) After conducting a reasonable inquiry for purposes of this representation, the offeror
represents that it [ ] does, [ ] does not use covered telecommunications equipment or
services, or any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunications
equipment or services.
(4) FAR 52.209-11, REPRESENTATION BY CORPORATIONS REGARDING
DELINQUENT TAX LIABILITY OR A FELONY CONVICTION UNDER FEDERAL
LAW (FEB 2016)
45

---

As required by sections 744 and 745 of Division E of the Consolidated and Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L 113-235), and similar provisions, if
contained in subsequent appropriations acts, the Government will not enter into a contract
with any corporation that--
Has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial
and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not
being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority
responsible for collecting the tax liability, where the awarding agency is aware of
the unpaid tax liability, unless an agency has considered suspension or debarment
of the corporation and made a determination that suspension or debarment is not
necessary to protect the interests of the Government; or
Was convicted of a felony criminal violation under any Federal law within the
preceding 24 months, where the awarding agency is aware of the conviction,
unless an agency has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and
made a determination that this action is not necessary to protect the interests of
the Government.
The applicant represents that—
It is [ ] is not [ ] a corporation that has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been
assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have
lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the
authority responsible for collecting the tax liability; and
It is [ ] is not [ ] a corporation that was convicted of a felony criminal violation under a
Federal law within the preceding 24 months.
ii. Grant and Cooperative Agreement Proposals:
(1) Grant awards greater than $100,000.00 require a certification of compliance with a national
policy mandate concerning lobbying. Statutes and Government-wide regulations require the
certification to be submitted prior to award. When submitting your grant through Grants.gov, by
completing blocks 18 and 19 of the SF 424 (R&R) Form, the grant applicant is providing the
certification on lobbying required by 32 CFR Part 28; otherwise a copy signed by the AOR must
be provided. Below is the required certification:
CERTIFICATION AT APPENDIX A TO 32 CFR PART 28 REGARDING
LOBBYING: Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans, and Cooperative Agreements the
undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that:
(1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf
of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an
officer or employee of an agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee
of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the
awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of
46

---

any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the
extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal
contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
(2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be
paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or
employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of
Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this
Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall
complete and submit SF-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in
accordance with its instructions.
(3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be
included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including
subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative
agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.
This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed
when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a
prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by 31 U.S.C. 1352. Any
person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not
less than $10,000.00 and not more than $100,000.00 for each such failure.
(2) In accordance with Continuing Appropriations Act, 2017 (Pub. L. 114-223), or any other Act
that extends to fiscal year (FY) 2023 funds the same prohibitions as contained in section 743,
division E, title VII, of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Pub. L. 114-113), none of
the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by that or any other Act may be made
available for a grant or cooperative agreement with an entity that requires its employees or
contractors seeking to report fraud, waste, or abuse to sign internal confidentiality agreements or
statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting those employees or contractors from lawfully
reporting that waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated investigative or law enforcement
representative of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive the information.
PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES THAT REQUIRED CERTAIN
INTERNAL CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS – REPRESENTATION
Agreement with the representation below will be affirmed by checking the “I
agree” box in block 17 of the SF424 (R&R) as part of the electronic proposal
submitted via Grants.gov. The representation reads as follows:
By submission of its proposal or application, the applicant represents that it does
not require any of its employees, contractors, or subrecipients seeking to report
fraud, waste, or abuse to sign or comply with internal confidentiality agreements
or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting those employees, contractors,
subrecipients from lawfully reporting that waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated
investigative or law enforcement representative of a Federal department or agency
authorized to receive such information.
47

---

*Note that: Section 743 states that it does not contravene requirements applicable
to SF 312, Form 4414, or any other form issued by a Federal department or
agency governing the nondisclosure of classified information.
(3) Recipients are required to submit the following representation with the application package
IAW the instructions at Section D of this BAA:
REPRESENTATIONS UNDER DOD ASSISTANCE AGREEMENTS:
APPROPRIATIONS PROVISIONS ON TAX DELINQUENCY AND FELONY
CONVICTIONS
The applicant is ( ) is not ( ) a “Corporation” meaning any entity, including any
institution of higher education, other nonprofit organization, or for-profit entity
that has filed articles of incorporation.
If the applicant is a “Corporation” please complete the following representations:
(a) The applicant represents that it is ( ) is not ( ) a corporation that has any unpaid
Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial and
administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being
paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible
for collecting the tax liability.
(b) The applicant represents that it is ( ) is not ( ) is not a corporation that was
convicted of a criminal violation under any Federal law within the preceding 24
months.
NOTE: If an applicant responds in the affirmative to either of the above
representations, the applicant is ineligible to receive an award unless the agency
suspension and debarment official (SDO) has considered suspension or debarment
and determined that further action is not required to protect the Government’s
interests. The applicant therefore should provide information about its tax liability
or conviction to the agency’s SDO as soon as it can do so, to facilitate completion
of the required considerations before award decisions are made.
PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES USING CERTAIN
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND VIDEO SURVEILLANCE SERVICES OR EQUIPMENT
Section 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
Year (FY) 2019 (Public Law 115-232) prohibits the head of an executive
agency from obligating or expending loan or grant funds to procure or obtain,
extend, or renew a contract to procure or obtain, or enter into a contract (or
extend or 105 renew a contract) to procure or obtain the equipment, services, or
systems prohibited systems as identified in section 889 of the NDAA for FY
2019. For more information on how this applies to all grant recipients and sub-
recipients after August 13, 2020, please see DoD Research General Terms and
48

---

Conditions (SEP 2021) NP Article IV. Other national policy requirements,
paragraph 18.
b. Policy Requirements:
The following list provides notable national policy requirements that may be applicable to an
award. NOTE: The following is not an all-inclusive list of policy requirements. For assistance
awards, refer to the DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions at
http://www.onr.navy.mil/Contracts-Grants/submit-proposal/grants-proposal/grants-
termsconditions.aspx for additional national policy requirements that may apply. For contract
awards, appropriate Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and/or Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) clauses will be added to award documents.
i. PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS
(1) For Assistance Instruments:
(a) The recipient must protect the rights and welfare of individuals who participate as human
subjects in research under this award and comply fully with the requirements at 32 CFR part
219, Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 3216.02, 10 U.S.C. 980, the National Policy
Requirements Concerning Live Organisms Terms and Conditions (Section A.1., Human
Subjects, at 81 Federal Register 78380, Appendix C to Part 1122), and when applicable, Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) policies and regulations.
(b) The recipient must not begin performance of research involving human subjects, also
known as human subjects research (HSR), that is covered under 32 CFR part 219, or that meets
exemption criteria under 32 CFR 219.104(d), or expend funding on such effort, until the
recipient receives a formal notification of approval from the cognizant DoD Human Research
Protection Official (HRPO). Approval to perform HSR under this award is received after the
HRPO has performed a review of the recipient’s documentation of planned HSR activities and
has officially furnished a concurrence with the recipient’s determination as presented in the
documentation.
(c) In order for the HRPO to accomplish this concurrence review, the recipient must provide
sufficient documentation to enable his or her assessment as follows:
(i) If the HSR meets one or more exemption criteria under 32 CFR 219.104(d), the
documentation must include a citation of the exemption category/ies under 32 CFR 219.104(d)
and a rationale statement.
(ii) If the recipient’s activity is determined as “non-exempt research involving human subjects,”
the documentation must include:
− Documentation of Assurance of Compliance (a written assurance that an
institution will comply with requirements of 32 CFR Part 219, as well as the
terms of the assurance) appropriate for the scope of work or program plan; and
49

---

− Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, as well as all documentation reviewed
by the IRB to make their determination.
(d) The HRPO retains final judgment on what activities constitute HSR, whether an exempt
category applies, whether the risk determination is appropriate, and whether the planned HSR
activities comply with the requirements in paragraph (a) of this section.
(e) The recipient must notify the Grants Officer/Agreements Officer immediately of any
suspensions or terminations of the Assurance of Compliance.
(f) DoD staff, consultants, and advisory groups may independently review and inspect the
recipient’s research and research procedures involving human subjects and, based on such
findings, DoD may prohibit research that presents unacceptable hazards or otherwise fails to
comply with DoD requirements.
(g) Definitions for terms used in this section are found in DoDI 3216.02.
The Army Research Institute HRPO is:
Dr. Erica Michael, Senior Research Psychologist
U.S. Army Research Institute 6000 6th Street
Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5586
(703) 545-9590, erica.b.michael.civ@army.mil
(2) For Contracts: DFARS clause 252.235-7004 is applicable to this solicitation and will be
included in its entirety in any resultant contract award that supports research that includes or
may include HSR.
ii. ANIMAL USE:
Assistance Instruments:
Prior to initiating any animal work under the award, the recipient must:
Register the recipient’s research, development, test, and evaluation or training facility with the
Secretary of Agriculture in accordance with 7 U.S.C. 2136 and 9 CFR section 2.30, unless
otherwise exempt from this requirement by meeting the conditions in 7
U.S.C. 2136 and 9 CFR parts 1-4 for the duration of the activity.
(ii) Have the recipient’s proposed animal use approved in accordance with DoDI 3216.01,
Use of Animals in DoD Programs by a DoD Component Headquarters Oversight Office.
(iii) Furnish evidence of such registration and approval to the grants officer.
(b) The recipient must make the animals on which the research is being conducted, and all
50

---

[Document continues — 22 more pages]

---

W911NF-23-S-0010 Amendment 02 ARI BAA

UNITED STATES ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES (ARI)
BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT
FOR
BASIC, APPLIED, AND ADVANCED
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
W911NF-23-S-0010-0002
01 May 2023 – 30 April 2028
ISSUED BY:
U.S. Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground
Research Triangle Park Division
P. O. BOX 12211
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2211
1

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. OVERVIEW OF THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY: ....................................................... 4
A. Required Overview Content…………...………………………………………………….4
B. Additional Overview……………………………………………………………………...5
II. DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY:……..……7
A. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION……………….………………………………………....….7
1. Basic Research Areas of Interest…………………………………………………….....7
2. Applied Research and Advanced Technology Development Areas of Interest……….8
a. Holistic Personnel Assessment and Statistical Innovations for Talent Management..9
b. Leader Competences for Complexity & Uncertainty……………………..…….….10
c. Team Assignment & Performance………………………………….………………15
d. Assessing and Developing Technological Fluency for the Future Force….……….18
B. FEDERAL AWARD INFORMATION ............................................................................ 19
1. Procurement Contract……………………………………………………………………19
2. Grant…………………………………………………………………………………….19
3. Cooperative Agreement………………………………………………………………….20
4. Other Transaction for Research…………………………………………………………. 20
5. Other Transaction for Prototype or Production…………………………………………...20
6. Grants and cooperative agreements for institutions of higher education, nonprofit
organizations, foreign organizations, and foreign public entities………………………….20
7. Grants and cooperative agreements for for-profit and nonprofit organizations exempted
from Subpart E - Cost Principles of 2 CFR Part 200……………………………………...21
8. OT for Research………………………………………………………………………….21
9. OT for Prototypes or Production …………………………………………………………21
10. The following websites may be accessed to obtain an electronic copy of the governing
regulations and terms and conditions…………………………………………………..….21
C. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION ...................................................................................... 22
1. Eligible Applicants……………………………………………………………………......22
2. Cost Sharing or Matching…………………………………………………………...…22
D. APPLICATIONAND SUBMISSION INFORMATION ..................................................... 22
1. Address to View Broad Agency Announcement……………………………………...22
2

---

2. Content and Form of Application Submission……………………………………………...23
Section 1 – General Information…………………………………………………………...23
Section 2 – Application Process Overview………………………………………………....24
Section 3 – White Paper Preparation……………………………………………………......25
Section 4 – White Paper Submission…………………………………………………..........26
Section 5 – Review of White Papers…………………………………………………..........26
Section 6 – Preparation of Proposals……………………………………………………......26
Section 7 -- Conference and Symposia Grants……………………………………………...34
Section 8 – Submission of Proposals……………………………………………………….35
E. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION…………………………………………….…....40
1. Criteria……………………………………………………………………………………..40
2. Recipient Qualification………………………………………………………………….….41
F. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION…………………………………............43
1. Award Notices……………………………………………………………………………....43
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements…………………………………………...43
3. Reporting………………………………………………………………………………....…53
G. FEDERAL AWARD AGENCY CONTACTS……………………………………………...…55
H. OTHER INFORMATION………………………………………………………………....56
1. Contract Proposals ………………………………………………………………………...56
2. Grants and Cooperative Agreement Proposals……………………………………………...65
3. Other Transaction Proposals……………………………………………………………......69
4. Army Contract Writing System Transition Information………………………………..........69
APPENDIX 1: TABLE OF ACRONYMS…………………………………………………...…....71
APPENDIX 2: AMENDMENTS…………………………………………………………...…......73
3

---

I. OVERVIEW OF THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
A. Required Overview Content
Agency Name:
U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI)
Issuing Acquisition Office:
U.S. Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground, Research Triangle Park
(ACC-APG-RTP) Division
Research Opportunity Title:
U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences Broad Agency
Announcement for Basic, Applied, and Advanced Research (Fiscal Years 2023-2028)
Announcement Type:
Initial Announcement
Research Opportunity Number:
W911NF-23-S-0010
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number and Title:
12.630 – Basic, Applied, and Advanced Research in Science and Engineering
Response Dates (Submissions):
This BAA is a continuously open five-year announcement valid throughout the period
beginning 01 May 2023 and ending 30 April 2028. New start awards are normally
obligated early within each fiscal year Amendments to this BAA will be posted to SAM.gov
and is now known as Contract Opportunities and will also be posted to
http://www.Grants.gov when they occur. Interested parties are encouraged to periodically
check these websites for updates and amendments.
(End of Section)
4

---

B. Additional Overview Information
INTRODUCTION:
This Broad Agency Announcement (BAA), which sets forth research areas of interest to the
United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI), is issued
under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation
(FAR), which provides for the acquisition of basic and applied research and that part of
development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement
through the competitive selection of proposals, and 10 U.S.C. 4001, 10 U.S.C. 4021, and 10
U.S.C. 4022, which provide the authorities for issuing awards under this announcement for basic
and applied research. This BAA also supports efforts in accordance with the Department of
Defense Grant and Agreement Regulations (DoDGARS) at 32 CRF 22.315(a). Proposals
submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award are considered to be the result of full
and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of Public Law 98-369, "The
Competition in Contracting Act of 1984" and subsequent amendments.
ARI is the Army’s lead agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for
Army readiness and performance via research advances and applications of the behavioral and
social sciences that address personnel, organization, and Soldier and leader development issues.
Programs funded under this BAA include basic research, applied research, and advanced
technology development that can improve human performance and Army readiness.
Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by
funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Those contemplating submission
of a proposal are encouraged to contact the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) identified in
Section G of this BAA or the responsible ARI Manager noted at the end of the technical area
entry (Part II Section A of this BAA) to determine whether the proposed R&D warrants further
inquiry. If the proposed R&D warrants further inquiry and funding is available, submission of a
white paper or proposal will be entertained. The recommended three-step sequence is (1) initial
contact with the ARI TPOC or responsible ARI Manager, (2) white paper submission, (3)
proposal submission.
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor
and cost associated with submission of proposals that have minimal probability of being selected
for funding. Costs associated with white paper or proposal submissions in response to this BAA
are not considered allowable direct charges to any resulting award. These costs may be
allowable expenses to normal bid and proposal indirect costs specified in FAR 31.205-18.
Applicants submitting proposals are cautioned that only a Government Contracting or Grants
Officer may obligate the Government to any agreement involving expenditure of Government
funds.
To be eligible for an award under this announcement, a prospective awardee must meet certain
minimum standards pertaining to financial resources and responsibility, ability to comply with
the performance schedule, past performance, integrity, experience, technical capabilities,
operational controls, and facilities. In accordance with Federal statutes, regulations, and
5

---

Department of Defense (DoD) and Army policies, no person on grounds of race, color, age, sex,
national origin, or disability shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or
be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving financial assistance from
the Army.
(End of Section)
6

---

II. DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
A. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
1. Basic Research Areas of Interest
Basic Research is defined as systematic study directed toward greater knowledge or
understanding of the fundamental aspects of phenomena and of observable facts that drive theory
forward without being restricted to ideas that have known applications or products. Basic
research may lay the foundation for future research aimed at developing tools, but that is not its
goal. ARI’s Basic Research Program maintains close contact with ARI's applied scientists and
other relevant agencies within the Army to facilitate the transition of basic research to applied
Army efforts. The Basic Research Program seeks to support and execute high-risk, high-reward
fundamental research to develop state-of-the-art theory, methods, and models to create the
innovative concepts required to support the Army’s future capabilities and needs. Basic Research
seeks to support efforts in the following focal areas:
• Science of Measurement of Individuals & Collectives: Maintaining readiness requires
that the Army be comprised of high-quality personnel who are optimally distributed
throughout the force. Accurate, efficient, predictive, and informative measurement of
individuals and collectives is the means to meeting this charge. The program goals of this
focal area are to develop new (a) means to concurrently measure more than one factor
with a single testing behavior without sacrificing precision; (b) approaches to capture and
analyze continuous behavioral processes unfolding within and between fluid social
situations; (c) models and methods for combining information from diverse and
potentially archival sources to better understand the nature and antecedents of
performance; and (d) construct validation models and methods consistent with the nature
and antecedents of performance. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to,
psychometrics for modeling dynamic data, measurement theory for dynamic constructs,
context-sensitive measures of adaptability and flexibility, and embedded assessments of
individual and group attributes.
• Understanding Multilevel and Organizational Dynamics: The Army organization is a
complex, often fluid structure based on both formal and informal work roles and social
hierarchies. It is critical to better understand the multilevel and cross-level influences at
the individual, small unit, and organizational level, and how these influences relate to
organizational effectiveness. The program goals of this focal area are to (a) develop new
theories that capture the multilevel and multifactored nature of organizations and the
mechanisms underlying their coordination and restructuring processes, and (b) identify
and define top-down and bottom-up factors, and their interactions, that influence
organizational effectiveness. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, non-linear
models for assessing team processes, process-oriented models of individual and group
dynamics, modeling dynamic organizational restructuring, and models of complex multi-
layered organizations.
• Context of Behavior in Military Environments: The Army must thrive in various and
unpredictable situations. There are known gaps in current theory to address how
7

---

contextual factors, including leadership behaviors, combine to impact individual and
group behavior. The program goals of this focal area are to develop new (a) models or
refine existing models that capture critical environmental characteristics that influence
human behavior, and (b) theories understanding effective leadership and developing
effective leaders efficiently; developing new measures that advance the current
understanding of leadership and leader behaviors. Topics of interest include, but are not
limited to, developing leadership theory for complex organizations, identifying external
factors that impact social and decision-making processes, understanding multilevel
contextual effects on organizational behavior, and models for strategically activating
organizationally relevant identities.
• Formal and Informal Learning and Development: The Army not only trains personnel
for specific jobs, tasks, and roles, but also develops Soldiers across their careers. Thus, it
is important to understand how to maximize opportunities for learning throughout that
timespan. The program goals of this focal area are to develop (a) longitudinal theories of
adult learning within a variety of environments from a multidisciplinary perspective; (b)
innovative methods for maximizing collective learning; and (c) measurement techniques
that allow for objective and/or automatic assessment of learning processes. Topics of
interest include, but are not limited to, understanding the role of narratives in learning,
individual and collective mental models of learning experiences, non-linear models of
learning and development, and models of development across the career span.
For additional information on these domains, and potential areas of interest, Applicants may also
consult the following reports by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Science
(available from the National Academies Press http://www.nap.edu):
• “Measuring Human Capabilities: An Agenda for Basic Research on the Assessment of
Individual and Group Performance Potential for Military Accession” (2015) supervised
by the Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences
• “The Context of Military Environments: Social and Organizational Factors” (2014)
supervised by the Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences “Sociocultural
Data to Accomplish Department of Defense Missions: Toward a Unified Social
Framework: Workshop Summary” (2011) supervised by the Board on Human-System
Integration
The ARI Manager is Dr. Alexander Wind, (703) 851-9372, Alexander.P.Wind.civ@army.mil
2. Applied Research and Advanced Technology Development Areas of Interest
ARI seeks Applied Research proposals that provide a systematic expansion and application
of knowledge to design and develop useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures
that provide the means to meet a recognized and specific Army need. Applied Research
precedes specific technology investigations or development and should have high potential to
transition into advanced technology.
The ARI Advanced Technology Development program includes the development of
8

---

technologies, components, or prototypes that can be tested in field experiments and/or
simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct relevance to identified
military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or cost
reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and
retention; advanced data analytics and models applied to talent management; development of
higher-order competencies for Soldiers and Leaders; holistic assessment of unit readiness;
and team and unit mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and, if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
Topic areas of the applied research and advanced technology development include the following:
a. Holistic Personnel Assessment and Statistical Innovations for Talent Management
i. Improving Talent Management through Advanced Analytics
“Big Data” can be characterized by large sample sizes and high dimensionality, sparsity, noisy
and irregular measurements, complex interdependencies (including social and temporal), and
heterogeneity (e.g., of data types and structures). Legal or ethical considerations also may
place restrictions on how data and models should be used (e.g., creating new forms of
assessment that result in adverse impact). Finally, the utility of data and models for making
decisions depends on getting the right kind of information to the right people at the right time.
Leaders and Soldiers need information that is understandable, reliable, valid, and timely.
Given these challenges, research is necessary to develop new ways of generating, analyzing,
and using data for the purpose of talent management.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• New statistical and computational methods for assessing individuals and groups.
Examples include new approaches to generate, deploy, and score assessments; statistical
innovations in addressing faking and response distortion; predictive models to improve
talent management; new methods for augmenting assessments with non-traditional data;
and methods to reduce response burden.
• New methods to support timely, valid, and efficient data-based personnel management and
leader decision-making. Examples include innovations in job analysis/competency
modeling and statistical/computational methods to optimally assign individuals to
specialties and units.
• New metrics and models for group and individual effectiveness in organizations.
Examples include network effects associated with individual training and performance, as
well as metrics to more accurately integrate the value, costs, and likelihood of relevant
performance behaviors across contexts and careers.
• Novel or non-traditional data sources for behavioral/social science research in military
contexts. Examples include archival, physiological, relational, sensor, and qualitative data
-- especially data related to Soldier performance, staffing and personnel decisions,
leadership development, attitude assessment, and group/organizational behavior.
• Other applications of Big Data analytics, predictive modeling, or new computational
methods to address talent management and personnel management. Examples include
testing and assessment, counter-productive work behaviors, recruitment, retention, career
9

---

development, promotions, improving person-job fit, enhancing readiness and resilience,
and decision-support systems for leaders.
The ARI Managers are Dr. Andrew Slaughter, (703) 545-2353,
andrew.j.slaughter.civ@army.mil, and Dr. Garett Howardson, (703) 545-2429,
garett.n.howardson.civ@army.mil.
ii. Holistic Personnel Assessment
The ARI personnel assessment program includes research to advance the science underlying
talent management. The overarching objective is to devise means to attract, select, assign,
promote, and retain enlisted and officer personnel, both Active and Reserve, whose abilities
and interests will fit the Army’s current and future organizational and job requirements. Our
approach to enlisted and officer job performance reflects a “whole person”, compensatory
perspective, incorporating both the ability to perform and the motivation to perform. Our
selection and assignment research must incorporate both elements in a holistic fashion. Areas
of research include theory, methods, techniques, and tools to:
• Enhance the measurement of individual differences, both cognitive and non-cognitive,
for personnel assessment using both classical and innovative measurement approaches;
• Refine and expand the measurement and evaluation of job performance to include
innovative approaches and analysis techniques for job analysis and holistic job
performance assessment;
• Enhance personnel management, e.g., selection, assignment, promotion, from
application to the Army until separation using innovative methods, tools, and techniques;
• Evaluate and validate personnel assessments across the Soldier lifecycle to include
evaluating the impact of new and proposed personnel policies on personnel management
and performance; and
• Improve personnel management through application and enhancement of longitudinal
data and analysis.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Tonia Heffner, 703-545-4408, tonia.s.heffner.civ@army.mil
b. Leader Competences for Complexity & Uncertainty
As the Army prepares to execute the potential range of future military operations, it must
continue to develop a bench of officers and non-commissioned officers (NCOs) who possess the
competencies to perform well across a variety of conventional and emerging contexts.
Developing such competencies requires time and experience over a career, innate ability, and
deliberate leader development and training interventions. Leaders at all levels in the Army—
including junior and senior NCOs, cadets, and junior and senior officers—must develop the
critical cognitive skills that underlie tactical and technical expertise. Leaders also must possess
refined interpersonal and communication skills to mentor subordinates, build teams comprised of
diverse individuals, effectively cooperate with interagency and coalition partners, and
appropriately influence a variety of individuals and groups (e.g., the media, local populations).
Innovations in leader development and training require understanding of the competencies
required for effective performance in future operational contexts, as well as an understanding of
how ability and experience help or hinder competency progression. This area of research
10

---

addresses methods and techniques to identify, train, develop, and assess higher-order
competencies and requisite skills for successful leader performance within the Army.
i. Complex cognitive competencies for organizational and strategic leaders
The Army invests significant time and effort to develop leaders over their careers. Army
leaders are given immensely complex and dynamic missions that can have serious
implications at both local and global levels. The development of complex cognitive
competencies in Army leaders is essential for a successful and an effective organization.
Unless these complex cognitive competencies are continuously developed in Army leaders,
they may lose the ability to anticipate change. When organizational and strategic leaders are
continually developing their complex cognitive skills, they gain the power to explore all
options rather than just react with last minute changes to existing plans with respect to what
may have become an outdated concept of the operational and strategic environment. There is
need for scientific innovative research that will enhance the Army’s capability in assessment
of complex cognitive skills in its leaders and in the creation of improved methods to
accelerate the development of such skills at opportune times during their career lifecycle.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• How to better develop, identify, and assess individuals with the capacity for strategic
leadership and higher-order cognitive competencies (e.g., systems thinking,
innovative thinking, thinking-in-time, action learning, comprehensive information
gathering, critical thinking).
• Identification of the competencies, knowledge, skills, and abilities that must be
developed over a career to build officers’ capacity for strategic thinking and
leadership; identification of how the competencies develop over time and across a
career.
• Methods to assess, develop, and accelerate acquisition of cognitive competencies at
different phases in an officer’s career. Cognitive competencies of interest include,
but are not limited to, strategic thinking, systems thinking, creativity and innovation,
thinking-in-time, related complex cognitive skills.
• On-the-job approaches to building cognitive competencies and expertise. Examples
include examining the value of broadening opportunities to develop strategic
leadership skills, and methods to improve how leaders use mentoring to build
strategic thinking in others.
• Methods to develop the competencies, knowledge, and skills to improve a leader’s
ability to perform well in a variety of operational and mission contexts (e.g.,
visualizing the operational environment).
The ARI Manager is Dr. Rhett Graves, (913) 684-9758, thomas.r.graves5.civ@army.mil
ii. Multifaceted development pathways for organizational and strategic leaders
Deterring adversaries and winning the nation’s wars are accomplished through the
coordinated actions of cohesive and effective organizations working toward the same
purpose. The leader’s role in shaping and directing these organizations is significant.
Moreover, as leaders advance in their careers, the organizations they lead grow in
11

---

complexity. Army leaders advance from the direct level of leadership to leading
organizations to leading the Army enterprise. At each stage, leaders are expected to continue
learning and developing themselves, as well as developing the subordinates and
organizations they lead. To be effective across different performance environments and
across a career, leaders must therefore develop and improve a wide range of knowledge,
skills, and abilities—both within themselves and within others. Army leaders have a diversity
of backgrounds, interests, talents, etc., that result in the development of competencies that are
individualized to particular developmental paths. A better understanding is required of
individual, multifaceted, and asynchronous patterns of competency development.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Research is needed to identify how leaders grow over time and over unique
developmental paths, as well as how leaders develop and mentor their subordinates.
• Development of innovative measures and models of leadership performance; leader
competencies, knowledge, skills, abilities, and other attributes; and leader growth.
This includes developing and validating methods to assess competency baselines and
progression throughout Professional Military Education.
• Methods for identifying, measuring, and developing operational leadership
competencies for obtaining advantage in future operational environments,
characterized by contextual features such as battlefield transparency, near-peer
adversaries, autonomous systems, human-machine teaming, integrated domains.
• Methods for leader development in contexts extending beyond formal education and
training venues.
• Measures and methods to improve the rate of competency development and leader
capability to develop his or her subordinates. This includes leader development
interventions to improve knowledge and skills related to mentorship, methods to aid
leaders in identifying subordinates’ developmental needs, and methods to improve
performance counselling and feedback.
• Methods to enable leaders to influence and improve the organizations they lead. This
includes methods to develop leader skills and competencies related to promoting
organizational effectiveness, as well as techniques or job aids to help leaders promote
organizational performance (e.g., methods to support the diffusion of innovation,
methods to set conditions for a learning environment).
The ARI Manager is Dr. Rhett Graves, (913) 684-9758, thomas.r.graves5.civ@army.mil
iii. Assessing and Developing Junior Officer Competencies
Research is needed to specifically develop valid measures and targeted interventions that are
designed to provide developmental feedback on critical leader competencies for Junior
Officers. The Leader Requirements Model (LRM) and the Army Talent Attribute Framework
(ATAF) provide foundational and critical attributes and competencies relevant for this leader
echelon. Building on this foundation, research will further explore the anatomy of the targeted
competencies and the contexts in which they are used, ultimately allowing for the design of
diagnostic and developmental tools specific to more granular subcompetencies. By focusing
on the requisite knowledge, skills, abilities (KSAO) necessary for subcompetency proficiency,
12

---

research findings will provide the Army with novel developmental methods as well as a more
refined ability to predict performance. Additionally, research also is needed to provide
instructional and institutional guidance, helping trainers/educators to better instill these leader
competencies to maximize transfer of training to current and future operational environments.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Development of innovative assessment tools to diagnose Junior Officer leader
competency gaps and provide actionable guidance for leader development.
• Development of a stage progression model for Junior Officer competency
development accounting for configural profiles of subcompetency and KSAOs
expertise and how those profiles interact with elements of contextual demands.
• Methods to accelerate the development of leader competencies with novel training
interventions yielding improved performance at earlier stages of Officers’ careers.
• Prototype interventions promoting the transition from one stage of competency
development to the next.
• Methods to predict specific aspects of individuals’ leader performance in a range of
missions/situations enabling more refined talent management decisions.
• Development of enhanced and validated instructional guidance ultimately producing
more ready and lethal Junior Officers.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Jennifer Tucker, Office: 706-545-2490; Work cell: 706-366-7312,
jennifer.s.tucker.civ@army.mil
iv. Assessing and Developing Junior Leader Competencies for Multi-domain Operations
Sustained competition and conflict in the future operational environment (FOE) will impose
novel performance requirements on Army Leaders. Emerging operational demands and
requirements for multidomain operations will require Leaders to augment existing
competencies and to develop new ones. Research is needed to identify critical competencies
supporting Leader performance in the FOE and develop assessment and formative feedback
tools to enhance competency development. Specifically, research is needed to enhance
Leaders’: (a) perceptual and cognitive competencies for ambiguous contexts (e.g., degraded
information environments, spatial cognition, social cognition), (b) adaptive competencies for
rapidly evolving technological contexts (e.g., technological fluency, expert communication,
expert problem-solving, career transitions to technical fields), and (c) self-regulation
competencies for effective performance in demanding environments (e.g., hot cognition,
vigilance, cognitive flexibility).
Additionally, research is needed to understand better the systematic nature of ecological and
transactional aspects of competency development, taking place between the Soldier/Leader and
their context, as they and the Army more broadly recognize, make sense of, respond to, and
adapt to perceived contextual demands. The Army requires novel ways of thinking about,
measuring, and enhancing competencies that incorporate, explore, develop, and refine
ecological, transactional, and contextually focused perspectives, emphasizing perceptual,
cognitive, affective, performative, and experiential facets of competency development.
13

---

Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Methods to identify critical competencies for Leaders to perform effectively in
current and future operational environments, particularly with respect to MDO.
• Development of innovative and valid assessment techniques and tools for measuring
Leader competencies for the FOE.
• Methods to determine the cognitive, affective, sociocultural, and/or other factors
needed to be integrated into training and formative feedback interventions to enhance
competencies for FOE conditions (e.g., simulated realistic training contexts).
• Development of validated formative feedback tools that support and enhance critical
competencies early and throughout Leaders’ career lifecycle.
• Techniques to conceptualize and operationalize ecological and/or transactional
models of competency development, accounting for the role of context in perceptual,
cognitive, affective, performative, experiential, or other facets of competency
development.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Randy Brou, Office: 706-545-2550; Work cell: 706-575-8264,
randy.j.brou.civ@army.mil
v. Developing Noncommissioned Officers for the Future Force
Known as the “Backbone of the Army,” noncommissioned officers (NCO) conduct the daily
operations of the Army and are charged with the care, training, education, and readiness of
every Soldier. For those reasons, NCOs’ ability to coach, train and mentor competent Soldiers
of character is key to the readiness and success of the force. As NCOs transition from direct,
first line leadership (e.g., team leaders, squad leaders, and other equivalent duty positions) to
operational and strategic leadership positions, they must progressively build upon the enduring
leader competencies and knowledge, skills, abilities and other attributes (KSAO) that are
required of all NCOs. They must also develop challenging new competencies and KSAOs that
were not required of them as first line leaders. Although the Army has made great strides in
providing NCOs with rich and impactful professional development opportunities within the
institutional training domain, further research needs to be conducted within the operational and
self-development domains. One important focus of the research is to understand how NCOs
can build, practice, and accelerate their leadership competencies outside of the Army
schoolhouse settings. This research will provide science-based developmental methods and
assessments that 1) address the leader competencies and KSAOs for which NCOs need
additional training and development before being assigned to duty positions that require them,
2) are aligned with Army doctrine and existing leader development training, and 3) can be used
by NCOs in any learning domain.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Identification of emerging challenges that NCOs will face when leading, training, and
taking care of their units and Soldiers over the next decade, and identification of the
KSAOs they will need to meet those challenges.
14

---

• Identification of leader competencies and KSAOs for which NCOs need additional
training and development and the best methods to develop those competencies and
KSAOs.
• Development and validation of developmental methods and assessments to accelerate and
build upon the essential competencies and KSAOs that are required of NCOs across the
entirety of their lifecycle (e.g., leader identity, effective communication, task
prioritization, risk assessment and management).
• Development and validation of developmental methods and assessments to accelerate and
build upon essential leader competencies and KSAOs that are uniquely required of senior
NCO ranks and/or particular senior enlisted organizational and strategic leadership
positions.
• Methods and models that identify, describe, and anticipate how NCO competency and
KSAO requirements change over the course of an enlisted leader’s career.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Brian Crabb (254) 383-1132, brian.t.crabb.civ@army.mil.
c. Team Assignment & Performance
i. Multi-Layered Hierarchical Units
Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) require a dynamic mix of U.S. Army forward presence,
expeditionary forces, and partner forces to deter and defeat the enemy. Future Army units are
projected to operate as disaggregated, highly mobile, self-contained forces that will operate for
extended periods in complex environments without fixed basing. Small units drawing from
diverse personnel across a variety of units will be required to rapidly and organically aggregate
to achieve particular missions, and then disaggregate back into their previous state post-mission.
These teaming arrangements are an adaptive response to the complexity of the problems
encountered in the current global environment. Teams are complex dynamic systems that exist
across different environments, develop over time, and evolve and adapt as situational demands
unfold. Research efforts are needed to develop tools and techniques for teams to be able to
organically aggregate and disaggregate as the mission and operational environment demand,
understand how myriad individual characteristics combine to create highly effective teams, and
determine the contextual factors that impact the success of nested, hierarchical units.
.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Tools and techniques to support the rapid, organic aggregation and disaggregation of
small units within multi-team systems in response to task and environmental
demands.
• Statistical and measurement methods to understand team and multi-team process and
performance dynamics in field settings.
• Understanding of attributes and emergent states of teams related to robustness and a
team’s ability to continue to perform well under duress for extended time periods.
• Understanding the role of trust, cohesion, and other emergent states that influence
performance and effectiveness in multi-team systems; including the establishment
and dynamics of these states in multi-team systems.
15

---

• Understanding of how leaders, climate, culture, and other aspects of teams interact
across different echelons and team compositions.
• Application or revision of concepts such as commander's intent, command intent, and
unity of effort to train and support collaboration and decision-making by collocated
and distributed teams.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Stefanie P. Shaughnessy, (571) 585-1790,
stefanie.p.shaughnessy.civ@army.mil
ii. Team Staffing and Composition
As the Army shifts to the Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) paradigm, there will be an
increased emphasis on ensuring effectiveness of Soldiers and small units, with a recent
emphasis by Army Senior Leaders on small teams (squads, platoons, and companies) as the
foundation of readiness. In order to maintain maximal effectiveness of the force in this
paradigm, the Army will need to efficiently assign and utilize personnel throughout the
formation. This concept is often articulated as “Right Soldier, Right Job, Right Time.” To
achieve this vision, the Army requires the capability to shift to the assignment paradigm
from focusing solely on individual jobs to also accounting for the specific organization,
unit, and/or team context in which that job is performed. The Army requires the tools,
methods, and frameworks for optimally assigning individuals to teams and small units to
ensure the operational effectiveness of these units in future conflicts. Moreover, the Army
would benefit from new assessment systems to collect sufficiently deep and appropriate
information on the individual attributes and capabilities of Soldiers to support a team-based
assignment paradigm. Research in this topic area will address both the methods and
statistical tools, as well as the attributes and capabilities to be assessed in order to support
team-based assignment in the future.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Identifying characteristics that predict individuals’ capacity of working effectively
in team environments.
• Statistical optimization frameworks and models for ensuring team effectiveness
across a large number of teams and team assignment decisions.
• Understanding of team composition and compilation models for predicting team
outcomes (e.g., cohesion, adaptability, performance, effectiveness, readiness).
• Computational tools that embody scientific knowledge of team composition and
compilation, team tasks and environmental conditions related to team outcomes,
and optimization frameworks for personnel officers and leaders to use to assign
members to teams.
• Understanding the impact of team process change over time as team members rotate
in and out of units.
• Analytical tools for aggregating and displaying data and facilitating team-based
assignment decisions, to include taking into account different, or multiple, team
outcomes based on team needs.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Stefanie P. Shaughnessy, (571) 585-1790,
stefanie.p.shaughnessy.civ@army.mil
16

---

iii. Developing Teams for the Future Operational Environment
To be prepared for the future operational environment (FOE), the Army is undergoing a
transformational change with a focus on improving its talent management system. This
change will necessitate optimization of human potential, especially at the small-team
level. Current trends suggest that the FOE will be characterized by an expanded
battlespace across time, domains, geography, and actors, the convergence of capabilities
through technology, and compression among strategic, operational, and tactical levels.
The FOE will present challenges not just in the operational context, but also in training.
The multi-domain operations (MDO) concept requires Army teams to operate semi-
independently, but also to utilize capabilities across multiple domains in order to conduct
sustained missions in highly contested environments. According to the Army People
Strategy (2020), the Army must modernize training through the development of new tools,
technology, and methods to optimize human performance for MDO. To do this, the Army
needs a broad and deep research program that focuses on developing the talent of small
teams as they acquire proficiency of both the critical tactical skills and the requisite team
dimensions that will be required of them in the emerging operational environment. Despite
a burgeoning research literature on teams, there is considerable evidence that current
teams in the Army, and in modern organizations more broadly, are vastly different from
teams in the past (Jones et al., 2020; Shuffler et al., 2020). With some notable exceptions,
researchers largely remain vetted to a traditional understanding of teams as fairly static
and independent entities (Tannenbaum et al., 2012). Thus, the current state of the
scientific literature lacks specific practical insight about how to train Army teams in order
to meet the dynamic complexities that they are expected face in the FOE. This research
will inform the science of teams by providing a better understanding of team processes,
emergent states, and training approaches, while simultaneously equipping Army trainers
through the development of effective tools for optimizing individual and collective talent
during home station training. Such research will thereby allow the Army to maximize its
human potential to meet the challenges of the FOE.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
• Identification of the individual and team KSAOs, or relationships among them, that
small teams need to build and sustain team effectiveness in the FOE.
• Development of training approaches and tools to build individual team member
KSAOs that enable teams to sustain mission performance in the FOE.
• Development of team training approaches and tools that build team KSAOs and
team processes to enable sustained mission performance of teams in the FOE.
• Identification of the individual KSAOs and team-level characteristics that are
necessary for the effectiveness of teams within multiteam systems.
• Development of training approaches and tools that facilitate optimal teaming and
that enable teams to operate within multiteam systems.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Brian Crabb (254) 383-1132, brian.t.crabb.civ@army.mil
17

---

iv. Team Enablers
Performance in the current and future operational environments hinges not only on the
performance of individuals, but on the performance of teams. This research examines the
relationships and development of innovative measures of critical multilevel constructs,
such as unit resilience, unit cohesion, and unit climate and determines how these key
enablers impact unit-level readiness outcomes. The research also adds to the development
of integrated measures of objective and perceptual data on these key team enablers
• Development and validation of innovative measures and models of collective
constructs (e.g., resilience, cohesion, and command climate).
• Methods to improve unit/collective constructs (e.g., resilience, cohesion, command
climate).
• Development and validation of integrated measures of collective constructs such as
resilience, cohesion, command climate.
• The use of social network analysis to understand and investigate the pattern of
communication among unit members within small Army units to determine how it
influences team resilience.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Alok Bhupatkar, 703-712-3038,
alok.a.bhupatkar.civ@army.mil
d. Assessing and Developing Technological Fluency for the Future Force
In the Future Operating Environment (FOE), Soldiers and squads will be teamed with
increasingly sophisticated and evolving technologies. Soldiers and leaders in specialty
areas (e.g., Cyber, Data Workforce, Technology Workforce) and General Purpose Forces
(GPF) will require increased technological aptitudes and skills in order to adapt emerging
technologies to evolving mission sets and avoid being overmatched by AI-enabled “smart”
technologies. Technological Fluency (TF) - the ability of Soldiers and units to use and
rapidly adapt new and emerging technologies without formal training on these technologies

will be a decisive factor in the FOE. This research will enable the creation of a

“technologically fluent” Force by developing models of technological fluency, methods
and measures to assess and develop the technological fluency of Soldiers across a career,
and technologies to maximize resilience and performance in Soldiers and units.
Modernization is incomplete without critical mass in the Force capable of learning and
using those new technologies and systems. Talent Management reform is incomplete
without foresight of future operational demands and the ability to recruit, assign, and
develop Soldiers to meet those demands. To build a technologically fluent Force, Army
talent management processes must be capable of modeling TF, assessing Soldier and unit
TF, and developing performance for future mission success.
Areas of research include theoretical models or frameworks, methods, techniques, and tools
to:
• Build individual difference assessments that reflect TF competencies leveraging
existing measures and developing new, innovative measures.
• Expand the assessment of job performance to include criterion measures related to
18

---

TF, e.g., behavioral inputs to systems, system feedback of coordinated AI-human
interactions, collective performance measures, training performance measures.
• Develop training and leader development programs to enhance the KSAOs
reflecting TF competencies and to maximize performance in jobs/tasks requiring a
high degree of TF.
The ARI Managers are Dr. Jennifer Tucker, Office: 706-545-2490; Work cell: 706-366-
7312, jennifer.s.tucker.civ@army.mil and Dr. Alok Bhupatkar, 703-712-3038,
alok.a.bhupatkar.civ@army.mil
(End of Section)
B. FEDERAL AWARD INFORMATION:
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to
award a variety of instruments on behalf of ARI. Anticipated awards may be made in the form
of procurement contracts, grants, cooperative agreements and, other transactions (OTs) for
research, or OTs for prototypes. The ACC (APG) RTP Division reserves the right to use the type
of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed. Applicants should familiarize
themselves with these instrument types and the applicable regulations before submitting a white
paper or proposal. The following are brief descriptions of the possible award instruments:
1. Procurement Contract: A legal instrument, which consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6303, reflects a
relationship between the Federal Government and a State, a local government, or other recipient
when the principal purpose of the instrument is to acquire property or services for the direct benefit
or use of the Federal Government.
Procurement contracts awarded by the ACC (APG) RTP Division will contain, where appropriate,
detailed special provisions concerning patent, rights in technical data and computer software,
reporting requirements, equal employment opportunity, etc. No fee or profit will be allowed on travel
and equipment.
Contracts are primarily governed by the following regulations:
a. Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR)
b. Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations (DFARS)
c. Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS)
2. Grant: A legal instrument, that consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6304, is used to enter into a relationship
in which:
a. The principal purpose is to transfer a thing of value to the recipient to carry out a public purpose
of support or stimulation authorized by a law or the United States, rather than to acquire
property or services for the Department of Defense’s direct benefit or use.
b. Substantial involvement is not expected between the Department of Defense and the recipient
19

---

when carrying out the activity contemplated by the grant.
c. No fee or profit is allowed.
3. Cooperative Agreement: A legal instrument which, consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6305, is used to
enter into the same kind of relationship as a grant (see definition "grant"), except that substantial
involvement is expected between the Department of Defense and the recipient when carrying out
the activity contemplated by the cooperative agreement. The term does not include "cooperative
research and development agreements" as defined in 15 U.S.C. 3710a. No fee or profit is allowed.
4. Other Transaction for Research. A legal instrument, consistent with 10 U.S.C. 4021, which may
be used for basic, applied, and advanced research projects. The research covered under this
instrument cannot be duplicative of research being conducted under an existing DoD program. To
the maximum extent practicable, OTs for research are to provide for a 50/50 cost share between the
Government and the applicant. An applicant’s cost share may take the form of cash, independent
research and development (IR&D), foregone intellectual property rights, equipment, access to
unique facilities, and/or other means. Due to the extent of cost share, and the fact that an OT for
research does not qualify as a “funding agreement” as defined at 37 CFR 401.2(a), the intellectual
property provisions of this instrument can be negotiated to provide expanded protection to an
applicant’s intellectual property. No fee or profit is allowed on OTs for research. Please refer to
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Other Transaction
Guide version 2.0 dated July 2023 for additional information. This document, along with additional
other transaction agreement (OTA) resources, may be accessed at the following link:
https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/cp/policy/other-policy-areas.html
5. Other Transaction for Prototype or Production. A legal instrument, consistent with 10
U.S.C. 4022, which provides DoD the flexibility necessary to adopt and incorporate business
practices that reflect commercial industry standards and best practices into its award instruments.
OTs for prototypes or production are not FAR-based procurement contracts, grants, cooperative
agreements, or OTs for Research. OTs for prototypes or production have specific applications and
conditions for use (see Appendix C of the Other Transactions Guide linked below). The effort
covered under an OT cannot be duplicative of effort being conducted under an existing DoD
program. Follow-on production contracts and/or an OT may be awarded to a Prototype Other
Transaction Awardee, if applicable. Please refer to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment Other Transaction Guide version 2.0 dated July 2023 for additional
information. This document, along with other OTA resources, may be accessed at the following
link: https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/cp/policy/other-policy-areas.html
6. Grants and cooperative agreements for institutions of higher education, nonprofit
organizations, foreign organizations, and foreign public entities are primarily governed by the
following:
a. Federal statutes
b. Federal regulations
c. 2 CFR Part 200
d. 2 CFR 1104
e. 32 CFR Parts 21, 22, 26, and 28
f. DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions
20

---

g. Agency-specific Research Terms and Conditions
7. Grants and cooperative agreements for for-profit and nonprofit organizations exempted from
Subpart E - Cost Principles of 2 CFR Part 200, are primarily governed by the following:
a. Federal statutes
b. Federal regulations
c. 32 CFR Part 34 - Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with For-Profit
Organizations
d. 32 CFR Parts 21, 22, 26, and 28
e. DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions
f. Agency-specific Research Terms and Conditions
8. OT for Research are primarily governed by the following:
a. Federal statutes
b. Federal regulations
c. Office of Secretary of Defense implementation guidance titled Other Transactions (OT)
Guide for Prototype Projects (July 2023, Version 2)
d. Guide to Research Other Transactions under 10 U.S.C. 4021 issued by the Office of the
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering
9. OTs for Prototypes or Production are primarily governed by the following:
a. Federal statutes
b. Federal regulations
c. Office of Secretary of Defense implementation guidance titled Other Transactions
(OT) Guide for Prototype Projects (July 2023, Version 2)
10. The following websites may be accessed to obtain an electronic copy of the governing
regulations and terms and conditions:
• FAR, DFARS, and AFARS: https://www.acquisition.gov
• Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): http://www.ecfr.gov
• DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions:
https://www.nre.navy.mil/work-with-us/manage-your-award/manage-grant-
award/grants-terms-conditions
• Agency-specific Research Terms and Conditions:
https://arl.devcom.army.mil/resources/baa-forms/#terms-and-conditions
(End of Section)
21

---

C. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION:
1. Eligible Applicants:
Proposals are sought from institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations, and for-
profit organizations, domestic or foreign, for research and development (R&D) in those areas
specified in SECTION II. A of this BAA. Foreign organization and foreign public entities
are advised that security restrictions may apply that could preclude their participation in
these efforts. Countries included on the U.S. State Department List of Countries that Support
Terrorism are excluded from participation in these efforts.
Government Laboratories, Federal Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs),
and U.S. Service Academies are not eligible to participate as prime Contractors or
Recipients under this BAA. If a proposal selected for award includes the involvement of a
Government laboratory, Federally Funded Research and Development Center, or U.S.
Service Academy, award funds allocated for the involvement of Government laboratories,
FFRDCs, and/or U.S. Service Academies will be directly provided from ARI to the
respective Government laboratory, FFRDC or U.S. Service Academy via a Military
Interdepartmental Purchase Request (MIPR). No award funds will be channeled directly
from a prime awardee (e.g., Contractor or Recipient) to a Government laboratory, FFRDC, or
U.S. Service Academy.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching:
Generally, there is no requirement for cost sharing, matching, or cost participation to be
eligible for award under this BAA. Cost sharing and matching is not an evaluation factor
used under this BAA. Exceptions may exist if the applicant is proposing the use of an OT
for research or prototype as an award instrument. Cost-sharing requirements may be found
within the specified Other Transactions regulations and Other Transaction Guides referenced
in this BAA. Applicants are encouraged to consider cost sharing schemes in cooperation
with ARI.
In addition, if cost sharing is proposed on a grant or cooperative agreement proposal
submitted by a nonprofit or institution of higher education, the award will be subject to the
restrictions at 2 CFR 200.306. If cost sharing is proposed on a contract proposal, the award
will be subject to the restrictions at FAR 35.003
(End of Section)
D. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION:
1. Address to View Broad Agency Announcement:
Grants.gov (www.grants.gov)
Contract Opportunities (sam.gov)
22

---

2. Content and Form of Application Submission:
Section 1 – General Information
Completeness of Information: Proposals must include all of the information specified in this
BAA to prevent delays in evaluation. Be sure to specify the Commercial and Government
Entity (CAGE Code), the DUNS Number, and the Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN)
with your submission. Completion of the Representations and Certifications as well as
registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) are prerequisites before receiving
an award.
Classified Submissions: Do not submit any proposals that include classified information.
ACC-APG-RTP is not allowed to accept classified submissions.
Use of Color in Proposals: All proposals received will be stored as electronic images.
Electronic color images require a significantly larger amount of storage space than black-
and-white images. As a result, Applicant’s use of color in proposals should be used only
when necessary to convey specific information.
Government Property/Government Furnished Equipment and Facilities: Normally, title to
equipment or other tangible property purchased with Government funds vests with nonprofit
institutions of higher education or with nonprofit organizations whose primary purpose is
conducting scientific research if vesting will facilitate scientific research performed for the
Government. For-profit organizations are expected to possess the necessary plant and
equipment to conduct the proposed research. Deviations may be made on a case-by-case
basis to allow for-profit organizations to purchase equipment, but regulatory disposition
instructions must be followed.
Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI): Proposals may discuss the need to access or
generate controlled unclassified information for the proposed work. When an award requires
access to CUI, DFARS Clause 252.204-7012 will be included in the award, as well as
additional ARI specific requirements as determined necessary. For questions regarding the
potential for access to controlled unclassified information, please coordinate with the TPOC
for that topic area prior to whitepaper or proposal submission.
Post-Employment Conflict of Interest: There are certain post-employment restrictions on
former Federal officers and employees, including special Government employees (Section
207 of Title 18, U.S.C.). If an Applicant believes a conflict of interest may exist, the
Applicant should discuss the situation with the Army legal counsel, Mr. Brian Bentley,
(571) 256-7844, brian.e.bentley2.civ@army.mil, prior to expending time and effort in
preparing a proposal.
Statement of Disclosure Preference: Please complete Form 52 or 52A stating your
preference for release of information contained in your proposal. Copies of these forms are
available at http://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?page=218. Additionally, proposals
containing data that is not to be disclosed to the public for any purpose or used by the
Government except for evaluation purposes shall include the following statement on their
23

---

cover page:
This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall
not be duplicated, used, or disclosed, in whole or in part, for any purpose other than to
evaluate this proposal. If, however, an award is made to this Applicant as a result of, or
in connection with, the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to
duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting award. This
restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this
proposal if the information has been obtained from another source without restriction.
The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets .
The Applicant shall also mark each sheet of data it wants to restrict with the following
legend:
“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title
page of this proposal.”
Section 2 – Application Process Overview
The application process is in three stages as follows:
Stage 1- Provide a valid unique entity identifier (formerly DUNS). Please verify the
accuracy of your Unique Entity Identifier (formerly DUNS) at the Dun and Bradstreet
(D&B) website http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform before registering with the System for
Award Management System (SAM). Prospective Applicants must be registered in SAM at
https://www.sam.gov prior to submitting its application.
Stage 2 - Prospective Applicants are encouraged, but not required, to submit White Papers
prior to the submission of a complete proposal. The purpose of submitting a White Paper is
to minimize the labor and cost associated with the production of a detailed proposal that has
little chance of being selected for funding. Feedback on a White Paper will be provided to
the Applicant with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a
proposal”.
Stage 3 - Interested Applicants are required to submit a proposal. All proposals submitted
under the terms and conditions cited in this BAA will be reviewed regardless of whether an
Applicant submitted a White Paper.
24

---

Section 3 – White Paper Preparation
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research, including how it is
innovative and how it could substantially advance the state of the science. Army relevance and
potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate of total cost for the proposed
effort. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the
concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an
addendum in which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per
individual) of all key personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal
Investigators) who will perform the research, highlighting their qualifications and
experience as discussed below. All files and forms must be compiled into a single PDF file
or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will be advised that they are only to
review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any pages submitted in
excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPER:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives,
approach, relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include
the nature and extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the
work will contribute to the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request
and how this would be demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests
of the Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges,
software, personnel or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment
(GFE), Government Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property
(GFP), or Government Furnished Data (GFD). Applicant shall indicate any Government
coordination that may be required for obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to
perform any simulations or exercises that would demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research
hours, burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the
Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform
the research, highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
The Applicant must clearly identify and mark any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only
by the Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software contained
in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted rights
respectively. In the absence of such
25

---

1. identification, the Government will assume to have unlimited rights to all technical data
or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records or data bearing a restrictive.
2. An Applicant is cautioned, however, that portions of a White Paper may be subject to
release under terms of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Section 4 – White Paper Submission
A White Paper of the proposed effort may be submitted electronically to the cognizant ARI
Manager listed in Section II. A with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 White
Paper” addressing specific technical area(s) and an estimate of proposed cost.
An Applicant preparing a White Paper for submission may follow any convenient format desired
as long as the submission complies with guidance above in Section 3, “White Paper
Submission.” Please enclose an e-mail address and a telephone number where you can be
reached.
Section 5 – Review of White Papers
ARI TPOCs will receive and consider all whitepapers submitted and will provide a response with
either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
Section 6 – Preparation of Proposals
PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:
General Information: The proposal is the only vehicle available to the Applicant for receiving
consideration for award. The proposal must stand on its own merit; only information provided in
the proposal can be used in the evaluation process leading to an award. The proposal should be
prepared simply and economically, providing straightforward, concise delineation of capabilities
necessary to perform the proposed work. The technical volume must be accompanied by a fully
supported cost volume as cost and technical considerations are reviewed simultaneously; the cost
volume should assume a start date of no earlier than 01 November 2023. In preparing proposals,
it is important that the Applicant keep in mind the characteristics of a proposal acceptable for
evaluation. A proposal must include all the information specified in this announcement in order
to receive consideration. All proposals must include:
1. An Abstract, Background, Application Potential, Technical Approach, Reference List,
Curriculum Vitae/Resumes of proposed researchers, and cost information, as described
below.
2. Contact information such as e-mail addresses and telephone numbers for both the
Principal Investigator and Institutional Representative to allow technical and contracting
questions to be addressed.
26

---

3. Institutional endorsement, signature of the proposed Principal Investigator, time frames
for all phases of the project, and detailed accounts of proposed work and cost by task.
4. Provide the name, address, and phone number of Applicant’s cognizant Defense Contract
Audit Agency (DCAA) office, if known. All Applicants must be registered in the System
for Award Management (SAM) before an award can be made. Applicants must also
provide their DUNS number (Duns and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System).
Proposals should be very well written, and Applicant’s intention should be clear to
technical reviewers who, while having expertise in behavioral sciences, may lack
concentrated knowledge in the proposed domain. Proposals should be sufficiently
detailed to be responsive to the criteria, described below, for evaluation.
Proposal Format and Content: To ensure all proposals receive proper consideration, the
Government-recommended proposal format shown below (Volume I Technical) should be
followed. This format can most easily be incorporated as the proposal table of contents and
serves as a final checklist as well. Proposals must address at least one of the domains for basic
or applied/advanced research cited in SECTION II. A of this BAA.
Proposal documents (excluding illustrations, tables, and required forms) must use the
following page format:
• Page Size – 8 ½ x 11 inches
• Margins – 1 inch
• Spacing – single
• Font – Times New Roman, 12 point
Note: The Abstract, Background, Application Potential and Technical Approach
sections of a proposal, including any appendices, tables, or figures, must be no
greater than 23 pages in length. (The cover page, table of contents, proposal reference
list, curriculum vitae, cost information and institutional information are not included in
the 23-page limit). Reviewers will not review any pages beyond the 23-page limit.
VOLUME I – TECHNICAL
i Cover Page
ii Table of Contents
iii Abstract
1. Background
2. Application Potential
3. Technical Approach
4. Reference List
5. Curriculum Vitae/Resumes of Key Personnel
i. Cover Page: A cover page is required. Proposals will not be processed without:
A SF 424 R&R Form (required for assistance agreement proposals submitted online via
Grants.gov (see section 8- Submission of Proposals).
27

---

Note: If an Applicant elects to submit a contract proposal via Grants.gov instead of via
e-mail, the SF 424 R&R Form is required. Proposals for Grants or cooperative agreements
only require the SF 424 R&R Form.
The cover page should include the BAA number, Research Area(s) of Interest, name and
telephone number for the principal points of contact (both technical and contractual), proposed
project title, and any other information that identifies the proposal. The cover page should also
contain the proprietary data disclosure statement, if applicable (ARO FORM 52 or 52A). The
title of the proposed project should be brief, scientifically representative, intelligible to a
scientifically literate reader, and suitable for use in the public domain. Should the project be
carried out at a branch campus or other component of the submitting organization, that branch
campus or component should be identified in the space provided (Block 12 on the SF 424 R&R).
To evaluate compliance with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 {20 U.S.C. A§
1681 Et. Seq.), the Department of Defense is collecting certain demographic and career
information to be able to assess the success rates of women who are proposed for key roles in
applications in STEM disciplines. To enable this assessment, each application must include the
following forms completed as indicated.
Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) form:
The Degree Type and Degree Year fields on the Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile
{Expanded) form will be used by DoD as the source for career information. In addition to the
required fields on the form, applicants must complete these two fields for all individuals that
are identified as having the project role of PD/Pl or Co-PD/Pl on the form. Additional
senior/key persons can be added by selecting the "Next Person" button.
Research and Related Personal Data form:
This form will be used by DoD as the source of demographic information, such as gender, race,
ethnicity, and disability information for the Project Director/Principal Investigator and all
other persons identified as Co-Project Director{s)/Co-Principal Investigator(s). Each
application must include this form with the name fields of the Project Director/Principal
Investigator and any Co-Project Director(s)/Co-Principal Investigator(s) completed;
however, provision of the demographic information in the form is voluntary. If completing
the form for multiple individuals, each Co-Project Director/Co-Principal Investigator can be
added by selecting the "Next Person" button. The demographic information, if provided,
will be used for statistical purposes only and will not be made available to merit reviewers.
Applicants who do not wish to provide some or all of the information should check or select
the "Do not wish to provide" option.
The proposed duration for which support is requested should be consistent with the nature and
complexity of the proposed activity and associated budget. The Federal awarding agency
reserves the right to make awards with shorter or longer periods of performance. Specification of
a desired starting date for the project is important and helpful. However, requested effective
dates cannot be guaranteed.
Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 7701, as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996
28

---

[Section 31001(I)(1), Public Law 104-134], Federal agencies shall obtain each awardee’s
Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN). This number may be the Employer Identification
Number (EIN) for a business or non-profit entity or the Social Security Number for an
individual. The TIN is being obtained for purposes of collecting and reporting on any delinquent
amounts that may arise out of an awardee’s relationship with the Government. Applicants must
provide their organization's Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. The DUNS
number is a nine-digit number assigned by Dun and Bradstreet Information Services.
Applicants must provide their assigned Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code. The
CAGE code is a 5-character code assigned and maintained by the Defense Logistics Service
Center (DLSC) to identify a commercial plant or establishment.
ii. Table of Contents: It is highly recommended that the Applicant follow the above table of
contents (Volume I, “Technical”) and use it for a final quality-control checklist.
iii. Abstract: The abstract allows the Applicant to present briefly and concisely the important
aspects of its proposal. It should summarize the proposed research objectives, expectations, and
the basic approaches to be used in the proposed effort. The abstract must identify implications
for applied research if the project is successful. The abstract should be 250 words or less.
Abstracts longer than 250 words will not be read.
1. Background: This section should describe the research problem, discuss relevant
theory, and summarize existing research. It is important that the proposal identify specific,
relevant hypotheses following discussion of theory. When integrating theories or research
domains, an overarching framework supporting such integration should be described.
When appropriate, a graphic depiction of the conceptual model and hypotheses may be
provided.
2. Technical Approach: The technical approach should follow and expand upon the
background section and provide a detailed description of the proposed research. This
account should be much like the methods section of a research paper. The technical
approach should include: a description of the data to be collected, the methods for collecting
the data, the number and source of participants (e.g., using power analysis) and how they
will be acquired, the research design, the measures to be used, and the analysis plan.
Proposals for secondary research (e.g., meta- analyses) should provide estimates of the
likely number of primary studies and/or effects available in the research literature for
analysis. If the intermediate or final product of research will include training packages,
simulation models, or other software-based device, the proposal should relate the product to
the research hypotheses and provide sufficient detail to permit understanding and
evaluation.
The technical approach should detail and set a schedule for the major tasks to be performed
and products to be produced. In the case of a one-year proposal, the research plan should
be divided by quarters of the year. In the case of multi-year proposals, it should be divided
semi-annually or by major tasks within a year. The technical approach should specifically
identify what tasks will be performed by which party and why each subcontractor, if any,
was selected to perform its task(s).
29

---

3. Technical Discussion: No technical approach is without its limitations or
shortcomings. Every issue should be identified and compared with the successes/failures
of previous approaches. A trade-off analysis is a good way to make this comparison and
should be supported by theory, simulation, modeling, experimental data, or other sound
engineering and scientific practices. If the Offeror has a "new and creative" solution to
the problem(s), that solution should be developed and analyzed in this section. The
preferred technical approach should be described in as much detail as is necessary or
useful to establish confidence in the approach. The technical discussion should include
the following:
• A complete discussion stating the background and objectives of the proposed work,
the scientific approaches to be considered, the relationship to competing or related
research, and the level of effort to be employed; include the nature and extent of the
anticipated results and how they will significantly advance the scientific state-of-the-
art; if known, include the manner in which the work will contribute to the
accomplishment of the Army's mission; ensure the proposal identifies any scientific
uncertainties and describes specific approaches for the resolution of the uncertainties
• A brief description of your organization
• The names of other Government agencies or other parties receiving the proposal
and/or funding the proposed effort (if none, so state); concurrent or later submission
of the proposal to other organizations will not prejudice its review by ARI if we are
kept informed of the situation
• A statement regarding possible impact, if any, of the proposed effort on the
environment considering as a minimum its effect upon water, atmosphere, natural
resources, human resources, and any other values
• The Offeror shall provide a statement regarding the use of Class I and Class II
ozone-depleting substances. Ozone-depleting substances mean any substance
designated as Class I by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), including but
not limited to chlorofluorocarbons, halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl
chloroform and any substance designated as Class II by EPA, including but not
limited to hydrochlorofluorocarbons. See 40 C.F.R. Part 82 for detailed information.
If Class I or II substances are to be utilized, a list shall be provided as part of the
Offeror's proposal. If none, so state.
• Requested support (if any) in the following areas: facilities, equipment, and
materials.
4. Reference List: All cited references must be listed. Do not include publications that
are not referenced. The references list must be in American Psychological Association
(APA) format, consistent with the most recent APA Publications Manual.
5. Curriculum Vitae/Resumes of Key Personnel: Curriculum vitae or résumés
30

---

should be included for all proposed researchers with special emphasis on the Principal
Investigator, Co-Principal Investigator(s), and Consultants; documents are limited to five (5)
pages per investigator to include name, brief biography, and list of recent, relevant publications.
VOLUME II – COST
The cost volume shall justify the need for and amount of major direct expense categories,
including (but not limited to) labor, equipment, and travel. The cost estimate for the proposed
effort should sufficiently detail elements of cost and the need for these items to allow for
meaningful evaluation. The cost volume should clearly and closely align with the planned
methodology presented in the technical approach section. A cost estimate should be detailed for
each task of the proposed work and should include the following:
a. A complete detail of direct labor to include, by category, labor hours and rates
b. Fringe benefits rate and base
c. An itemized list of equipment showing cost of each item and justification for inclusion
d. Description and cost of expendable supplies
e. Complete detail of travel to include number of people and duration of travel, reason/need
for travel, destination, airfare, per diem, rental car, etc. Note that in recent years, travel
costs for one conference per year to present work from the funded research effort has
been a typical request
f. Complete detail of any subcontracts to include labor categories, skill levels, and labor
rates and hours
g. Other direct costs (reproduction, computer, etc.)
h. Indirect cost rates and bases with an indication whether rates are fixed or provisional and
the time frame to which they are applied
i. Proposed fee, if any and if applicable
j. Cost sharing, if any and if applicable
k. Any documentation which supports all items above
l. Applicants should furnish the name and telephone number of their cognizant audit agency
COST PROPOSAL PREPARATION:
1. Cost Reimbursement or Fixed Price Award: Selection of the type of award (cost
reimbursement or fixed price) is based upon various factors, such as (1) award instrument
selected, (2) type of research to be performed, (3) the contractor's experience maintaining cost
records, and (4) the ability to detail and allocate proposed costs and performance of the work.
Cost-type awards are most commonly used because of their suitability in supporting research
and development efforts as they permit some flexibility in the redirection of efforts due to
recent research experiment results or changes in Army guidance. Fixed-price-type awards are
used when the research project costs can be estimated accurately, the services to be rendered
are reasonably definite, and the amount of property, if any, is fixed. The negotiated price is
not subject to any adjustment on the basis of the Applicant’s cost experience in performing
the contract. An Applicant may propose either cost-reimbursable or fixed-price contract
arrangements. Assistance awards such as Grants or Cooperative Agreements may be
arranged as well, but the award type may vary in accordance with relevant factors as
determined by ARI and ACC (APG) RTP Division. Grants and Cooperative Agreement
31

---

awards will be cost reimbursable without profit or fee.
2. Cost Proposal Content: A proposal should represent an Applicant’s best response to the
solicitation, including cost information. Any inconsistency, whether real or apparent, between
promised performance and cost or price data must be fully explained in the proposal. Failure
to explain any significant inconsistencies may demonstrate an Applicant’s lack of
understanding of the nature and scope of the work required. Accordingly, the cost volume
must be sufficient to establish the reasonableness, realism, and completeness of the proposed
cost/price. Further, any modifications made to the initial proposal resulting in a change in the
cost volume must likewise be thoroughly supported in writing regardless of whether such
changes are made during negotiations or at the time of a proposal revision. The estimate
should be detailed for each task of the proposed work. The cost volume should be limited to
the minimum number of pages necessary to satisfy the specific requirements set forth herein.
Submission of volumes of computer-generated data to support the cost volume is not
necessary or desired. If computer-generated data is essential to support the cost volume, it
may be submitted as an addendum and must be clearly cross-referenced to the material it
supports in the cost volume.
Each proposal must contain a budget for each year of support requested and a cumulative
budget for the full term of requested support. The proposal may list funds under any of the
categories listed so long as the item is considered necessary to perform the proposed work
and is not precluded by applicable cost principles. In addition to the forms, the budget
should include no more than five (5) pages of budget justification narrative for each year.
A signed summary budget page must be included. The documentation pages should be
titled "Budget Explanation Page" and numbered chronologically starting with the budget
form. The need for each cost element should be explained clearly.
All cost data must be current and complete. Costs proposed must conform to the
following principles and procedures:
Before award it must be established that an approved accounting system and financial
management system exist for an Applicant.
The following specific information is required:
1. Summary by cost element and profit or fee for total proposal (Note: Profit/Fee
not allowed for grants, cooperative agreements, or Other Transaction
Agreements for the prime recipient of the award or any subrecipients)
2. Labor summary for total proposal by labor categories, proposed hours per labor
category, and hourly rates per labor category
3. Explanation of how labor rates are computed including base rates (actuals),
fringe, and escalation, if any
4. Interdivisional transfers (detailed breakout of costs), if applicable
32

---

5. Identification of indirect rates by fiscal year and explanation of how established
and base to which they apply
6. Bill of materials detailing items by type, quantity, unit price, total amount, and
source of estimate (provide vendor written quotes)
7. Summary of all travel by destination, purpose, number of people and days, air
fare, per diem, car rental, etc.
8. Consultant(s) by name, hourly rate, and number of hours (furnish copy of
consulting agreement and identify prior agreement(s) under which the consultant
commanded proposed rate)
9. Computer use by type, rate, and quantity
10. Other direct costs by type, amount, cost per unit, and purpose (specifically
identify any costs for printing or publication)
11. DD Form 1861 (if proposing facilities capital cost of money)
12. Forecast of monthly and cumulative dollar commitments for the proposed
performance period
13. Subcontractor's proposal, with prime Applicant’s price/cost analysis of
subcontractor's proposal (if subcontract was not competed, include justification)
3. Subawardee Cost Proposals: Subawardees' cost proposals must be similarly structured.
All subcontracted work must be properly identified as such. If a subcontractor elects to
submit an abbreviated proposal to an Applicant, it is Applicant’s responsibility to see that
the subcontractor simultaneously submits a complete detailed proposal properly identified
directly to the Government Contracting or Grants Officer. An Applicant’s proposal must:
1. Identify principal items/services to be subcontracted;
2. Identify prospective subcontractors and the basis on which they were selected (if
non- competitive, provide selected source justification);
3. Identify the type of contractual arrangement contemplated for each subcontract
and the rationale for the same;
4. Identify the cost or pricing data or information other than cost or pricing
data submitted by each subcontractor; and
5. Provide an analysis concerning the reasonableness, realism, and completeness of
each subcontractor's proposal; if the analysis is based on a comparison with prior
research efforts, identify the basis on which the prior costs or prices were
33

---

determined to be reasonable.
Section 7 -- Conference and Symposia Grants
A. Introduction. Through the award of a grant, the Army supports conferences and symposia
(as defined in the DoD Travel Regulations) in areas of science that bring experts together
to discuss recent research or educational findings or to expose other researchers or
advanced graduate students to new research and educational techniques. The Army
encourages the convening in the United States of major international conferences,
symposia, and assemblies of international alliances.
B. Eligibility. Notwithstanding the Army's authority to provide grant support for such events,
only non-commercial scientific, technical, or professional organizations that qualify for
tax exemption may receive a conference grant/symposia grant. Those who meet this
requirement should also be aware that the DoD does not permit "co- sponsorship" (as
defined in DoD 5500.07-R) absent additional high-level staffing and approval. In other
words, the conference grant support identified in this BAA is NOT DoD sponsorship or
co-sponsorship since ARI is neither an organizer, nor provider, of any substantial
logistical support for the conferences addressed in this section.
C. Conference Support. Conference support proposals should be submitted a minimum of six (6)
months prior to the date of the conference. It is anticipated that support for conferences and
symposia may take multiple forms including financial support for the meeting, travel support
for speakers, or travel support to allow attendance and participation by advanced graduate
students and junior faculty.
D. Technical Proposal Preparation. The technical portion of a proposal for support of
conference or symposium should include:
1. A one page or less summary indicating the objectives of the project,
2. The topics to be covered,
3. The location and probable date(s) and why the conference is considered appropriate at
the time specified,
4. An explanation of how the conference and requested support will relate to the
research interests of the Army as identified in Section II. A of this BAA and how it
will contribute to the enhancement and improvement of scientific, engineering, and/or
educational in general and activities as outlined earlier in the research areas of this
BAA,
5. The name of chairperson(s)/(PI)(s) and his/her biographical information,
6. If applicable, a list of proposed participants,
7. The methods of announcement or invitation,
8. A summary of how the results of the meeting will be disseminated, and
9. A signed cover page.
E. Cost Proposal Preparation. The cost portion of the proposal should show:
34

---

1. Total project conference costs by major cost elements.
2. Anticipated sources of conference income and amount from each.
3. Anticipated use of funds requested.
4. A signed budget.
F. Support for Federal Employee Attendance. Funds provided cannot be used for payment to
any federal government employee for support, subsistence, or services in connection with the
proposed conference or symposium.
G. Cognizant POC. It is highly recommended that potential applicants contact the
appropriate POC identified earlier in the research areas of this BAA for advice and
assistance before preparation of a conference/symposia proposal.
Section 8 – Submission of Proposals
Proposals must be submitted through the Applicant’s organizational office having responsibility for
Government business relations. The proposal must contain the signature of an authorized official.
All signatures must be that of an official(s) authorized to commit the organization in business and
financial affairs. The cover of the proposal should be marked with the BAA Solicitation Number
W911NF-23-S-0010 along with the name of the research scientific area of interest(s) (see Section II.
A of this BAA). Applicants are requested to provide their e-mail addresses upon submission of a
proposal and also the name, address, and telephone number of their cognizant Defense Contract
Audit Agency (DCAA) office, if known.
Proposals for Contracts and OTs may be submitted via e-mail or online via Grants.gov.
Proposals for Grants or cooperative agreements (assistance) MUST be submitted online via
Grants.gov. Further, it is recommended a copy of any proposal submitted also be furnished to
the cognizant ARI Manager listed in Section II. A.
EMAIL SUBMISSION:
Proposals for contracts and OTs may be e-mailed directly to usarmy.rtp.devcom-
arl.mbx.baa@army.mil. or submitted online via Grants.gov, http://Grants.gov. Proposals for
assistance agreements cannot be sent via email, see below for submission of Assistance agreement
proposals through Grants.gov. The Proposer must also send a copy of the proposal to cognizant
ARI Manager listed in Section II. A.
a. Proposals for contracts and OTs may be e-mailed directly to usarmy.rtp.devcom-
arl.mbx.baa@army.mil. Full proposals MUST be emailed to the cognizant ARI
Manager listed in Section II. A. All submissions must include “ARI BAA
W911NF-23-S-0010” in the subject line.
All e-mailed proposals must contain the information outlined in Section II. D. 2
(Section 6- Preparation of Proposals) including all the electronic forms.
35

---

b. All forms requiring signature must be completed, printed, signed, and scanned into a
PDF document. All documents must be combined into a single PDF formatted file to
be attached to the email.
Proposals are to be provided in electronic MS Word or Adobe PDF format. The proposal
must include the complete technical and cost volumes of the proposal. Electronic versions of
the technical and cost volumes must be combined into one electronic file. The proposal must
include the signature of the authorized institutional representative. If the electronic version
does not include a signature from the appropriate representative of the Applicant, the
Government Procurement Contracting Officer must be provided a signed and dated copy
prior to award if selected.
GRANTS.GOV: (mandatory submission portal for grant and cooperative agreement proposals; optional
submission portal for contract proposals). Please e-mail a courtesy copy of proposals to cognizant ARI
Manager listed in Section II. A. Grants.gov registration (see Section 8) must be accomplished prior to
application through this process.
(1) Proposals requesting Assistance agreements must be submitted via Grants.gov; proposals
requesting a Contract or OT may be submitted either via Grants.gov or email (instructions
above).
(2) Grants.gov Registration must be accomplished prior to application submission in Grants.gov.
Each organization that desires to submit applications via Grants.Gov must complete a one-time
registration. There are several one-time actions your organization must complete in order to
submit applications through Grants.gov (e.g., obtain a Unique Entity Identifier, register with the
SAM, register with the credential provider, register with Grants.gov and obtain approval for an
authorized organization representative (AOR) to submit applications on behalf of the
organization). To register please see http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organization-
registration.html
Please note the registration process for an Organization or an Individual can take between
three to five business days or as long as four weeks if all steps are not completed in a timely
manner.
Questions relating to the registration process, system requirements, how an application form
works, or the submittal process should be directed to Grants.gov at 1-800-518-4726 or
support@grants.gov.
NOTE: All web links referenced in this section are subject to change by Grants.gov and may not
be updated here.
(3) Specific forms are required for submission of a proposal. The forms are contained in the
Application Package available at http://www.grants.gov under the specific opportunity you
36

---

are submitting under. When viewing an opportunity, select the "Package” tab and then select
"View." A Grant Application Package and Application Instructions are available for this
BAA through the Grants.gov Apply portal under CFDA Number 12.630 or Funding
Opportunity Number W911NF-23-S-0010. To apply, select “Apply” and then “Apply Now
Using Workspace.”
*NOTE: Effective 31 December 2017, applicants must apply online at Grants.gov using the
application Workspace. For access to complete instructions on how to apply for opportunities
using Workspace refer to https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/workspace-
overview.html.
The following documents are mandatory: (1) Application for Federal Assistance (R&R) (SF 424
(R&R)), and (4) Attachments form.
(4) The SF 424 (R&R) form is to be used as the cover page for all proposals submitted via
Grants.gov. The SF 424 (R&R) must be fully completed. AOR usernames and passwords serve
as “electronic signatures” when your organization submits applications through Grants.gov. By
using the SF 424 (R&R), proposers are providing the certification required by 32 CFR Part 28
regarding lobbying (see Section II.F.2.a.ii of this BAA). Block 11, “Descriptive Title of
Applicant’s Project,” must reference the research topic area being addressed in the effort by
identifying the specific paragraph from Section II.A of this BAA.
(5) The Attachments form must contain the documents outlined in Section II.D.2. under Section
6 – Preparation of Proposals”. All documents must be combined into separate and single PDF
formatted files using the Table of Contents names. Include “W911NF-23-S-0010 in the title so
the proposal will be distinguished from other BAA submissions and upload each document to
the mandatory Attachments form.
(6) The applicant must include with its proposal submission the representations required by
Section II.F.2.a.ii of this BAA. The representations must include applicant POC information
and be signed by an authorized representative. Attach the representations document to an
available field within the Attachments form. Note: If the applicant’s online SAM
Representations and Certifications include its response to the representations, a hard copy
representation is not required with proposal submission.
(7) The Grants.gov User Guide at:
https://www.grants.gov/help/html/help/index.htm#t=GetStarted%2FGetStarted.htm will assist
AORs in the application process. Remember that you must open and complete the Application
for Federal Assistance (R&R) (SF 424 (R&R)) first, as this form will automatically populate
data fields in other forms. If you encounter any problems, contact customer support at 1-800-
518-4726 or at support@grants.gov. If you forget your user name or password, follow the
instructions provided in the Credential Provider tutorial. Tutorials may be printed by right-
clicking on the tutorial and selecting “Print”.
(8) As it is possible for Grants.gov to reject the proposal during this process, it is strongly
recommended that proposals be uploaded at least two days before any established deadline in the
BAA so that they will not be received late and be ineligible for award consideration. It is also
37

---

recommended to start uploading proposals at least two days before the deadline to plan ahead for
any potential technical and/or input problems involving the applicant’s own equipment.
3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM):
a. Each applicant (unless the applicant is an individual or Federal agency that is exempt
from those requirements under 2 CFR 25.110(b) or (c), or has an exception approved by the
agency under 2 CFR 25.110(d)) is required to:
i. Provide a valid unique entity identifier (formerly DUNS) in its application.
Please verify the accuracy of your Unique Entity Identifier (formerly DUNS)
at the Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) website http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform
before registering with the System for Award Management System (SAM).
ii. Be registered in SAM at https://www.sam.gov prior to submitting its application;
and
iii. Maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times
during which it has an active Federal award or an application or plan
under consideration by a Federal awarding agency.
b. The SAM obtains Legal Business Name, Doing Business Name (DBA), Physical
Address, and Postal Code/ Zip+4 data fields from D&B. If corrections are required,
registrants will not be able to enter/modify these fields in SAM; they will be pre-populated
using D&B Unique Entity Identifier record data. When D&B confirms the correction has
been made, the registrant must then re-visit sam.gov and click a “yes”' to D&B's changes.
Only at this point will the D&B data be accepted into the SAM record. Allow a minimum of
two (2) business days for D&B to send the modified data to SAM.
c. The Federal awarding agency may not make a Federal award to an applicant until the
applicant has complied with all applicable unique entity identifier and SAM requirements. If
an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements by the time the Federal awarding
agency is ready to make a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency may determine that
the applicant is not qualified to receive a Federal award and use that determination as a basis
for making a Federal award to another applicant.
4. Submission Dates and Times:
Proposals will be accepted via the methods noted previously through 11:59 PM Eastern
Daylight Time on 30 April 2028.
It is the Applicant’s responsibility to assure that a proposal submission is received by the
respective date and time specified above. If your proposal submission is not received at the
initial point of entry to the Government (received through web based system, e-mail or post-
marked if applicable) by the exact date and time specified above, it will be determined late
and will not be evaluated. The submission of a courtesy copy of an assistance (non-
contract) proposal to the cognizant ARI Manager listed in Section II. A does not fulfill the
timeliness requirement.
38

---

Grants.gov: After a proposal is submitted to Grants.gov, the AOR will receive a series of three
emails from Grants.gov. The first two emails will be received within 24 to 48 hours after
submission. The first email will confirm time of receipt of the proposal by the Grants.gov system
and the second will indicate that the proposal has either been successfully validated by the
system prior to transmission to the grantor agency or has been rejected due to errors. A third
email will be received once the grantor agency has confirmed receipt of the proposal. Reference
the Grants.gov User Guide at
https://www.grants.gov/help/html/help/index.htm#t=GetStarted%2FGetStarted.htm for
information on how to track your application package.
For the purposes of this BAA, an applicant’s proposal is not considered received by ARI until the
AOR receives email #3.
5. Intergovernmental Review:
Not Applicable
6. Funding Restrictions:
There are no funding restrictions associated with this BAA.
7. Other Submission Requirements:
a. Information to be Requested from Successful Applicants: Applicants whose proposals
are accepted for funding may be contacted before award to provide additional information
required for award. The required information is normally limited to clarifying budget
explanations, representations, certifications, and some technical aspects.
b. For Contracts Only- Performance Work Statements (PWS): Prior to award, the
Contracting Officer may request that the contractor submit a PWS for the effort to be
performed, which will be incorporated into the contract at the time of award.
c. Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI): In accordance with the Federal Acquisition
Regulations (FAR) Subpart 9.5, Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest (OCI)
and 2 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §200.112, there is the potential for the Applicant
to have an OCI if the Applicant has a pending or current Intergovernmental Personnel Act
(IPA) agreement with ARI. The Applicant will need to identify and address mitigation
measures for an OCI due to the IPA agreement as part of their submission under this
BAA. Failure to include an OCI plan may result in the proposal being rejected for
consideration of funding.
(End of Section)
39

---

E. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION:
1. Criteria: Proposals will initially be evaluated as to whether they constitute basic, applied, or
advanced technology development research.
Basic research is defined as systematic study directed toward greater knowledge or
understanding of the fundamental aspects of phenomena and of observable facts without specific
application of processes or products in mind, whereas applied research provides a systematic
expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop useful strategies, techniques,
methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and specific Army need.
Advanced Technology Development program includes the development of technologies,
components, or prototypes that can be tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments.
Projects in this category have a direct relevance to identified military needs. These projects
should demonstrate the general military utility or cost reduction potential of technology in the
areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention; advanced data analytics and models
applied to talent management; development of higher-order competencies for Soldiers and
Leaders; holistic assessment of unit readiness; and team and unit mission effectiveness. These
projects should be focused on a more direct operational benefit and, if successful, the technology
should be available for transition.
Proposals received in response to this BAA will be evaluated by scientific peers internal, and
possibly external to the Army, using the following criteria. ARI may solicit input on technical
aspects of proposals from non-Government consultants/experts who are strictly bound by non-
disclosure requirements. Criterion (a) is most important; the other criteria are of equal
importance to one another. All evaluation factors/criteria other than cost, when combined, are
significantly more important than cost or price:
(a) Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the
proposed research;
(b) Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission;
(c) Qualifications/Capabilities – Proposed principal investigator and key personnel
qualifications, capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional
resources and facilities;
(d) Cost - Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism,
affordability, and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of
evaluation on other factors.
Review and Selection Process:
(a) All Proposals are treated as privileged information prior to award and the contents are disclosed
to Government employees or designated support contractors only for the purpose of evaluation.
The Applicant must indicate on the appropriate proposal form or in the proposal any limitation to
be placed on disclosure of information contained in the proposal form (ARO Form 52 or 52A)
any limitation to be placed on disclosure of information contained in the proposal to non-
40

---

Government evaluators.
(b) All Proposals will be evaluated based on the merit and relevance of the specific R&D proposed
as it relates to the overall ARI research program, rather than against other proposals in the same
general area. Each evaluated proposal will receive a recommendation of “select” or “do not
select” as supported by the evaluation
(c) In accordance with OMB guidance in 200 of Title 2, CFR, it is DoD policy that DoD
Components must report and use integrity and performance information in the Federal Awardee
Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), or any successor system designated by
OMB, concerning Grants, Cooperative Agreements, and OTAs.
2. Recipient Qualification
a. Grant and Cooperative Agreement Proposals:
i. The Grants Officer is responsible for determining a recipient’s qualification prior to award. In
general, a Grants Officer will award grants or cooperative agreements only to qualified recipients
that meet the standards at 32 CFR 22.415. To be qualified, a potential recipient must:
(1) Have the management capability and adequate financial and technical resources, given those that
would be made available through the grant or cooperative agreement, to execute the program of
activities envisioned under the grant or cooperative agreement;
(2) Have a satisfactory record of executing such programs or activities (if a prior recipient of an
award);
(3) Have a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics; and
(4) Be otherwise qualified and eligible to receive a grant or cooperative agreement under applicable
laws and regulations.
Applicants are requested to provide information with proposal submissions to assist the Grants
Officer’s evaluation of recipient qualification.
Applicants are requested to provide information with proposal submissions to assist the Grants
Officer’s evaluation of recipient qualification.
ii. In accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance in parts 180 and
200 of Title 2, CFR, it is DoD policy that DoD Components must report and use integrity
and performance information in the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity
Information System (FAPIIS), or any successor system designated by OMB, concerning
grants, cooperative agreements, and OTs for research as follows:
If the total Federal share will be greater than the simplified acquisition threshold on any Federal
award under a notice of funding opportunity (see 2 CFR 200.88 Simplified Acquisition
Threshold):
41

---

• The Federal awarding agency, prior to making a Federal award with a total amount of
Federal share greater than the simplified acquisition threshold, will review and consider any information about the applicant that is in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM (formerly FAPIIS) (see 41 U.S.C. 2313);
• An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and
performance systems accessible through SAM and comment on any information about itself that a Federal awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM;
• The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in
addition to the other information in the designated integrity and performance system, in making a judgment about the applicant's integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 2 CFR 200.205 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants. b. Contract Proposals: i. Contracts shall be awarded to responsible prospective contractors only. See FAR 9.104-1 for a listing of the general standards against which an applicant will be assessed to determine responsibility. Applicants are requested to provide information with proposal submission to assist the Contracting Officer’s evaluation of responsibility. ii. FAPIIS will be checked prior to making an award. The web address is: https://cpars.gov. The applicant representing the entity may comment in this system on any information about the entity that a federal government official entered. The information in FAPIIS will be used in making a judgment about the entity’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards that may affect the official’s determination that the applicant is qualified to receive an award. c. Research and Prototype OTA Proposals: i. Proposals for Research and Prototype OTAs may only be considered for award once it has been determined that the eligibility requirements of 10 U.S.C. 4021 or 10 U.S.C. 4022, as well as the Other Transactions Guides referenced in this BAA, have been satisfied. (End of Section) 42

---

F. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION:
1. Award Notices:
An Applicant whose proposal is recommended for award will be contacted by a Government
Contract/Grant Specialist to discuss any additional information required for award. Additional
information required may include representations and certifications, revised budgets or budget
explanations, certificate of current cost or pricing data, subcontracting plan for small
businesses, and other information as applicable to the proposed award. The anticipated award
start date will be determined at this time. The appropriate award document, when signed by
the Government Contracting/Grants Officer, is the authorizing award document.
The notification email is not an authorization to commit or expend funds. The Government
is not obligated to provide any funding until a Government Contracting/ Grants/Agreements
Officer signs the award document.
The award document signed by the Government Contracting/Grants Officer is the official and
authorizing award instrument. The authorizing award instrument, signed by the Contracting/
Grants/Agreements Officer, will be emailed to the PI and AOR.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements:
a. Required Representations and Certifications:
i. Contract Proposals:
(1) Representations and certifications shall be completed by successful applicants prior to award.
FAR Online Representations and Certifications are to be completed through SAM at
https://www.SAM.gov. As appropriate, DFARS and contract-specific certification packages will
be provided to the contractor for completion prior to award to include, but not limited the
following contractual requirements:
(2) FAR 52.203-18, PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES THAT
REQUIRE CERTAIN CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS OR STATEMENTS—
REPRESENTATION (JAN 2017)
(a) Definition. As used in this provision--
“Internal confidentiality agreement or statement,” “subcontract,” and “subcontractor,” are
defined in the clause at 52.203-19, Prohibition on Requiring Certain Internal
Confidentiality Agreements or Statements.
(b) In accordance with section 743 of Division E, Title VII, of the Consolidated and
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L. 113-235) and its successor
provisions in subsequent appropriations acts (and as extended in continuing
resolutions), Government agencies are not permitted to use funds appropriated (or
otherwise made available) for contracts with an entity that requires employees or
subcontractors of such entity seeking to report waste, fraud, or abuse to sign internal
43

---

confidentiality agreements or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting such
employees or subcontractors from lawfully reporting such waste, fraud, or abuse to a
designated investigative or law enforcement representative of a Federal department or
agency authorized to receive such information.
(c) The prohibition in paragraph (b) of this provision does not contravene requirements
applicable to SF 312, (Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement), Form 4414
(Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement), or any other form
issued by a Federal department or agency governing the nondisclosure of classified
information.
(d) Representation. By submission of its offer, the applicant represents that it will not
require its employees or subcontractors to sign or comply with internal confidentiality
agreements or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting such employees or
subcontractors from lawfully reporting waste, fraud, or abuse related to the performance
of a Government contract to a designated investigative or law enforcement representative
of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive such information (e.g., agency
Office of the Inspector General).
(3) FAR 52.204-26, COVERED TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT OR SERVICES-
REPRESENTATION (OCT 2020)
a) Definitions. As used in this provision, "covered telecommunications equipment or
services" and "reasonable inquiry" have the meaning provided in the clause 52.204-25,
Prohibition on Contracting for Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance
Services or Equipment.
(b) Procedures. The Offeror shall review the list of excluded parties in the System for
Award Management (SAM) ( https://www.sam.gov) for entities excluded from
receiving federal awards for "covered telecommunications equipment or services".
(c)(1) Representation. The Offeror represents that it [ ] does, [ ] does not provide covered
telecommunications equipment or services as a part of its offered products or services to the
Government in the performance of any contract, subcontract, or other contractual instrument.
(2) After conducting a reasonable inquiry for purposes of this representation, the offeror
represents that it [ ] does, [ ] does not use covered telecommunications equipment or
services, or any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunications
equipment or services.
(4) FAR 52.209-11, REPRESENTATION BY CORPORATIONS REGARDING
DELINQUENT TAX LIABILITY OR A FELONY CONVICTION UNDER FEDERAL
LAW (FEB 2016)
(a) As required by sections 744 and 745 of Division E of the Consolidated and Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L 113-235), and similar provisions, if
44

---

contained in subsequent appropriations acts, the Government will not enter into a contract
with any corporation that--
(1) Has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial
and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not
being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority
responsible for collecting the tax liability, where the awarding agency is aware of
the unpaid tax liability, unless an agency has considered suspension or debarment
of the corporation and made a determination that suspension or debarment is not
necessary to protect the interests of the Government; or
(2) Was convicted of a felony criminal violation under any Federal law within the
preceding 24 months, where the awarding agency is aware of the conviction,
unless an agency has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and
made a determination that this action is not necessary to protect the interests of
the Government.
(b) The Offeror represents that—
It is [ ] is not [ ] a corporation that has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been
assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have
lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the
authority responsible for collecting the tax liability; and
It is [ ] is not [ ] a corporation that was convicted of a felony criminal violation under a
Federal law within the preceding 24 months.
ii. Grant and Cooperative Agreement Proposals:
(1) Grant awards greater than $100,000.00 require a certification of compliance with a national
policy mandate concerning lobbying. Statutes and Government-wide regulations require the
certification to be submitted prior to award. When submitting your grant through Grants.gov, by
completing blocks 18 and 19 of the SF 424 (R&R) Form, the grant applicant is providing the
certification on lobbying required by 32 CFR Part 28; otherwise a copy signed by the AOR must
be provided. Below is the required certification:
CERTIFICATION AT APPENDIX A TO 32 CFR PART 28 REGARDING
LOBBYING: Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans, and Cooperative Agreements the
undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that:
(1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf
of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an
officer or employee of an agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee
of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the
awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of
any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the
extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal
contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
45

---

(2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be
paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or
employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of
Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this
Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall
complete and submit SF-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in
accordance with its instructions.
(3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be
included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including
subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative
agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.
This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed
when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a
prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by 31 U.S.C. 1352. Any
person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not
less than $10,000.00 and not more than $100,000.00 for each such failure.
(2) In accordance with Continuing Appropriations Act, 2017 (Pub. L. 114-223), or any other Act
that extends to fiscal year (FY) 2023 funds the same prohibitions as contained in section 743,
division E, title VII, of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Pub. L. 114-113), none of
the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by that or any other Act may be made
available for a grant or cooperative agreement with an entity that requires its employees or
contractors seeking to report fraud, waste, or abuse to sign internal confidentiality agreements or
statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting those employees or contractors from lawfully
reporting that waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated investigative or law enforcement
representative of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive the information.
PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES THAT REQUIRED CERTAIN
INTERNAL CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS – REPRESENTATION
Agreement with the representation below will be affirmed by checking the “I
agree” box in block 17 of the SF424 (R&R) as part of the electronic proposal
submitted via Grants.gov. The representation reads as follows:
By submission of its proposal or application, the applicant represents that it does
not require any of its employees, contractors, or subrecipients seeking to report
fraud, waste, or abuse to sign or comply with internal confidentiality agreements
or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting those employees, contractors,
subrecipients from lawfully reporting that waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated
investigative or law enforcement representative of a Federal department or agency
authorized to receive such information.
*Note that: Section 743 states that it does not contravene requirements applicable
to SF 312, Form 4414, or any other form issued by a Federal department or
agency governing the nondisclosure of classified information.
46

---

(3) Recipients are required to submit the following representation with the application package
IAW the instructions at Section D of this BAA:
REPRESENTATIONS UNDER DOD ASSISTANCE AGREEMENTS:
APPROPRIATIONS PROVISIONS ON TAX DELINQUENCY AND FELONY
CONVICTIONS
The applicant is ( ) is not ( ) a “Corporation” meaning any entity, including any
institution of higher education, other nonprofit organization, or for-profit entity
that has filed articles of incorporation.
If the applicant is a “Corporation” please complete the following representations:
(a) The applicant represents that it is ( ) is not ( ) a corporation that has any unpaid
Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial and
administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being
paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible
for collecting the tax liability.
(b) The applicant represents that it is ( ) is not ( ) is not a corporation that was
convicted of a criminal violation under any Federal law within the preceding 24
months.
NOTE: If an applicant responds in the affirmative to either of the above
representations, the applicant is ineligible to receive an award unless the agency
suspension and debarment official (SDO) has considered suspension or debarment
and determined that further action is not required to protect the Government’s
interests. The applicant therefore should provide information about its tax liability
or conviction to the agency’s SDO as soon as it can do so, to facilitate completion
of the required considerations before award decisions are made.
PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES USING CERTAIN
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND VIDEO SURVEILLANCE SERVICES OR EQUIPMENT
Section 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
Year (FY) 2019 (Public Law 115-232) prohibits the head of an executive
agency from obligating or expending loan or grant funds to procure or obtain,
extend, or renew a contract to procure or obtain, or enter into a contract (or
extend or 105 renew a contract) to procure or obtain the equipment, services, or
systems prohibited systems as identified in section 889 of the NDAA for FY
2019. For more information on how this applies to all grant recipients and sub-
recipients after August 13, 2020, please see DoD Research General Terms and
Conditions (SEP 2021) NP Article IV. Other national policy requirements,
paragraph 18.
47

---

b. Policy Requirements:
The following list provides notable national policy requirements that may be applicable to an
award. NOTE: The following is not an all-inclusive list of policy requirements. For assistance
awards, refer to the DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions at
https://www.nre.navy.mil/work-with-us/manage-your-award/manage-grant-award/grants-
terms-conditions for additional national policy requirements that may apply. For contract
awards, appropriate clauses will be added to award documents.
i. PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS
(1) For Assistance Instruments:
(a) The recipient must protect the rights and welfare of individuals who participate as human
subjects in research under this award and comply fully with the requirements at 32 CFR part
219, Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 3216.02, 10 U.S.C. 980, the National Policy
Requirements Concerning Live Organisms Terms and Conditions (Section A.1., Human
Subjects, at 81 Federal Register 78380, Appendix C to Part 1122), and when applicable, Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) policies and regulations.
(b) The recipient must not begin performance of research involving human subjects, also
known as human subjects research (HSR), that is covered under 32 CFR part 219, or that meets
exemption criteria under 32 CFR 219.104(d), or expend funding on such effort, until the
recipient receives a formal notification of approval from the cognizant DoD Human Research
Protection Official (HRPO). Approval to perform HSR under this award is received after the
HRPO has performed a review of the recipient’s documentation of planned HSR activities and
has officially furnished a concurrence with the recipient’s determination as presented in the
documentation.
(c) In order for the HRPO to accomplish this concurrence review, the recipient must provide
sufficient documentation to enable his or her assessment as follows:
(i) If the HSR meets one or more exemption criteria under 32 CFR 219.104(d), the
documentation must include a citation of the exemption category/ies under 32 CFR 219.104(d)
and a rationale statement.
(ii) If the recipient’s activity is determined as “non-exempt research involving human subjects,”
the documentation must include:
− Documentation of Assurance of Compliance (a written assurance that an
institution will comply with requirements of 32 CFR Part 219, as well as the
terms of the assurance) appropriate for the scope of work or program plan; and
− Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, as well as all documentation reviewed
by the IRB to make their determination.
48

---

(d) The HRPO retains final judgment on what activities constitute HSR, whether an exempt
category applies, whether the risk determination is appropriate, and whether the planned HSR
activities comply with the requirements in paragraph (a) of this section.
(e) The recipient must notify the Grants Officer/Agreements Officer immediately of any
suspensions or terminations of the Assurance of Compliance.
(f) DoD staff, consultants, and advisory groups may independently review and inspect the
recipient’s research and research procedures involving human subjects and, based on such
findings, DoD may prohibit research that presents unacceptable hazards or otherwise fails to
comply with DoD requirements.
(g) Definitions for terms used in this section are found in DoDI 3216.02.
The Army Research Institute HRPO is:
Dr. Erica Michael, Senior Research Psychologist
U.S. Army Research Institute
6000 6th Street
Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5586
(703) 545-9590, erica.b.michael.civ@army.mil
(2) For Contracts: DFARS clause 252.235-7004 is applicable to this solicitation and will be
included in its entirety in any resultant contract award that supports research that includes or
may include HSR.
ii. ANIMAL USE:
Assistance Instruments:
Prior to initiating any animal work under the award, the recipient must:
Register the recipient’s research, development, test, and evaluation or training facility with the
Secretary of Agriculture in accordance with 7 U.S.C. 2136 and 9 CFR section 2.30, unless
otherwise exempt from this requirement by meeting the conditions in 7
U.S.C. 2136 and 9 CFR parts 1-4 for the duration of the activity.
(ii) Have the recipient’s proposed animal use approved in accordance with DoDI 3216.01,
Use of Animals in DoD Programs by a DoD Component Headquarters Oversight Office.
(iii) Furnish evidence of such registration and approval to the grants officer.
(b) The recipient must make the animals on which the research is being conducted, and all
premises, facilities, vehicles, equipment, and records that support animal care and use available
during business hours and at other times mutually agreeable to the recipient, the United States
Department of Agriculture Office of Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
49

---

(USDA/APHIS) representative, personnel representing the DoD component oversight offices,
as well as the grants officer, to ascertain that the recipient is compliant with 7 U.S.C. 2131 et
seq., 9 CFR parts 1-4, and DoDI 3216.01.
(c) The recipient’s care and use of animals must conform with the pertinent laws of the
United States, regulations of the Department of Agriculture, and regulations, policies, and
procedures of the DoD (see 7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq., 9 CFR parts 1-4, and DoDI 3216.01).
(d) The recipient must acquire animals in accordance with DoDI 3216.01.
(2) Contracts: The appropriate clauses shall be added to the award.
iii. BIOLOGICAL SAFETY PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS:
Assistance Instruments and Contracts: Awards may be subject to biological safety
(1) program requirements IAW:
Army Regulation (AR) 385-10, Chapter 20
https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/ARN16777_ARN16343_AR385_10
_ FINAL.pdf
(b) Department of Army (DA) Pamphlet (PAM) 385-69 on safety standards for
microbiological and biomedical laboratories. This pamphlet requires the mandatory use of the
latest edition of the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) and National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical
Laboratories (BMBL) https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/p385_69.pdf
(c) DoD Manual 6055.18-M, Enclosure 4, Section 13
https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=24365
iv. MILITARY RECRUITING:
(1) Assistance Instruments: This is to notify potential applicants that each grant or cooperative
agreement awarded under this announcement to an institution of higher education must include
the following term and condition:
(a) As a condition for receiving funds available to the DoD under this award, you agree that you
are not an institution of higher education (as defined in 32 CFR part 216) that has a policy or
practice that either prohibits, or in effect prevents:
(i) The Secretary of a Military Department from maintaining, establishing, or operating a unit of
the Senior Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC)—-in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 654 and
other applicable Federal laws—-at that institution (or any sub-element of that institution);
50

---

[Document continues — 23 more pages]

---

W911NF-23-S-0010_Amendment 01

UNITED STATES ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES (ARI)
BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT
FOR
BASIC, APPLIED, AND ADVANCED
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
W911NF-23-S-0010-0001
01 May 2023 – 30 April 2028
ISSUED BY:
U.S. Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground
Research Triangle Park Division
P. O. BOX 12211
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2211
1

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. OVERVIEW OF THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY: ................................................. 4
A. Required Overview Content…………...………………………………………………….4
B. Additional Overview……………………………………………………………………...5
II. DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY:………7
A. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION……………….………………………………………....…7
1. Basic Research Areas of Interest……………………………………………………....7
2. Applied Research and Advanced Technology Development Areas of Interest………..8
a. Holistic Personnel Assessment and Statistical Innovations for Talent Management.9
b. Leader Competences for Complexity & Uncertainty……………………..………..10
c. Team Assignment & Performance………………………………….………………15
d. Assessing and Developing Technological Fluency for the Future Force….……….18
B. FEDERAL AWARD INFORMATION ............................................................................ 20
1. Procurement Contract……………………………………………………………………20
2. Grant……………………………………………………………………………………..20
3. Cooperative Agreement………………………………………………………………….20
4. Technology Investment Agreement (TIA)……………………………………….………20
5. Other Transaction for Research…………………………………………………………..21
6. Grants and cooperative agreements for institutions of higher education, nonprofit
organizations, foreign organizations, and foreign public entities………………………….21
7. Grants and cooperative agreements for for-profit and nonprofit organizations exempted
from Subpart E - Cost Principles of 2 CFR Part 200……………………………………...21
8. OT for Research/ TIAs…………………………………………………………………...21
9. The following websites may be accessed to obtain an electronic copy of the governing
regulations and terms and conditions……………………………………………………..22
C. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION .......................................................................................23
1. Eligible Applicants………………………………………………………………………..23
2. Cost Sharing or Matching…………………………………………………………...…23
D. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION .................................................................... 24
1. Address to View Broad Agency Announcement……………………………………...24
2. Content and Form of Application Submission……………………………………………24
2

---

Section 1 – General Information…………………………………………………………24
Section 2 – Application Process Overview……………………………………………….25
Section 3 – White Paper Preparation……………………………………………………..26
Section 4 – White Paper Submission……………………………………………………..27
Section 5 – Review of White Papers……………………………………………………...27
Section 6 – Preparation of Proposals……………………………………………………...27
Section 7 -- Conference and Symposia Grants……………………………………………35
Section 8 – Submission of Proposals……………………………………………………..36
E. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION…………………………………………….….41
1. Criteria……………………………………………………………………………………41
2. Recipient Qualification……………………………………………………………………42
F. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION………………………………………..44
1. Award Notices…………………………………………………………………………….44
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements………………………………………….44
3. Reporting………………………………………………………………………………..…54
G. FEDERAL AWARD AGENCY CONTACTS………………………………………………56
H. OTHER INFORMATION………………………………………………………………..57
3

---

I. OVERVIEW OF THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
A. Required Overview Content
Agency Name:
U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI)
Issuing Acquisition Office:
U.S. Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground, Research Triangle Park
(ACC-APG-RTP) Division
Research Opportunity Title:
U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences Broad Agency
Announcement for Basic, Applied, and Advanced Research (Fiscal Years 2023-2028)
Announcement Type:
Initial Announcement
Research Opportunity Number:
W911NF-23-S-0010
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number and Title:
12.630 – Basic, Applied, and Advanced Research in Science and Engineering
Response Dates (Submissions):
This BAA is a continuously open five-year announcement valid throughout the period
beginning 01 May 2023 and ending 30 April 2028. New start awards are normally
obligated early within each fiscal year Amendments to this BAA will be posted to SAM.gov
and is now known as Contract Opportunities and will also be posted to
http://www.Grants.gov when they occur. Interested parties are encouraged to periodically
check these websites for updates and amendments.
(End of Section)
4

---

B. Additional Overview Information
INTRODUCTION:
This Broad Agency Announcement (BAA), which sets forth research areas of interest to the
United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI), is issued
under the provisions of paragraph 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation
(FAR), which provides for the acquisition of basic and applied research and that part of
development not related to the development of a specific system or hardware procurement
through the competitive selection of proposals, and 10 U.S.C. 4001, 10 U.S.C. 4021, and 10
U.S.C. 4022, which provide the authorities for issuing awards under this announcement for basic
and applied research. Proposals submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award are
considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full compliance with the
provisions of Public Law 98-369, "The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984" and subsequent
amendments.
ARI is the Army’s lead agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for
Army readiness and performance via research advances and applications of the behavioral and
social sciences that address personnel, organization, and Soldier and leader development issues.
Programs funded under this BAA include basic research, applied research, and advanced
technology development that can improve human performance and Army readiness.
Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by
funding constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Those contemplating submission
of a proposal are encouraged to contact the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) identified in
Section G of this BAA or the responsible ARI Manager noted at the end of the technical area
entry (Part II Section A of this BAA) to determine whether the proposed R&D warrants further
inquiry. If the proposed R&D warrants further inquiry and funding is available, submission of a
white paper or proposal will be entertained. The recommended three-step sequence is (1) initial
contact with the ARI TPOC or responsible ARI Manager, (2) white paper submission, (3)
proposal submission.
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor
and cost associated with submission of proposals that have minimal probability of being selected
for funding. Costs associated with white paper or proposal submissions in response to this BAA
are not considered allowable direct charges to any resulting award. These costs may be
allowable expenses to normal bid and proposal indirect costs specified in FAR 31.205-18.
Applicants submitting proposals are cautioned that only a Government Contracting or Grants
Officer may obligate the Government to any agreement involving expenditure of Government
funds.
To be eligible for an award under this announcement, a prospective awardee must meet certain
minimum standards pertaining to financial resources and responsibility, ability to comply with
the performance schedule, past performance, integrity, experience, technical capabilities,
operational controls, and facilities. In accordance with Federal statutes, regulations, and
5

---

Department of Defense (DoD) and Army policies, no person on grounds of race, color, age, sex,
national origin, or disability shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or
be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving financial assistance from
the Army.
(End of Section)
6

---

II. DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
A. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
1. Basic Research Areas of Interest
Basic Research is defined as systematic study directed toward greater knowledge or
understanding of the fundamental aspects of phenomena and of observable facts that drive theory
forward without being restricted to ideas that have known applications or products. Basic
research may lay the foundation for future research aimed at developing tools, but that is not its
goal. ARI’s Basic Research Program maintains close contact with ARI's applied scientists and
other relevant agencies within the Army to facilitate the transition of basic research to applied
Army efforts. The Basic Research Program seeks to support and execute high-risk, high-reward
fundamental research to develop state-of-the-art theory, methods, and models to create the
innovative concepts required to support the Army’s future capabilities and needs. Basic Research
seeks to support efforts in the following focal areas:
 Science of Measurement of Individuals & Collectives: Maintaining readiness requires
that the Army be comprised of high-quality personnel who are optimally distributed
throughout the force. Accurate, efficient, predictive, and informative measurement of
individuals and collectives is the means to meeting this charge. The program goals of this
focal area are to develop new (a) means to concurrently measure more than one factor
with a single testing behavior without sacrificing precision; (b) approaches to capture and
analyze continuous behavioral processes unfolding within and between fluid social
situations; (c) models and methods for combining information from diverse and
potentially archival sources to better understand the nature and antecedents of
performance; and (d) construct validation models and methods consistent with the nature
and antecedents of performance. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to,
psychometrics for modeling dynamic data, measurement theory for dynamic constructs,
context-sensitive measures of adaptability and flexibility, and embedded assessments of
individual and group attributes.
 Understanding Multilevel and Organizational Dynamics: The Army organization is a
complex, often fluid structure based on both formal and informal work roles and social
hierarchies. It is critical to better understand the multilevel and cross-level influences at
the individual, small unit, and organizational level, and how these influences relate to
organizational effectiveness. The program goals of this focal area are to (a) develop new
theories that capture the multilevel and multifactored nature of organizations and the
mechanisms underlying their coordination and restructuring processes, and (b) identify
and define top-down and bottom-up factors, and their interactions, that influence
organizational effectiveness. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, non-linear
models for assessing team processes, process-oriented models of individual and group
dynamics, modeling dynamic organizational restructuring, and models of complex multi-
layered organizations.
 Context of Behavior in Military Environments: The Army must thrive in various and
unpredictable situations. There are known gaps in current theory to address how
7

---

contextual factors, including leadership behaviors, combine to impact individual and
group behavior. The program goals of this focal area are to develop new (a) models or
refine existing models that capture critical environmental characteristics that influence
human behavior, and (b) theories understanding effective leadership and developing
effective leaders efficiently; developing new measures that advance the current
understanding of leadership and leader behaviors. Topics of interest include, but are not
limited to, developing leadership theory for complex organizations, identifying external
factors that impact social and decision-making processes, understanding multilevel
contextual effects on organizational behavior, and models for strategically activating
organizationally relevant identities.
 Formal and Informal Learning and Development: The Army not only trains personnel
for specific jobs, tasks, and roles, but also develops Soldiers across their careers. Thus, it
is important to understand how to maximize opportunities for learning throughout that
timespan. The program goals of this focal area are to develop (a) longitudinal theories of
adult learning within a variety of environments from a multidisciplinary perspective; (b)
innovative methods for maximizing collective learning; and (c) measurement techniques
that allow for objective and/or automatic assessment of learning processes. Topics of
interest include, but are not limited to, understanding the role of narratives in learning,
individual and collective mental models of learning experiences, non-linear models of
learning and development, and models of development across the career span.
For additional information on these domains, and potential areas of interest, Applicants may also
consult the following reports by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Science
(available from the National Academies Press http://www.nap.edu):
 “Measuring Human Capabilities: An Agenda for Basic Research on the Assessment of
Individual and Group Performance Potential for Military Accession” (2015) supervised
by the Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences
 “The Context of Military Environments: Social and Organizational Factors” (2014)
supervised by the Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences “Sociocultural
Data to Accomplish Department of Defense Missions: Toward a Unified Social
Framework: Workshop Summary” (2011) supervised by the Board on Human-System
Integration
The ARI Manager is Dr. Alexander Wind, (703) 851-9372, Alexander.P.Wind.civ@army.mil
2. Applied Research and Advanced Technology Development Areas of Interest
ARI seeks Applied Research proposals that provide a systematic expansion and application
of knowledge to design and develop useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures
that provide the means to meet a recognized and specific Army need. Applied Research
precedes specific technology investigations or development and should have high potential to
transition into advanced technology.
The ARI Advanced Technology Development program includes the development of
technologies, components, or prototypes that can be tested in field experiments and/or
simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct relevance to identified
8

---

military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or cost
reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and
retention; advanced data analytics and models applied to talent management; development of
higher-order competencies for Soldiers and Leaders; holistic assessment of unit readiness;
and team and unit mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and, if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
Topic areas of the applied research and advanced technology development include the following:
a. Holistic Personnel Assessment and Statistical Innovations for Talent Management
i. Improving Talent Management through Advanced Analytics
“Big Data” can be characterized by large sample sizes and high dimensionality, sparsity, noisy
and irregular measurements, complex interdependencies (including social and temporal), and
heterogeneity (e.g., of data types and structures). Legal or ethical considerations also may
place restrictions on how data and models should be used (e.g., creating new forms of
assessment that result in adverse impact). Finally, the utility of data and models for making
decisions depends on getting the right kind of information to the right people at the right time.
Leaders and Soldiers need information that is understandable, reliable, valid, and timely.
Given these challenges, research is necessary to develop new ways of generating, analyzing,
and using data for the purpose of talent management.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
 New statistical and computational methods for assessing individuals and groups.
Examples include new approaches to generate, deploy, and score assessments; statistical
innovations in addressing faking and response distortion; predictive models to improve
talent management; new methods for augmenting assessments with non-traditional data;
and methods to reduce response burden.
 New methods to support timely, valid, and efficient data-based personnel management and
leader decision-making. Examples include innovations in job analysis/competency
modeling and statistical/computational methods to optimally assign individuals to
specialties and units.
 New metrics and models for group and individual effectiveness in organizations.
Examples include network effects associated with individual training and performance, as
well as metrics to more accurately integrate the value, costs, and likelihood of relevant
performance behaviors across contexts and careers.
 Novel or non-traditional data sources for behavioral/social science research in military
contexts. Examples include archival, physiological, relational, sensor, and qualitative data
-- especially data related to Soldier performance, staffing and personnel decisions,
leadership development, attitude assessment, and group/organizational behavior.
 Other applications of Big Data analytics, predictive modeling, or new computational
methods to address talent management and personnel management. Examples include
testing and assessment, counter-productive work behaviors, recruitment, retention, career
development, promotions, improving person-job fit, enhancing readiness and resilience,
and decision-support systems for leaders.
9

---

The ARI Managers are Dr. Andrew Slaughter, (703) 545-2353,
andrew.j.slaughter.civ@army.mil, and Dr. Garett Howardson, (703) 545-2429,
garett.n.howardson.civ@army.mil.
ii. Holistic Personnel Assessment
The ARI personnel assessment program includes research to advance the science underlying
talent management. The overarching objective is to devise means to attract, select, assign,
promote, and retain enlisted and officer personnel, both Active and Reserve, whose abilities
and interests will fit the Army’s current and future organizational and job requirements. Our
approach to enlisted and officer job performance reflects a “whole person”, compensatory
perspective, incorporating both the ability to perform and the motivation to perform. Our
selection and assignment research must incorporate both elements in a holistic fashion. Areas
of research include theory, methods, techniques, and tools to:
 Enhance the measurement of individual differences, both cognitive and non-cognitive,
for personnel assessment using both classical and innovative measurement approaches;
 Refine and expand the measurement and evaluation of job performance to include
innovative approaches and analysis techniques for job analysis and holistic job
performance assessment;
 Enhance personnel management, e.g., selection, assignment, promotion, from
application to the Army until separation using innovative methods, tools, and techniques;
 Evaluate and validate personnel assessments across the Soldier lifecycle to include
evaluating the impact of new and proposed personnel policies on personnel management
and performance; and
 Improve personnel management through application and enhancement of longitudinal
data and analysis.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Tonia Heffner, 703-545-4408, tonia.s.heffner.civ@army.mil
b. Leader Competences for Complexity & Uncertainty
As the Army prepares to execute the potential range of future military operations, it must
continue to develop a bench of officers and non-commissioned officers (NCOs) who possess the
competencies to perform well across a variety of conventional and emerging contexts.
Developing such competencies requires time and experience over a career, innate ability, and
deliberate leader development and training interventions. Leaders at all levels in the Army—
including junior and senior NCOs, cadets, and junior and senior officers—must develop the
critical cognitive skills that underlie tactical and technical expertise. Leaders also must possess
refined interpersonal and communication skills to mentor subordinates, build teams comprised of
diverse individuals, effectively cooperate with interagency and coalition partners, and
appropriately influence a variety of individuals and groups (e.g., the media, local populations).
Innovations in leader development and training require understanding of the competencies
required for effective performance in future operational contexts, as well as an understanding of
how ability and experience help or hinder competency progression. This area of research
addresses methods and techniques to identify, train, develop, and assess higher-order
competencies and requisite skills for successful leader performance within the Army.
10

---

i. Complex cognitive competencies for organizational and strategic leaders
The Army invests significant time and effort to develop leaders over their careers. Army
leaders are given immensely complex and dynamic missions that can have serious
implications at both local and global levels. The development of complex cognitive
competencies in Army leaders is essential for a successful and an effective organization.
Unless these complex cognitive competencies are continuously developed in Army leaders,
they may lose the ability to anticipate change. When organizational and strategic leaders are
continually developing their complex cognitive skills, they gain the power to explore all
options rather than just react with last minute changes to existing plans with respect to what
may have become an outdated concept of the operational and strategic environment. There is
need for scientific innovative research that will enhance the Army’s capability in assessment
of complex cognitive skills in its leaders and in the creation of improved methods to
accelerate the development of such skills at opportune times during their career lifecycle.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
 How to better develop, identify, and assess individuals with the capacity for strategic
leadership and higher-order cognitive competencies (e.g., systems thinking,
innovative thinking, thinking-in-time, action learning, comprehensive information
gathering, critical thinking).
 Identification of the competencies, knowledge, skills, and abilities that must be
developed over a career to build officers’ capacity for strategic thinking and
leadership; identification of how the competencies develop over time and across a
career.
 Methods to assess, develop, and accelerate acquisition of cognitive competencies at
different phases in an officer’s career. Cognitive competencies of interest include,
but are not limited to, strategic thinking, systems thinking, creativity and innovation,
thinking-in-time, related complex cognitive skills.
 On-the-job approaches to building cognitive competencies and expertise. Examples
include examining the value of broadening opportunities to develop strategic
leadership skills, and methods to improve how leaders use mentoring to build
strategic thinking in others.
 Methods to develop the competencies, knowledge, and skills to improve a leader’s
ability to perform well in a variety of operational and mission contexts (e.g.,
visualizing the operational environment).
The ARI Manager is Dr. Rhett Graves, (913) 684-9758, thomas.r.graves5.civ@army.mil
ii. Multifaceted development pathways for organizational and strategic leaders
Deterring adversaries and winning the nation’s wars are accomplished through the
coordinated actions of cohesive and effective organizations working toward the same
purpose. The leader’s role in shaping and directing these organizations is significant.
Moreover, as leaders advance in their careers, the organizations they lead grow in
complexity. Army leaders advance from the direct level of leadership to leading
organizations to leading the Army enterprise. At each stage, leaders are expected to continue
learning and developing themselves, as well as developing the subordinates and
11

---

organizations they lead. To be effective across different performance environments and
across a career, leaders must therefore develop and improve a wide range of knowledge,
skills, and abilities—both within themselves and within others. Army leaders have a diversity
of backgrounds, interests, talents, etc., that result in the development of competencies that are
individualized to particular developmental paths. A better understanding is required of
individual, multifaceted, and asynchronous patterns of competency development.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
 Research is needed to identify how leaders grow over time and over unique
developmental paths, as well as how leaders develop and mentor their subordinates.
 Development of innovative measures and models of leadership performance; leader
competencies, knowledge, skills, abilities, and other attributes; and leader growth.
This includes developing and validating methods to assess competency baselines and
progression throughout Professional Military Education.
 Methods for identifying, measuring, and developing operational leadership
competencies for obtaining advantage in future operational environments,
characterized by contextual features such as battlefield transparency, near-peer
adversaries, autonomous systems, human-machine teaming, integrated domains.
 Methods for leader development in contexts extending beyond formal education and
training venues.
 Measures and methods to improve the rate of competency development and leader
capability to develop his or her subordinates. This includes leader development
interventions to improve knowledge and skills related to mentorship, methods to aid
leaders in identifying subordinates’ developmental needs, and methods to improve
performance counselling and feedback.
 Methods to enable leaders to influence and improve the organizations they lead. This
includes methods to develop leader skills and competencies related to promoting
organizational effectiveness, as well as techniques or job aids to help leaders promote
organizational performance (e.g., methods to support the diffusion of innovation,
methods to set conditions for a learning environment).
The ARI Manager is Dr. Rhett Graves, (913) 684-9758, thomas.r.graves5.civ@army.mil
iii. Assessing and Developing Junior Officer Competencies
Research is needed to specifically develop valid measures and targeted interventions that are
designed to provide developmental feedback on critical leader competencies for Junior
Officers. The Leader Requirements Model (LRM) and the Army Talent Attribute Framework
(ATAF) provide foundational and critical attributes and competencies relevant for this leader
echelon. Building on this foundation, research will further explore the anatomy of the targeted
competencies and the contexts in which they are used, ultimately allowing for the design of
diagnostic and developmental tools specific to more granular subcompetencies. By focusing
on the requisite knowledge, skills, abilities (KSAO) necessary for subcompetency proficiency,
research findings will provide the Army with novel developmental methods as well as a more
refined ability to predict performance. Additionally, research also is needed to provide
instructional and institutional guidance, helping trainers/educators to better instill these leader
12

---

competencies to maximize transfer of training to current and future operational environments.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
 Development of innovative assessment tools to diagnose Junior Officer leader
competency gaps and provide actionable guidance for leader development.
 Development of a stage progression model for Junior Officer competency
development accounting for configural profiles of subcompetency and KSAOs
expertise and how those profiles interact with elements of contextual demands.
 Methods to accelerate the development of leader competencies with novel training
interventions yielding improved performance at earlier stages of Officers’ careers.
 Prototype interventions promoting the transition from one stage of competency
development to the next.
 Methods to predict specific aspects of individuals’ leader performance in a range of
missions/situations enabling more refined talent management decisions.
 Development of enhanced and validated instructional guidance ultimately producing
more ready and lethal Junior Officers.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Jennifer Tucker, Office: 706-545-2490; Work cell: 706-366-7312,
jennifer.s.tucker.civ@army.mil
iv. Assessing and Developing Junior Leader Competencies for Multi-domain Operations
Sustained competition and conflict in the future operational environment (FOE) will impose
novel performance requirements on Army Leaders. Emerging operational demands and
requirements for multidomain operations will require Leaders to augment existing
competencies and to develop new ones. Research is needed to identify critical competencies
supporting Leader performance in the FOE and develop assessment and formative feedback
tools to enhance competency development. Specifically, research is needed to enhance
Leaders’: (a) perceptual and cognitive competencies for ambiguous contexts (e.g., degraded
information environments, spatial cognition, social cognition), (b) adaptive competencies for
rapidly evolving technological contexts (e.g., technological fluency, expert communication,
expert problem-solving, career transitions to technical fields), and (c) self-regulation
competencies for effective performance in demanding environments (e.g., hot cognition,
vigilance, cognitive flexibility).
Additionally, research is needed to understand better the systematic nature of ecological and
transactional aspects of competency development, taking place between the Soldier/Leader and
their context, as they and the Army more broadly recognize, make sense of, respond to, and
adapt to perceived contextual demands. The Army requires novel ways of thinking about,
measuring, and enhancing competencies that incorporate, explore, develop, and refine
ecological, transactional, and contextually focused perspectives, emphasizing perceptual,
cognitive, affective, performative, and experiential facets of competency development.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
13

---

 Methods to identify critical competencies for Leaders to perform effectively in
current and future operational environments, particularly with respect to MDO.
 Development of innovative and valid assessment techniques and tools for measuring
Leader competencies for the FOE.
 Methods to determine the cognitive, affective, sociocultural, and/or other factors
needed to be integrated into training and formative feedback interventions to enhance
competencies for FOE conditions (e.g., simulated realistic training contexts).
 Development of validated formative feedback tools that support and enhance critical
competencies early and throughout Leaders’ career lifecycle.
 Techniques to conceptualize and operationalize ecological and/or transactional
models of competency development, accounting for the role of context in perceptual,
cognitive, affective, performative, experiential, or other facets of competency
development.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Jennifer Tucker, Office: 706-545-2490; Work cell: 706-366-
7312, jennifer.s.tucker.civ@army.mil
v. Developing Noncommissioned Officers for the Future Force
Known as the “Backbone of the Army,” noncommissioned officers (NCO) conduct the daily
operations of the Army and are charged with the care, training, education, and readiness of
every Soldier. For those reasons, NCOs’ ability to coach, train and mentor competent Soldiers
of character is key to the readiness and success of the force. As NCOs transition from direct,
first line leadership (e.g., team leaders, squad leaders, and other equivalent duty positions) to
operational and strategic leadership positions, they must progressively build upon the enduring
leader competencies and knowledge, skills, abilities and other attributes (KSAO) that are
required of all NCOs. They must also develop challenging new competencies and KSAOs that
were not required of them as first line leaders. Although the Army has made great strides in
providing NCOs with rich and impactful professional development opportunities within the
institutional training domain, further research needs to be conducted within the operational and
self-development domains. One important focus of the research is to understand how NCOs
can build, practice, and accelerate their leadership competencies outside of the Army
schoolhouse settings. This research will provide science-based developmental methods and
assessments that 1) address the leader competencies and KSAOs for which NCOs need
additional training and development before being assigned to duty positions that require them,
2) are aligned with Army doctrine and existing leader development training, and 3) can be used
by NCOs in any learning domain.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
 Identification of emerging challenges that NCOs will face when leading, training, and
taking care of their units and Soldiers over the next decade, and identification of the
KSAOs they will need to meet those challenges.
 Identification of leader competencies and KSAOs for which NCOs need additional
training and development and the best methods to develop those competencies and
KSAOs.
14

---

 Development and validation of developmental methods and assessments to accelerate and
build upon the essential competencies and KSAOs that are required of NCOs across the
entirety of their lifecycle (e.g., leader identity, effective communication, task
prioritization, risk assessment and management).
 Development and validation of developmental methods and assessments to accelerate and
build upon essential leader competencies and KSAOs that are uniquely required of senior
NCO ranks and/or particular senior enlisted organizational and strategic leadership
positions.
 Methods and models that identify, describe, and anticipate how NCO competency and
KSAO requirements change over the course of an enlisted leader’s career.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Brian Crabb (254) 383-1132, brian.t.crabb.civ@army.mil.
c. Team Assignment & Performance
i. Multi-Layered Hierarchical Units
Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) require a dynamic mix of U.S. Army forward presence,
expeditionary forces, and partner forces to deter and defeat the enemy. Future Army units are
projected to operate as disaggregated, highly mobile, self-contained forces that will operate for
extended periods in complex environments without fixed basing. Small units drawing from
diverse personnel across a variety of units will be required to rapidly and organically aggregate
to achieve particular missions, and then disaggregate back into their previous state post-mission.
These teaming arrangements are an adaptive response to the complexity of the problems
encountered in the current global environment. Teams are complex dynamic systems that exist
across different environments, develop over time, and evolve and adapt as situational demands
unfold. Research efforts are needed to develop tools and techniques for teams to be able to
organically aggregate and disaggregate as the mission and operational environment demand,
understand how myriad individual characteristics combine to create highly effective teams, and
determine the contextual factors that impact the success of nested, hierarchical units.
.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
 Tools and techniques to support the rapid, organic aggregation and disaggregation of
small units within multi-team systems in response to task and environmental
demands.
 Statistical and measurement methods to understand team and multi-team process and
performance dynamics in field settings.
 Understanding of attributes and emergent states of teams related to robustness and a
team’s ability to continue to perform well under duress for extended time periods.
 Understanding the role of trust, cohesion, and other emergent states that influence
performance and effectiveness in multi-team systems; including the establishment
and dynamics of these states in multi-team systems.
 Understanding of how leaders, climate, culture, and other aspects of teams interact
across different echelons and team compositions.
15

---

 Application or revision of concepts such as commander's intent, command intent, and
unity of effort to train and support collaboration and decision-making by collocated
and distributed teams.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Stefanie P. Shaughnessy, (571) 585-1790,
stefanie.p.shaughnessy.civ@army.mil
ii. Team Staffing and Composition
As the Army shifts to the Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) paradigm, there will be an
increased emphasis on ensuring effectiveness of Soldiers and small units, with a recent
emphasis by Army Senior Leaders on small teams (squads, platoons, and companies) as the
foundation of readiness. In order to maintain maximal effectiveness of the force in this
paradigm, the Army will need to efficiently assign and utilize personnel throughout the
formation. This concept is often articulated as “Right Soldier, Right Job, Right Time.” To
achieve this vision, the Army requires the capability to shift to the assignment paradigm
from focusing solely on individual jobs to also accounting for the specific organization,
unit, and/or team context in which that job is performed. The Army requires the tools,
methods, and frameworks for optimally assigning individuals to teams and small units to
ensure the operational effectiveness of these units in future conflicts. Moreover, the Army
would benefit from new assessment systems to collect sufficiently deep and appropriate
information on the individual attributes and capabilities of Soldiers to support a team-based
assignment paradigm. Research in this topic area will address both the methods and
statistical tools, as well as the attributes and capabilities to be assessed in order to support
team-based assignment in the future.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
 Identifying characteristics that predict individuals’ capacity of working effectively
in team environments.
 Statistical optimization frameworks and models for ensuring team effectiveness
across a large number of teams and team assignment decisions.
 Understanding of team composition and compilation models for predicting team
outcomes (e.g., cohesion, adaptability, performance, effectiveness, readiness).
 Computational tools that embody scientific knowledge of team composition and
compilation, team tasks and environmental conditions related to team outcomes,
and optimization frameworks for personnel officers and leaders to use to assign
members to teams.
 Understanding the impact of team process change over time as team members rotate
in and out of units.
 Analytical tools for aggregating and displaying data and facilitating team-based
assignment decisions, to include taking into account different, or multiple, team
outcomes based on team needs.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Stefanie P. Shaughnessy, (571) 585-1790,
stefanie.p.shaughnessy.civ@army.mil
16

---

iii. Developing Teams for the Future Operational Environment
To be prepared for the future operational environment (FOE), the Army is undergoing a
transformational change with a focus on improving its talent management system. This
change will necessitate optimization of human potential, especially at the small-team
level. Current trends suggest that the FOE will be characterized by an expanded
battlespace across time, domains, geography, and actors, the convergence of capabilities
through technology, and compression among strategic, operational, and tactical levels.
The FOE will present challenges not just in the operational context, but also in training.
The multi-domain operations (MDO) concept requires Army teams to operate semi-
independently, but also to utilize capabilities across multiple domains in order to conduct
sustained missions in highly contested environments. According to the Army People
Strategy (2020), the Army must modernize training through the development of new tools,
technology, and methods to optimize human performance for MDO. To do this, the Army
needs a broad and deep research program that focuses on developing the talent of small
teams as they acquire proficiency of both the critical tactical skills and the requisite team
dimensions that will be required of them in the emerging operational environment. Despite
a burgeoning research literature on teams, there is considerable evidence that current
teams in the Army, and in modern organizations more broadly, are vastly different from
teams in the past (Jones et al., 2020; Shuffler et al., 2020). With some notable exceptions,
researchers largely remain vetted to a traditional understanding of teams as fairly static
and independent entities (Tannenbaum et al., 2012). Thus, the current state of the
scientific literature lacks specific practical insight about how to train Army teams in order
to meet the dynamic complexities that they are expected face in the FOE. This research
will inform the science of teams by providing a better understanding of team processes,
emergent states, and training approaches, while simultaneously equipping Army trainers
through the development of effective tools for optimizing individual and collective talent
during home station training. Such research will thereby allow the Army to maximize its
human potential to meet the challenges of the FOE.
Topic areas of research interest include the following:
 Identification of the individual and team KSAOs, or relationships among them, that
small teams need to build and sustain team effectiveness in the FOE.
 Development of training approaches and tools to build individual team member
KSAOs that enable teams to sustain mission performance in the FOE.
 Development of team training approaches and tools that build team KSAOs and
team processes to enable sustained mission performance of teams in the FOE.
 Identification of the individual KSAOs and team-level characteristics that are
necessary for the effectiveness of teams within multiteam systems.
 Development of training approaches and tools that facilitate optimal teaming and
that enable teams to operate within multiteam systems.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Brian Crabb (254) 383-1132, brian.t.crabb.civ@army.mil
iv. Team Enablers
Performance in the current and future operational environments hinges not only on the
17

---

performance of individuals, but on the performance of teams. This research examines the
relationships and development of innovative measures of critical multilevel constructs,
such as unit resilience, unit cohesion, and unit climate and determines how these key
enablers impact unit-level readiness outcomes. The research also adds to the development
of integrated measures of objective and perceptual data on these key team enablers
 Development and validation of innovative measures and models of collective
constructs (e.g., resilience, cohesion, and command climate).
 Methods to improve unit/collective constructs (e.g., resilience, cohesion, command
climate).
 Development and validation of integrated measures of collective constructs such as
resilience, cohesion, command climate.
 The use of social network analysis to understand and investigate the pattern of
communication among unit members within small Army units to determine how it
influences team resilience.
The ARI Manager is Dr. Alok Bhupatkar, 703-712-3038,
alok.a.bhupatkar.civ@army.mil
d. Assessing and Developing Technological Fluency for the Future Force
In the Future Operating Environment (FOE), Soldiers and squads will be teamed with
increasingly sophisticated and evolving technologies. Soldiers and leaders in specialty
areas (e.g., Cyber, Data Workforce, Technology Workforce) and General Purpose Forces
(GPF) will require increased technological aptitudes and skills in order to adapt emerging
technologies to evolving mission sets and avoid being overmatched by AI-enabled “smart”
technologies. Technological Fluency (TF) - the ability of Soldiers and units to use and
rapidly adapt new and emerging technologies without formal training on these technologies

will be a decisive factor in the FOE. This research will enable the creation of a

“technologically fluent” Force by developing models of technological fluency, methods
and measures to assess and develop the technological fluency of Soldiers across a career,
and technologies to maximize resilience and performance in Soldiers and units.
Modernization is incomplete without critical mass in the Force capable of learning and
using those new technologies and systems. Talent Management reform is incomplete
without foresight of future operational demands and the ability to recruit, assign, and
develop Soldiers to meet those demands. To build a technologically fluent Force, Army
talent management processes must be capable of modeling TF, assessing Soldier and unit
TF, and developing performance for future mission success.
Areas of research include theoretical models or frameworks, methods, techniques, and tools
to:
 Build individual difference assessments that reflect TF competencies leveraging
existing measures and developing new, innovative measures.
 Expand the assessment of job performance to include criterion measures related to
TF, e.g., behavioral inputs to systems, system feedback of coordinated AI-human
interactions, collective performance measures, training performance measures.
18

---

 Develop training and leader development programs to enhance the KSAOs
reflecting TF competencies and to maximize performance in jobs/tasks requiring a
high degree of TF.
The ARI Managers are Dr. Jennifer Tucker, Office: 706-545-2490; Work cell: 706-366-
7312, jennifer.s.tucker.civ@army.mil and Dr. Alok Bhupatkar, 703-712-3038,
alok.a.bhupatkar.civ@army.mil
(End of Section)
19

---

B. FEDERAL AWARD INFORMATION:
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to
award a variety of instruments on behalf of ARI. Anticipated awards may be made in the form
of procurement contracts, grants, cooperative agreements and technology investment agreements
(TIAs), or other transactions for prototypes (OTAs). The ACC (APG) RTP Division reserves the
right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed. Applicants should
familiarize themselves with these instrument types and the applicable regulations before
submitting a white paper or proposal. The following are brief descriptions of the possible award
instruments:
1. Procurement Contract: A legal instrument, which consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6303, reflects a
relationship between the Federal Government and a State, a local government, or other recipient
when the principal purpose of the instrument is to acquire property or services for the direct benefit
or use of the Federal Government.
Procurement contracts awarded by the ACC (APG) RTP Division will contain, where appropriate,
detailed special provisions concerning patent, rights in technical data and computer software,
reporting requirements, equal employment opportunity, etc.. No fee or profit will be allowed on
travel and equipment.
Contracts are primarily governed by the following regulations:
a. Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR)
b. Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations (DFARS)
c. Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS)
2. Grant: A legal instrument, that consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6304, is used to enter into a relationship
in which:
a. The principal purpose is to transfer a thing of value to the recipient to carry out a public purpose
of support or stimulation authorized by a law or the United States, rather than to acquire
property or services for the Department of Defense’s direct benefit or use.
b. Substantial involvement is not expected between the Department of Defense and the recipient
when carrying out the activity contemplated by the grant.
c. No fee or profit is allowed.
3. Cooperative Agreement: A legal instrument which, consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6305, is used to
enter into the same kind of relationship as a grant (see definition "grant"), except that substantial
involvement is expected between the Department of Defense and the recipient when carrying out
the activity contemplated by the cooperative agreement. The term does not include "cooperative
research and development agreements" as defined in 15 U.S.C. 3710a. No fee or profit is allowed.
4. Technology Investment Agreement (TIA): An assistance instrument as described in 32 CFR Part
37. A TIA may be a cooperative agreement or an Other Transaction for Research under 10 U.S.C.
20

---

4021 both with provisions tailored for involving commercial firms or research involving
commercial application. To the maximum extent practicable, TIAs shall provide for a 50/50 cost
share between the Government and the applicant. No fee or profit is allowed on TIAs.
5. Other Transaction for Research. A legal instrument, consistent with 10 U.S.C. 4021, which may
be used for basic, applied, and advanced research projects. The research covered under this
instrument cannot be duplicative of research being conducted under an existing DoD program. To
the maximum extent practicable, OTs for research are to provide for a 50/50 cost share between the
Government and the applicant. An applicant’s cost share may take the form of cash, independent
research and development (IR&D), foregone intellectual property rights, equipment, access to
unique facilities, and/or other means. Due to the extent of cost share, and the fact that an OT for
research does not qualify as a “funding agreement” as defined at 37 CFR 401.2(a), the intellectual
property provisions of this instrument can be negotiated to provide expanded protection to an
applicant’s intellectual property. No fee or profit is allowed on OTs for research. Please refer to
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Other Transaction
Guide version 1.0 dated November 2018 for additional information. This document, along with
additional other transaction agreement (OTA) resources, may be accessed at the following link:
https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/cp/policy/other-policy-areas.html
6. Grants and cooperative agreements for institutions of higher education, nonprofit
organizations, foreign organizations, and foreign public entities are primarily governed by the
following:
a. Federal statutes
b. Federal regulations
c. 2 CFR Part 200
d. 2 CFR 1104
e. 32 CFR Parts 21, 22, 26, and 28
f. DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions
g. Agency-specific Research Terms and Conditions
7. Grants and cooperative agreements for for-profit and nonprofit organizations exempted from
Subpart E - Cost Principles of 2 CFR Part 200, are primarily governed by the following:
a. Federal statutes
b. Federal regulations
c. 32 CFR Part 34 - Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with For-Profit
Organizations
d. 32 CFR Parts 21, 22, 26, and 28
e. DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions
f. Agency-specific Research Terms and Conditions
8. OT for Research/ TIAs are primarily governed by the following:
a. Federal statutes
b. Federal regulations
c. 32 CFR Part 37 – Technology Investment Agreements
21

---

d. DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions
e. Agency-specific Research Terms and Conditions
f. Office of Secretary of Defense implementation guidance titled Other Transactions (OT)
Guide for Prototype Projects (November 2018, Version 1)
9. The following websites may be accessed to obtain an electronic copy of the governing
regulations and terms and conditions:
 FAR, DFARS, and AFARS: https://www.acquisition.gov
 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): http://www.ecfr.gov
 DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions:
https://www.onr.navy.mil/en/work-with-us/manage-your-award/manage-grant-
award/grants-terms-conditions
 Agency-specific Research Terms and Conditions:
https://www.arl.army.mil/resources/baa-forms/#terms-and-conditions
(End of Section)
22

---

C. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION:
1. Eligible Applicants:
Proposals are sought from institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations, and for-
profit organizations, domestic or foreign, for research and development (R&D) in those areas
specified in SECTION II. A of this BAA. Foreign organization and foreign public entities
are advised that security restrictions may apply that could preclude their participation in
these efforts. Countries included on the U.S. State Department List of Countries that Support
Terrorism are excluded from participation in these efforts.
Government Laboratories, Federal Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs),
and U.S. Service Academies are not eligible to participate as prime Contractors or
Recipients under this BAA. If a proposal selected for award includes the involvement of a
Government laboratory, Federally Funded Research and Development Center, or U.S.
Service Academy, award funds allocated for the involvement of Government laboratories,
FFRDCs, and/or U.S. Service Academies will be directly provided from ARI to the
respective Government laboratory, FFRDC or U.S. Service Academy via a Military
Interdepartmental Purchase Request (MIPR). No award funds will be channeled directly
from a prime awardee (e.g., Contractor or Recipient) to a Government laboratory, FFRDC, or
U.S. Service Academy.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching:
Generally, there is no requirement for cost sharing, matching, or cost participation to be
eligible for award under this BAA. Cost sharing and matching is not an evaluation factor
used under this BAA. Exceptions may exist if the applicant is proposing the use of an OT
for research or prototype as an award instrument. Cost-sharing requirements may be found
at 32 CFR Part 37 and in the DoD Other Transaction Guide for Prototype Projects
(https://www.dau.edu/pdfviewer/Source/Guidebooks/Other-Transactions-(OT)-Guide.pdf).
Applicants are encouraged to consider cost sharing schemes in cooperation with ARI.
(End of Section)
23

---

D. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION:
1. Address to View Broad Agency Announcement:
Grants.gov (www.grants.gov)
Contract Opportunities (sam.gov)
2. Content and Form of Application Submission:
Section 1 – General Information
Completeness of Information: Proposals must include all of the information specified in this
BAA to prevent delays in evaluation. Be sure to specify the Commercial and Government
Entity (CAGE Code), the DUNS Number, and the Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN)
with your submission. Completion of the Representations and Certifications as well as
registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) are prerequisites before receiving
an award.
Classified Submissions: Do not submit any white papers or proposals that include classified
information. ACC-APG-RTP is not allowed to accept classified submissions.
Use of Color in Proposals: All proposals received will be stored as electronic images.
Electronic color images require a significantly larger amount of storage space than black-
and-white images. As a result, Applicant’s use of color in proposals should be used only
when necessary to convey specific information.
Government Property/Government Furnished Equipment and Facilities: Normally, title to
equipment or other tangible property purchased with Government funds vests with nonprofit
institutions of higher education or with nonprofit organizations whose primary purpose is
conducting scientific research if vesting will facilitate scientific research performed for the
Government. For-profit organizations are expected to possess the necessary plant and
equipment to conduct the proposed research. Deviations may be made on a case-by-case
basis to allow for-profit organizations to purchase equipment, but regulatory disposition
instructions must be followed.
Post-Employment Conflict of Interest: There are certain post-employment restrictions on
former Federal officers and employees, including special Government employees (Section
207 of Title 18, U.S.C.). If an Applicant believes a conflict of interest may exist, the
Applicant should discuss the situation with the Army legal counsel, Mr. Brian Bentley,
(571) 256-7844, brian.e.bentley2.civ@army.mil, prior to expending time and effort in
preparing a proposal.
24

---

Statement of Disclosure Preference: Please complete Form 52 or 52A stating your
preference for release of information contained in your proposal. Copies of these forms are
available at http://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?page=218. Additionally, proposals
containing data that is not to be disclosed to the public for any purpose or used by the
Government except for evaluation purposes shall include the following statement on their
cover page:
This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall
not be duplicated, used, or disclosed, in whole or in part, for any purpose other than to
evaluate this proposal. If, however, an award is made to this Applicant as a result of, or
in connection with, the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to
duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting award. This
restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this
proposal if the information has been obtained from another source without restriction.
The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets .
The Applicant shall also mark each sheet of data it wants to restrict with the following
legend:
“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title
page of this proposal.”
Section 2 – Application Process Overview
The application process is in three stages as follows:
Stage 1- Provide a valid unique entity identifier (formerly DUNS). Please verify the
accuracy of your Unique Entity Identifier (formerly DUNS) at the Dun and Bradstreet
(D&B) website http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform before registering with the System for
Award Management System (SAM). Prospective Applicants must be registered in SAM at
https://www.sam.gov prior to submitting its application.
Stage 2 - Prospective Applicants are encouraged, but not required, to submit White Papers
prior to the submission of a complete proposal. The purpose of submitting a White Paper is
to minimize the labor and cost associated with the production of a detailed proposal that has
little chance of being selected for funding. Feedback on a White Paper will be provided to
the Applicant with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a
proposal”.
Stage 3 - Interested Applicants are required to submit a proposal. All proposals submitted
under the terms and conditions cited in this BAA will be reviewed regardless of whether an
Applicant submitted a White Paper.
25

---

Section 3 – White Paper Preparation
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research, including how it is
innovative and how it could substantially advance the state of the science. Army relevance and
potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate of total cost for the proposed
effort. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient detail to allow evaluation of the
concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an
addendum in which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per
individual) of all key personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal
Investigators) who will perform the research, highlighting their qualifications and
experience as discussed below. All files and forms must be compiled into a single PDF file
or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will be advised that they are only to
review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any pages submitted in
excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPER:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives,
approach, relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include
the nature and extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the
work will contribute to the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request
and how this would be demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests
of the Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges,
software, personnel or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment
(GFE), Government Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property
(GFP), or Government Furnished Data (GFD). Applicant shall indicate any Government
coordination that may be required for obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to
perform any simulations or exercises that would demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research
hours, burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the
Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform
the research, highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must clearly identify and mark any proprietary data the Applicant intends
to be used only by the Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data
or computer software contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the
Government as limited rights or restricted rights respectively. In the absence of such
26

---

identification, the Government will assume to have unlimited rights to all technical data
or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records or data bearing a restrictive.
2. An Applicant is cautioned, however, that portions of a White Paper may be subject to
release under terms of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Section 4 – White Paper Submission
A White Paper of the proposed effort may be submitted electronically to the cognizant ARI
Manager listed in Section II. A with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 White
Paper” addressing specific technical area(s) and an estimate of proposed cost.
An Applicant preparing a White Paper for submission may follow any convenient format desired
as long as the submission complies with guidance above in Section 3, “White Paper
Submission.” Please enclose an e-mail address and a telephone number where you can be
reached.
Section 5 – Review of White Papers
ARI TPOCs will receive and consider all whitepapers submitted and will provide a response with
either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
Section 6 – Preparation of Proposals
PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:
General Information: The proposal is the only vehicle available to the Applicant for receiving
consideration for award. The proposal must stand on its own merit; only information provided in
the proposal can be used in the evaluation process leading to an award. The proposal should be
prepared simply and economically, providing straightforward, concise delineation of capabilities
necessary to perform the proposed work. The technical volume must be accompanied by a fully
supported cost volume as cost and technical considerations are reviewed simultaneously; the cost
volume should assume a start date of no earlier than 01 November 2023. In preparing proposals,
it is important that the Applicant keep in mind the characteristics of a proposal acceptable for
evaluation. A proposal must include all the information specified in this announcement in order
to receive consideration. All proposals must include:
1. An Abstract, Background, Application Potential, Technical Approach, Reference List,
Curriculum Vitae/Resumes of proposed researchers, and cost information, as described
below.
2. Contact information such as e-mail addresses and telephone numbers for both the
Principal Investigator and Institutional Representative to allow technical and contracting
questions to be addressed.
3. Institutional endorsement, signature of the proposed Principal Investigator, time frames
27

---

for all phases of the project, and detailed accounts of proposed work and cost by task.
4. Provide the name, address, and phone number of Applicant’s cognizant Defense Contract
Audit Agency (DCAA) office, if known. All Applicants must be registered in the System
for Award Management (SAM) before an award can be made. Applicants must also
provide their DUNS number (Duns and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System).
Proposals should be very well written, and Applicant’s intention should be clear to
technical reviewers who, while having expertise in behavioral sciences, may lack
concentrated knowledge in the proposed domain. Proposals should be sufficiently
detailed to be responsive to the criteria, described below, for evaluation.
Proposal Format and Content: To ensure all proposals receive proper consideration, the
Government-recommended proposal format shown below (Volume I Technical) should be
followed. This format can most easily be incorporated as the proposal table of contents and
serves as a final checklist as well. Proposals must address at least one of the domains for basic
or applied/advanced research cited in SECTION II. A of this BAA.
Proposal documents (excluding illustrations, tables, and required forms) must use the
following page format:
 Page Size – 8 ½ x 11 inches
 Margins – 1 inch
 Spacing – single
 Font – Times New Roman, 12 point
Note: The Abstract, Background, Application Potential and Technical Approach
sections of a proposal, including any appendices, tables, or figures, must be no
greater than 23 pages in length. (The cover page, table of contents, proposal reference
list, curriculum vitae, cost information and institutional information are not included in
the 23-page limit). Reviewers will not review any pages beyond the 23-page limit.
VOLUME I – TECHNICAL
i Cover Page
ii Table of Contents
iii Abstract
1. Background
2. Technical Approach
3. Technical Discussion
4. Reference List
5. Curriculum Vitae/Resumes of Key Personnel
i. Cover Page: A cover page is required. Proposals will not be processed without:
A SF 424 R&R Form (required for assistance agreement proposals submitted online via
Grants.gov (see section 8- Submission of Proposals).
28

---

Note: If an Applicant elects to submit a contract proposal via Grants.gov instead of via
e-mail, the SF 424 R&R Form is required. Proposals for Grants or cooperative agreements
only require the SF 424 R&R Form.
The cover page should include the BAA number, Research Area(s) of Interest, name and
telephone number for the principal points of contact (both technical and contractual), proposed
project title, and any other information that identifies the proposal. The cover page should also
contain the proprietary data disclosure statement, if applicable (ARO FORM 52 or 52A). The
title of the proposed project should be brief, scientifically representative, intelligible to a
scientifically literate reader, and suitable for use in the public domain. Should the project be
carried out at a branch campus or other component of the submitting organization, that branch
campus or component should be identified in the space provided (Block 12 on the SF 424 R&R).
To evaluate compliance with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 {20 U.S.C. A§
1681 Et. Seq.), the Department of Defense is collecting certain demographic and career
information to be able to assess the success rates of women who are proposed for key roles in
applications in STEM disciplines. To enable this assessment, each application must include the
following forms completed as indicated.
Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) form:
The Degree Type and Degree Year fields on the Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile
{Expanded) form will be used by DoD as the source for career information. In addition to the
required fields on the form, applicants must complete these two fields for all individuals that
are identified as having the project role of PD/Pl or Co-PD/Pl on the form. Additional
senior/key persons can be added by selecting the "Next Person" button.
Research and Related Personal Data form:
This form will be used by DoD as the source of demographic information, such as gender, race,
ethnicity, and disability information for the Project Director/Principal Investigator and all
other persons identified as Co-Project Director{s)/Co-Principal Investigator(s). Each
application must include this form with the name fields of the Project Director/Principal
Investigator and any Co-Project Director(s)/Co-Principal Investigator(s) completed;
however, provision of the demographic information in the form is voluntary. If completing
the form for multiple individuals, each Co-Project Director/Co-Principal Investigator can be
added by selecting the "Next Person" button. The demographic information, if provided,
will be used for statistical purposes only and will not be made available to merit reviewers.
Applicants who do not wish to provide some or all of the information should check or select
the "Do not wish to provide" option.
The proposed duration for which support is requested should be consistent with the nature and
complexity of the proposed activity and associated budget. The Federal awarding agency
reserves the right to make awards with shorter or longer periods of performance. Specification of
a desired starting date for the project is important and helpful. However, requested effective
dates cannot be guaranteed.
Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 7701, as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996
[Section 31001(I)(1), Public Law 104-134], Federal agencies shall obtain each awardee’s
29

---

Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN). This number may be the Employer Identification
Number (EIN) for a business or non-profit entity or the Social Security Number for an
individual. The TIN is being obtained for purposes of collecting and reporting on any delinquent
amounts that may arise out of an awardee’s relationship with the Government. Applicants must
provide their organization's Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. The DUNS
number is a nine-digit number assigned by Dun and Bradstreet Information Services.
Applicants must provide their assigned Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code. The
CAGE code is a 5-character code assigned and maintained by the Defense Logistics Service
Center (DLSC) to identify a commercial plant or establishment.
ii. Table of Contents: It is highly recommended that the Applicant follow the above table of
contents (Volume I, “Technical”) and use it for a final quality-control checklist.
iii. Abstract: The abstract allows the Applicant to present briefly and concisely the important
aspects of its proposal. It should summarize the proposed research objectives, expectations, and
the basic approaches to be used in the proposed effort. The abstract must identify implications
for applied research if the project is successful. The abstract should be 250 words or less.
Abstracts longer than 250 words will not be read.
1. Background: This section should describe the research problem, discuss relevant
theory, and summarize existing research. It is important that the proposal identify specific,
relevant hypotheses following discussion of theory. When integrating theories or research
domains, an overarching framework supporting such integration should be described.
When appropriate, a graphic depiction of the conceptual model and hypotheses may be
provided.
2. Technical Approach: The technical approach should follow and expand upon the
background section and provide a detailed description of the proposed research. This
account should be much like the methods section of a research paper. The technical
approach should include: a description of the data to be collected, the methods for collecting
the data, the number and source of participants (e.g., using power analysis) and how they
will be acquired, the research design, the measures to be used, and the analysis plan.
Proposals for secondary research (e.g., meta- analyses) should provide estimates of the
likely number of primary studies and/or effects available in the research literature for
analysis. If the intermediate or final product of research will include training packages,
simulation models, or other software-based device, the proposal should relate the product to
the research hypotheses and provide sufficient detail to permit understanding and
evaluation.
The technical approach should detail and set a schedule for the major tasks to be performed
and products to be produced. In the case of a one-year proposal, the research plan should
be divided by quarters of the year. In the case of multi-year proposals, it should be divided
semi-annually or by major tasks within a year. The technical approach should specifically
identify what tasks will be performed by which party and why each subcontractor, if any,
was selected to perform its task(s).
30

---

3. Technical Discussion: No technical approach is without its limitations or
shortcomings. Every issue should be identified and compared with the successes/failures
of previous approaches. A trade-off analysis is a good way to make this comparison and
should be supported by theory, simulation, modeling, experimental data, or other sound
engineering and scientific practices. If the Offeror has a "new and creative" solution to
the problem(s), that solution should be developed and analyzed in this section. The
preferred technical approach should be described in as much detail as is necessary or
useful to establish confidence in the approach. The technical discussion should include
the following:
 A complete discussion stating the background and objectives of the proposed work, the
scientific approaches to be considered, the relationship to competing or related research,
and the level of effort to be employed; include the nature and extent of the anticipated
results and how they will significantly advance the scientific state-of-the- art; if known,
include the manner in which the work will contribute to the accomplishment of the Army's
mission; ensure the proposal identifies any scientific uncertainties and describes specific
approaches for the resolution of the uncertainties
 A brief description of your organization
 The names of other Government agencies or other parties receiving the proposal and/or
funding the proposed effort (if none, so state); concurrent or later submission of the
proposal to other organizations will not prejudice its review by ARI if we are kept
informed of the situation
 A statement regarding possible impact, if any, of the proposed effort on the environment
considering as a minimum its effect upon water, atmosphere, natural resources, human
resources, and any other values
 The Offeror shall provide a statement regarding the use of Class I and Class II ozone-
depleting substances. Ozone-depleting substances mean any substance designated as Class
I by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), including but not limited to
chlorofluorocarbons, halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform and any
substance designated as Class II by EPA, including but not
limited to hydrochlorofluorocarbons. See 40 C.F.R. Part 82 for detailed information. If
Class I or II substances are to be utilized, a list shall be provided as part of the Offeror's
proposal. If none, so state.
 Requested support (if any) in the following areas: facilities, equipment, and
materials.
4. Reference List: All cited references must be listed. Do not include publications that
are not referenced. The references list must be in American Psychological Association
(APA) format in accordance with the current APA Publications Manual.
5. Curriculum Vitae/Resumes of Key Personnel: Curriculum vitae or résumés
31

---

should be included for all proposed researchers with special emphasis on the Principal
Investigator, Co-Principal Investigator(s), and Consultants; documents are limited to five (5)
pages per investigator to include name, brief biography, and list of recent, relevant
publications.
VOLUME II – COST
The cost volume shall justify the need for and amount of major direct expense categories,
including (but not limited to) labor, equipment, and travel. The cost estimate for the proposed
effort should sufficiently detail elements of cost and the need for these items to allow for
meaningful evaluation. The cost volume should clearly and closely align with the planned
methodology presented in the technical approach section. A cost estimate should be detailed for
each task of the proposed work and should include the following:
a. A complete detail of direct labor to include, by category, labor hours and rates
b. Fringe benefits rate and base
c. An itemized list of equipment showing cost of each item and justification for inclusion
d. Description and cost of expendable supplies
e. Complete detail of travel to include number of people and duration of travel, reason/need
for travel, destination, airfare, per diem, rental car, etc. Note that in recent years, travel
costs for one conference per year to present work from the funded research effort has
been a typical request
f. Complete detail of any subcontracts to include labor categories, skill levels, and labor
rates and hours
g. Other direct costs (reproduction, computer, etc.)
h. Indirect cost rates and bases with an indication whether rates are fixed or provisional and
the time frame to which they are applied
i. Proposed fee, if any and if applicable
j. Cost sharing, if any and if applicable
k. Any documentation which supports all items above
l. Applicants should furnish the name and telephone number of their cognizant audit agency
COST PROPOSAL PREPARATION:
1. Cost Reimbursement or Fixed Price Award: Selection of the type of award (cost
reimbursement or fixed price) is based upon various factors, such as (1) award instrument
selected, (2) type of research to be performed, (3) the contractor's experience maintaining cost
records, and (4) the ability to detail and allocate proposed costs and performance of the work.
Cost-type awards are most commonly used because of their suitability in supporting research
and development efforts as they permit some flexibility in the redirection of efforts due to
recent research experiment results or changes in Army guidance. Fixed-price-type awards are
used when the research project costs can be estimated accurately, the services to be rendered
are reasonably definite, and the amount of property, if any, is fixed. The negotiated price is
not subject to any adjustment on the basis of the Applicant’s cost experience in performing
the contract. An Applicant may propose either cost-reimbursable or fixed-price contract
arrangements as well as assistance awards but the award type may vary in accordance with
relevant factors as determined by ARI and ACC (APG) RTP Division. Grants and
32

---

Cooperative Agreement awards will be cost reimbursable without profit or fee.
33

---

2. Cost Proposal Content: A proposal should represent an Applicant’s best response to the
solicitation, including cost information. Any inconsistency, whether real or apparent, between
promised performance and cost or price data must be fully explained in the proposal. Failure
to explain any significant inconsistencies may demonstrate an Applicant’s lack of
understanding of the nature and scope of the work required. Accordingly, the cost volume
must be sufficient to establish the reasonableness, realism, and completeness of the proposed
cost/price. Further, any modifications made to the initial proposal resulting in a change in the
cost volume must likewise be thoroughly supported in writing regardless of whether such
changes are made during negotiations or at the time of a proposal revision. The estimate
should be detailed for each task of the proposed work. The cost volume should be limited to
the minimum number of pages necessary to satisfy the specific requirements set forth herein.
Submission of volumes of computer-generated data to support the cost volume is not
necessary or desired. If computer-generated data is essential to support the cost volume, it
may be submitted as an addendum and must be clearly cross-referenced to the material it
supports in the cost volume.
Each proposal must contain a budget for each year of support requested and a cumulative
budget for the full term of requested support. The proposal may list funds under any of the
categories listed so long as the item is considered necessary to perform the proposed work
and is not precluded by applicable cost principles. In addition to the forms, the budget
should include no more than five (5) pages of budget justification narrative for each year.
A signed summary budget page must be included. The documentation pages should be
titled "Budget Explanation Page" and numbered chronologically starting with the budget
form. The need for each cost element should be explained clearly.
All cost data must be current and complete. Costs proposed must conform to the
following principles and procedures:
Before award it must be established that an approved accounting system and financial
management system exist for an Applicant.
The following specific information is required:
1. Summary by cost element and profit or fee for total proposal (Note: Profit/Fee
not allowed for grants, cooperative agreements, or technology investment
agreements for the prime recipient of the award or any subrecipients)
2. Labor summary for total proposal by labor categories, proposed hours per labor
category, and hourly rates per labor category
3. Explanation of how labor rates are computed including base rates (actuals),
fringe, and escalation, if any
4. Interdivisional transfers (detailed breakout of costs), if applicable
34

---

5. Identification of indirect rates by fiscal year and explanation of how established
and base to which they apply
6. Bill of materials detailing items by type, quantity, unit price, total amount, and
source of estimate (provide vendor written quotes)
7. Summary of all travel by destination, purpose, number of people and days, air
fare, per diem, car rental, etc.
8. Consultant(s) by name, hourly rate, and number of hours (furnish copy of
consulting agreement and identify prior agreement(s) under which the consultant
commanded proposed rate)
9. Computer use by type, rate, and quantity
10. Other direct costs by type, amount, cost per unit, and purpose (specifically
identify any costs for printing or publication)
11. DD Form 1861 (if proposing facilities capital cost of money)
12. Forecast of monthly and cumulative dollar commitments for the proposed
performance period
13. Subcontractor's proposal, with prime Applicant’s price/cost analysis of
subcontractor's proposal (if subcontract was not competed, include justification)
3. Subawardee Cost Proposals: Subawardees' cost proposals must be similarly structured.
All subcontracted work must be properly identified as such. If a subcontractor elects to
submit an abbreviated proposal to an Applicant, it is Applicant’s responsibility to see that
the subcontractor simultaneously submits a complete detailed proposal properly identified
directly to the Government Contracting or Grants Officer. An Applicant’s proposal must:
1. Identify principal items/services to be subcontracted
2. Identify prospective subcontractors and the basis on which they were selected
(if non- competitive, provide selected source justification)
3. Identify the type of contractual arrangement contemplated for each
subcontract and the rationale for the same
4. Identify the cost or pricing data or information other than cost or
pricing data submitted by each subcontractor
5. Provide an analysis concerning the reasonableness, realism, and completeness
of each subcontractor's proposal; if the analysis is based on a comparison with
prior research
35

---

efforts, identify the basis on which the prior costs or prices were determined to be
reasonable
Section 7 -- Conference and Symposia Grants
a. Introduction. Through the award of a grant, the Army supports conferences
and symposia (as defined in the DoD Travel Regulations) in areas of science
that bring experts together to discuss recent research or educational findings
or to expose other researchers or advanced graduate students to new research
and educational techniques. The Army encourages the convening in the
United States of major international conferences, symposia, and assemblies
of international alliances.
b. Eligibility. Notwithstanding the Army's authority to provide grant support for
such events, only non-commercial scientific, technical, or professional
organizations that qualify for tax exemption may receive a conference
grant/symposia grant. Those who meet this requirement should also be aware
that the DoD does not permit "co- sponsorship" (as defined in DoD 5500.07-
R) absent additional high-level staffing and approval. In other words, the
conference grant support identified in this BAA is NOT DoD sponsorship or
co-sponsorship since ARI is neither an organizer, nor provider, of any
substantial logistical support for the conferences addressed in this section.
c. Conference Support. Conference support proposals should be submitted a
minimum of six (6) months prior to the date of the conference. It is anticipated
that support for conferences and symposia may take multiple forms including
financial support for the meeting, travel support for speakers, or travel support
to allow attendance and participation by advanced graduate students and junior
faculty.
d. Technical Proposal Preparation. The technical portion of a proposal for
support of conference or symposium should include:
a. A one page or less summary indicating the objectives of the project,
b. The topics to be covered,
c. The location and probable date(s) and why the conference is considered appropriate
at the time specified,
d. An explanation of how the conference and requested support will relate to the
research interests of the Army as identified in Section II. A of this BAA and how it
will contribute to the enhancement and improvement of scientific, engineering,
and/or educational in general and activities as outlined earlier in the research areas of
this BAA,
e. The name of chairperson(s)/(PI)(s) and his/her biographical information,
f. If applicable, a list of proposed participants,
g. The methods of announcement or invitation,
h. A summary of how the results of the meeting will be disseminated, and
i. A signed cover page.
36

---

5. Cost Proposal Preparation. The cost portion of the proposal should show:
a. Total project conference costs by major cost elements.
b. Anticipated sources of conference income and amount from each.
c. Anticipated use of funds requested.
d. A signed budget.
6. Support for Federal Employee Attendance. Funds provided cannot be used for payment to
any federal government employee for support, subsistence, or services in connection with the
proposed conference or symposium.
7. Cognizant POC. It is highly recommended that potential applicants contact the
appropriate POC identified earlier in the research areas of this BAA for advice and
assistance before preparation of a conference/symposia proposal.
Section 8 – Submission of Proposals
Proposals must be submitted through the Applicant’s organizational office having responsibility
for Government business relations. The proposal must contain the signature of an authorized
official. All signatures must be that of an official(s) authorized to commit the organization in
business and financial affairs. The cover of the proposal should be marked with the BAA
Solicitation Number W911NF-23-S-0010 along with the name of the research scientific area of
interest(s) (see Section II. A of this BAA). Applicants are requested to provide their e-mail
addresses upon submission of a proposal and also the name, address, and telephone number of
their cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) office, if known.
Proposals for Contracts, TIAs, OTAs may be submitted via e-mail or online via
Grants.gov. Proposals for Grants or cooperative agreements (assistance) MUST be
submitted online via Grants.gov. Further, it is recommended a copy of any proposal
submitted also be furnished to the cognizant ARI Manager listed in Section II. A.
CONTRACT, TIA, OTA PROPOSAL SUBMISSION:
Proposals for contracts may be e-mailed directly to usarmy.rtp.devcom-arl.mbx.baa@army.mil.
or submitted online via Grants.gov, http://Grants.gov. Proposal also must send a copy of the
proposal to cognizant ARI Manager listed in Section II. A.
a. Proposals for contracts (only) may be e-mailed directly to usarmy.rtp.devcom-
arl.mbx.baa@army.mil. Full proposals MUST be emailed to the cognizant ARI
Manager listed in Section II. A. All submissions must include “ARI BAA
W911NF-23-S-0010” in the subject line.
All e-mailed proposals must contain the information outlined in Section II. D. 2
(Section 6- Preparation of Proposals) including all the electronic forms.
37

---

b. All forms requiring signature must be completed, printed, signed, and scanned into a
PDF document. All documents must be combined into a single PDF formatted file to
be attached to the e-mail.
Proposals are to be provided in electronic MS Word or Adobe PDF format. The proposal
must include the complete technical and cost volumes of the proposal. Electronic versions of
the technical and cost volumes must be combined into one electronic file. The proposal must
include the signature of the authorized institutional representative. If the electronic version
does not include a signature from the appropriate representative of the Applicant, the
Government Procurement Contracting Officer must be provided a signed and dated copy
prior to award if selected.
GRANT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT PROPOSAL SUBMISSION: (mandatory submission
portal for grant and cooperative agreement proposals; optional submission portal for contract proposals).
Please e-mail a courtesy copy of proposals to cognizant ARI Manager listed in Section II. A. Grants.gov
registration (see Section 8) must be accomplished prior to application through this process.
(1) Proposals requesting Assistance agreements must be submitted via Grants.gov; proposals
requesting a Contract or OT may be submitted either via Grants.gov or email (instructions
above).
(2) Grants.gov Registration must be accomplished prior to application submission in Grants.gov.
Each organization that desires to submit applications via Grants.Gov must complete a one-time
registration. There are several one-time actions your organization must complete in order to
submit applications through Grants.gov (e.g., obtain a Unique Entity Identifier, register with the
SAM, register with the credential provider, register with Grants.gov and obtain approval for an
authorized organization representative (AOR) to submit applications on behalf of the
organization). To register please see http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organization-
registration.html
Please note the registration process for an Organization or an Individual can take between
three to five business days or as long as four weeks if all steps are not completed in a timely
manner.
Questions relating to the registration process, system requirements, how an application form
works, or the submittal process should be directed to Grants.gov at 1-800-518-4726 or
support@grants.gov.
NOTE: All web links referenced in this section are subject to change by Grants.gov and may not
be updated here.
(3) Specific forms are required for submission of a proposal. The forms are contained in the
Application Package available at http://www.grants.gov under the specific opportunity you
are submitting under. When viewing an opportunity, select the "Package” tab and then select
"View." A Grant Application Package and Application Instructions are available for this BAA
38

---

through the Grants.gov Apply portal under CFDA Number 12.630 or Funding Opportunity
Number W911NF-23-S-0010. To apply, select “Apply” and then “Apply Now Using
Workspace.”
*NOTE: Effective 31 December 2017, applicants must apply online at Grants.gov using the
application Workspace. For access to complete instructions on how to apply for opportunities
using Workspace refer to https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/workspace-
overview.html.
The following documents are mandatory: (1) Application for Federal Assistance (R&R) (SF 424
(R&R)), and (4) Attachments form.
(4) The SF 424 (R&R) form is to be used as the cover page for all proposals submitted via
Grants.gov. The SF 424 (R&R) must be fully completed. AOR usernames and passwords serve
as “electronic signatures” when your organization submits applications through Grants.gov. By
using the SF 424 (R&R), proposers are providing the certification required by 32 CFR Part 28
regarding lobbying (see Section II.F.2.a.ii of this BAA). Block 11, “Descriptive Title of
Applicant’s Project,” must reference the research topic area being addressed in the effort by
identifying the specific paragraph from Section II.A of this BAA.
(5) The Attachments form must contain the documents outlined in Section II.D.2. under Section
6 – Preparation of Proposals”. All documents must be combined into separate and single PDF
formatted files using the Table of Contents names. Include “W911NF-23-S-0010 in the title so
the proposal will be distinguished from other BAA submissions and upload each document to
the mandatory Attachments form.
(6) The applicant must include with its proposal submission the representations required by
Section II.F.2.a.ii of this BAA. The representations must include applicant POC information
and be signed by an authorized representative. Attach the representations document to an
available field within the Attachments form. Note: If the applicant’s online SAM
Representations and Certifications include its response to the representations, a hard copy
representation is not required with proposal submission.
(7) The Grants.gov User Guide at:
https://www.grants.gov/help/html/help/index.htm#t=GetStarted%2FGetStarted.htm will assist
AORs in the application process. Remember that you must open and complete the Application
for Federal Assistance (R&R) (SF 424 (R&R)) first, as this form will automatically populate
data fields in other forms. If you encounter any problems, contact customer support at 1-800-
518-4726 or at support@grants.gov. If you forget your user name or password, follow the
instructions provided in the Credential Provider tutorial. Tutorials may be printed by right-
clicking on the tutorial and selecting “Print”.
(8) As it is possible for Grants.gov to reject the proposal during this process, it is strongly
recommended that proposals be uploaded at least two days before any established deadline in the
BAA so that they will not be received late and be ineligible for award consideration. It is also
recommended to start uploading proposals at least two days before the deadline to plan ahead for
any potential technical and/or input problems involving the applicant’s own equipment.
39

---

3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM):
Each applicant (unless the applicant is an individual or Federal agency that is exempt from
those requirements under 2 CFR 25.110(b) or (c), or has an exception approved by the
agency under 2 CFR 25.110(d)) is required to: (i) Be registered in the System for Award
Management (SAM) https://www.sam.gov prior to submitting its application; (ii) provide a
valid DUNS number in its application; and (iii) continue to maintain an active SAM
registration with current information at all times during which it has an active Federal award
or an application or plan under consideration by an agency. An award will not be made to an
applicant until the applicant has complied with all applicable DUNS (call 1-866-705-5711
toll free or visit http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform) and SAM requirements.
4. Submission Dates and Times:
Proposals will be accepted via the methods noted previously through 11:59 PM Eastern
Daylight Time on 30 April 2028.
It is the Applicant’s responsibility to assure that a proposal submission is received by the
respective date and time specified above. If your proposal submission is not received at the
initial point of entry to the Government (received through web based system, e-mail or post-
marked if applicable) by the exact date and time specified above, it will be determined late
and will not be evaluated. The submission of a courtesy copy of an assistance (non-
contract) proposal to the cognizant ARI Manager listed in Section II. A does not fulfill the
timeliness requirement.
Grants.gov: After a proposal is submitted to Grants.gov, the AOR will receive a series of three
emails from Grants.gov. The first two emails will be received within 24 to 48 hours after
submission. The first email will confirm time of receipt of the proposal by the Grants.gov system
and the second will indicate that the proposal has either been successfully validated by the
system prior to transmission to the grantor agency or has been rejected due to errors. A third
email will be received once the grantor agency has confirmed receipt of the proposal. Reference
the Grants.gov User Guide at
https://www.grants.gov/help/html/help/index.htm#t=GetStarted%2FGetStarted.htm for
information on how to track your application package.
For the purposes of this BAA, an applicant’s proposal is not considered received by ARI until the
AOR receives email #3.
5. Intergovernmental Review:
Not Applicable
6. Funding Restrictions:
40

---

There are no funding restrictions associated with this BAA.
7. Other Submission Requirements:
Information to be Requested from Successful Applicants: Applicants whose proposals are
accepted for funding may be contacted before award to provide additional information
required for award. The required information is normally limited to clarifying budget
explanations, representations, certifications, and some technical aspects.
For Contracts Only- Performance Work Statements (PWS): Prior to award, the Contracting
Officer may request that the contractor submit a PWS for the effort to be performed, which
will be incorporated into the contract at the time of award.
(End of Section)
41

---

E. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION:
1. Criteria: Proposals will initially be evaluated as to whether they constitute basic, applied, or
advanced technology development research.
Basic research is defined as systematic study directed toward greater knowledge or
understanding of the fundamental aspects of phenomena and of observable facts without specific
application of processes or products in mind, whereas applied research provides a systematic
expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop useful strategies, techniques,
methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and specific Army need.
Advanced Technology Development program includes the development of technologies,
components, or prototypes that can be tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments.
Projects in this category have a direct relevance to identified military needs. These projects
should demonstrate the general military utility or cost reduction potential of technology in the
areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention; advanced data analytics and models
applied to talent management; development of higher-order competencies for Soldiers and
Leaders; holistic assessment of unit readiness; and team and unit mission effectiveness. These
projects should be focused on a more direct operational benefit and, if successful, the technology
should be available for transition.
Proposals received in response to this BAA will be evaluated by scientific peers internal, and
possibly external to the Army, using the following criteria. ARI may solicit input on technical
aspects of proposals from non-Government consultants/experts who are strictly bound by non-
disclosure requirements. Criterion (a) is most important; the other criteria are of equal
importance to one another. All evaluation factors/criteria other than cost, when combined, are
significantly more important than cost or price:
(a) Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the
proposed research;
(b) Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission;
(c) Qualifications/Capabilities – Proposed principal investigator and key personnel
qualifications, capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional
resources and facilities;
(d) Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism,
affordability, and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of
evaluation on other factors.
42

---

Review and Selection Process:
(a) All Proposals are treated as privileged information prior to award and the contents are disclosed
to Government employees or designated support contractors only for the purpose of evaluation.
The Applicant must indicate on the appropriate proposal form or in the proposal any limitation to
be placed on disclosure of information contained in the proposal form (ARO Form 52 or 52A)
any limitation to be placed on disclosure of information contained in the proposal to non-
Government evaluators.
(b) All Proposals will be evaluated based on the merit and relevance of the specific R&D proposed
as it relates to the overall ARI research program, rather than against other proposals in the same
general area. Each evaluated proposal will receive a recommendation of “select” or “do not
select” as supported by the evaluation
(c) In accordance with OMB guidance in 200 of Title 2, CFR, it is DoD policy that DoD
Components must report and use integrity and performance information in the Federal Awardee
Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), or any successor system designated by
OMB, concerning Grants, Cooperative Agreements, and TIAs.
2. Recipient Qualification
a. Grant, Cooperative Agreement, and OT Proposals:
i. The Grants Officer is responsible for determining a recipient’s qualification prior to award. In
general, a Grants Officer will award grants or cooperative agreements only to qualified recipients
that meet the standards at 32 CFR 22.415. To be qualified, a potential recipient must:
(1) Have the management capability and adequate financial and technical resources, given those that
would be made available through the grant or cooperative agreement, to execute the program of
activities envisioned under the grant or cooperative agreement;
(2) Have a satisfactory record of executing such programs or activities (if a prior recipient of an
award);
(3) Have a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics; and
(4) Be otherwise qualified and eligible to receive a grant or cooperative agreement under applicable
laws and regulations.
Applicants are requested to provide information with proposal submissions to assist the Grants
Officer’s evaluation of recipient qualification.
Applicants are requested to provide information with proposal submissions to assist the Grants
Officer’s evaluation of recipient qualification.
ii. In accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance in parts 180 and
43

---

200 of Title 2, CFR, it is DoD policy that DoD Components must report and use integrity
and performance information in the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity
Information System (FAPIIS), or any successor system designated by OMB, concerning
grants, cooperative agreements, and OTs for research as follows:
If the total Federal share will be greater than the simplified acquisition threshold on any Federal
award under a notice of funding opportunity (see 2 CFR 200.88 Simplified Acquisition
Threshold):

The Federal awarding agency, prior to making a Federal award with a total amount of

Federal share greater than the simplified acquisition threshold, will review and consider any
information about the applicant that is in the designated integrity and performance system
accessible through SAM (formerly FAPIIS) (see 41 U.S.C. 2313);

An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and

performance systems accessible through SAM and comment on any information about itself
that a Federal awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated integrity
and performance system accessible through SAM;

The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in

addition to the other information in the designated integrity and performance system, in
making a judgment about the applicant's integrity, business ethics, and record of performance
under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in
2 CFR 200.205 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants.
b. Contract Proposals:
i. Contracts shall be awarded to responsible prospective contractors only. See FAR 9.104-1
for a listing of the general standards against which an applicant will be assessed to determine
responsibility.
Applicants are requested to provide information with proposal submission to assist the
Contracting Officer’s evaluation of responsibility.
ii. FAPIIS will be checked prior to making an award. The web address is: https://cpars.gov.
The applicant representing the entity may comment in this system on any information about
the entity that a federal government official entered. The information in FAPIIS will be
used in making a judgment about the entity’s integrity, business ethics, and record of
performance under Federal awards that may affect the official’s determination that the
applicant is qualified to receive an award.
(End of Section)
44

---

F. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION:
1. Award Notices:
An Applicant whose proposal is recommended for award will be contacted by a
Government Contract/Grant Specialist to discuss any additional information required for
award. Additional information required may include representations and certifications,
revised budgets or budget explanations, certificate of current cost or pricing data,
subcontracting plan for small businesses, and other information as applicable to the
proposed award. The anticipated award start date will be determined at this time. The
appropriate award document, when signed by the Government Contracting/Grants
Officer, is the authorizing award document.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements:
a. Required Representations and Certifications:
i. Contract Proposals:
(1) Representations and certifications shall be completed by successful applicants prior to award.
FAR Online Representations and Certifications are to be completed through SAM at
https://www.SAM.gov. As appropriate, DFARS and contract-specific certification packages will
be provided to the contractor for completion prior to award to include, but not limited the
following contractual requirements:
(2) FAR 52.203-18, PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES THAT
REQUIRE CERTAIN CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS OR STATEMENTS—
REPRESENTATION (JAN 2017)
(a) Definition. As used in this provision--
“Internal confidentiality agreement or statement”, “subcontract”, and “subcontractor”, are
defined in the clause at 52.203-19, Prohibition on Requiring Certain Internal
Confidentiality Agreements or Statements.
(b) In accordance with section 743 of Division E, Title VII, of the Consolidated and
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L. 113-235) and its successor
45

---

provisions in subsequent appropriations acts (and as extended in continuing resolutions),
Government agencies are not permitted to use funds appropriated (or otherwise made
available) for contracts with an entity that requires employees or subcontractors of such
entity seeking to report waste, fraud, or abuse to sign internal confidentiality agreements
or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting such employees or subcontractors from
lawfully reporting such waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated investigative or law
enforcement representative of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive such
information.
(c) The prohibition in paragraph (b) of this provision does not contravene requirements
applicable to SF 312, (Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement), Form 4414
(Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement), or any other form
issued by a Federal department or agency governing the nondisclosure of classified
information.
(d) Representation. By submission of its offer, the applicant represents that it will not
require its employees or subcontractors to sign or comply with internal confidentiality
agreements or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting such employees or
subcontractors from lawfully reporting waste, fraud, or abuse related to the performance
of a Government contract to a designated investigative or law enforcement representative
of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive such information (e.g., agency
Office of the Inspector General).
(3) FAR 52.204-26, COVERED TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT OR SERVICES-
REPRESENTATION (OCT 2020)
a) Definitions. As used in this provision, "covered telecommunications equipment or
services" and "reasonable inquiry" have the meaning provided in the clause 52.204-25,
Prohibition on Contracting for Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance
Services or Equipment.
(b) Procedures. The Offeror shall review the list of excluded parties in the System for
Award Management (SAM) ( https://www.sam.gov) for entities excluded from
receiving federal awards for "covered telecommunications equipment or services".
(c)(1) Representation. The Offeror represents that it [ ] does, [ ] does not provide covered
telecommunications equipment or services as a part of its offered products or services to the
Government in the performance of any contract, subcontract, or other contractual instrument.
(2) After conducting a reasonable inquiry for purposes of this representation, the offeror
represents that it [ ] does, [ ] does not use covered telecommunications equipment or
services, or any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunications
equipment or services.
(4) FAR 52.209-11, REPRESENTATION BY CORPORATIONS REGARDING
DELINQUENT TAX LIABILITY OR A FELONY CONVICTION UNDER FEDERAL
LAW (FEB 2016)
46

---

As required by sections 744 and 745 of Division E of the Consolidated and Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L 113-235), and similar provisions, if
contained in subsequent appropriations acts, the Government will not enter into a contract
with any corporation that--
Has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial
and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not
being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority
responsible for collecting the tax liability, where the awarding agency is aware of
the unpaid tax liability, unless an agency has considered suspension or debarment
of the corporation and made a determination that suspension or debarment is not
necessary to protect the interests of the Government; or
Was convicted of a felony criminal violation under any Federal law within the
preceding 24 months, where the awarding agency is aware of the conviction,
unless an agency has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and
made a determination that this action is not necessary to protect the interests of
the Government.
The applicant represents that—
It is [ ] is not [ ] a corporation that has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been
assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have
lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the
authority responsible for collecting the tax liability; and
It is [ ] is not [ ] a corporation that was convicted of a felony criminal violation under a
Federal law within the preceding 24 months.
ii. Grant and Cooperative Agreement Proposals:
(1) Grant awards greater than $100,000.00 require a certification of compliance with a national
policy mandate concerning lobbying. Statutes and Government-wide regulations require the
certification to be submitted prior to award. When submitting your grant through Grants.gov, by
completing blocks 18 and 19 of the SF 424 (R&R) Form, the grant applicant is providing the
certification on lobbying required by 32 CFR Part 28; otherwise a copy signed by the AOR must
be provided. Below is the required certification:
CERTIFICATION AT APPENDIX A TO 32 CFR PART 28 REGARDING
LOBBYING: Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans, and Cooperative Agreements the
undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that:
(1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf
of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an
officer or employee of an agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee
of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the
awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of
47

---

any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the
extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal
contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
(2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be
paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or
employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of
Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this
Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall
complete and submit SF-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in
accordance with its instructions.
(3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be
included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including
subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative
agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.
This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed
when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a
prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by 31 U.S.C. 1352. Any
person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not
less than $10,000.00 and not more than $100,000.00 for each such failure.
(2) In accordance with Continuing Appropriations Act, 2017 (Pub. L. 114-223), or any other Act
that extends to fiscal year (FY) 2023 funds the same prohibitions as contained in section 743,
division E, title VII, of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Pub. L. 114-113), none of
the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by that or any other Act may be made
available for a grant or cooperative agreement with an entity that requires its employees or
contractors seeking to report fraud, waste, or abuse to sign internal confidentiality agreements or
statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting those employees or contractors from lawfully
reporting that waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated investigative or law enforcement
representative of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive the information.
PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES THAT REQUIRED CERTAIN
INTERNAL CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS – REPRESENTATION
Agreement with the representation below will be affirmed by checking the “I
agree” box in block 17 of the SF424 (R&R) as part of the electronic proposal
submitted via Grants.gov. The representation reads as follows:
By submission of its proposal or application, the applicant represents that it does
not require any of its employees, contractors, or subrecipients seeking to report
fraud, waste, or abuse to sign or comply with internal confidentiality agreements
or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting those employees, contractors,
subrecipients from lawfully reporting that waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated
investigative or law enforcement representative of a Federal department or agency
authorized to receive such information.
48

---

*Note that: Section 743 states that it does not contravene requirements applicable
to SF 312, Form 4414, or any other form issued by a Federal department or
agency governing the nondisclosure of classified information.
(3) Recipients are required to submit the following representation with the application package
IAW the instructions at Section D of this BAA:
REPRESENTATIONS UNDER DOD ASSISTANCE AGREEMENTS:
APPROPRIATIONS PROVISIONS ON TAX DELINQUENCY AND FELONY
CONVICTIONS
The applicant is ( ) is not ( ) a “Corporation” meaning any entity, including any
institution of higher education, other nonprofit organization, or for-profit entity
that has filed articles of incorporation.
If the applicant is a “Corporation” please complete the following representations:
(a) The applicant represents that it is ( ) is not ( ) a corporation that has any unpaid
Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial and
administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being
paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible
for collecting the tax liability.
(b) The applicant represents that it is ( ) is not ( ) is not a corporation that was
convicted of a criminal violation under any Federal law within the preceding 24
months.
NOTE: If an applicant responds in the affirmative to either of the above
representations, the applicant is ineligible to receive an award unless the agency
suspension and debarment official (SDO) has considered suspension or debarment
and determined that further action is not required to protect the Government’s
interests. The applicant therefore should provide information about its tax liability
or conviction to the agency’s SDO as soon as it can do so, to facilitate completion
of the required considerations before award decisions are made.
PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING WITH ENTITIES USING CERTAIN
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND VIDEO SURVEILLANCE SERVICES OR EQUIPMENT
Section 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
Year (FY) 2019 (Public Law 115-232) prohibits the head of an executive
agency from obligating or expending loan or grant funds to procure or obtain,
extend, or renew a contract to procure or obtain, or enter into a contract (or
extend or 105 renew a contract) to procure or obtain the equipment, services, or
systems prohibited systems as identified in section 889 of the NDAA for FY
2019. For more information on how this applies to all grant recipients and sub-
recipients after August 13, 2020, please see DoD Research General Terms and
49

---

Conditions (SEP 2021) NP Article IV. Other national policy requirements,
paragraph 18.
b. Policy Requirements:
The following list provides notable national policy requirements that may be applicable to an
award. NOTE: The following is not an all-inclusive list of policy requirements. For assistance
awards, refer to the DoD Research and Development General Terms and Conditions at
http://www.onr.navy.mil/Contracts-Grants/submit-proposal/grants-proposal/grants-
termsconditions.aspx for additional national policy requirements that may apply. For contract
awards, appropriate Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and/or Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS) clauses will be added to award documents.
i. PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS
(1) For Assistance Instruments:
(a) The recipient must protect the rights and welfare of individuals who participate as human
subjects in research under this award and comply fully with the requirements at 32 CFR part
219, Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 3216.02, 10 U.S.C. 980, the National Policy
Requirements Concerning Live Organisms Terms and Conditions (Section A.1., Human
Subjects, at 81 Federal Register 78380, Appendix C to Part 1122), and when applicable, Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) policies and regulations.
(b) The recipient must not begin performance of research involving human subjects, also
known as human subjects research (HSR), that is covered under 32 CFR part 219, or that meets
exemption criteria under 32 CFR 219.104(d), or expend funding on such effort, until the
recipient receives a formal notification of approval from the cognizant DoD Human Research
Protection Official (HRPO). Approval to perform HSR under this award is received after the
HRPO has performed a review of the recipient’s documentation of planned HSR activities and
has officially furnished a concurrence with the recipient’s determination as presented in the
documentation.
(c) In order for the HRPO to accomplish this concurrence review, the recipient must provide
sufficient documentation to enable his or her assessment as follows:
(i) If the HSR meets one or more exemption criteria under 32 CFR 219.104(d), the
documentation must include a citation of the exemption category/ies under 32 CFR 219.104(d)
and a rationale statement.
(ii) If the recipient’s activity is determined as “non-exempt research involving human subjects,”
the documentation must include:
 Documentation of Assurance of Compliance (a written assurance that an
institution will comply with requirements of 32 CFR Part 219, as well as the
terms of the assurance) appropriate for the scope of work or program plan; and
50

---

[Document continues — 23 more pages]

---

IMAP Q&A

IMAP Questions
1. What performance criteria are available to us to establish evidence of predictive validity?
a. The o(cid:431)eror should propose performance criteria that will meet project objectives in
line with their design.
2. Given the cognitive nature of the information management competency, what amount of
discriminant validity evidence do you expect to see with other cognitive measures?
a. Some evidence of discriminant and convergent validity should be present but
should not be given precedence over evidence of predictive validity. The o(cid:431)eror
should take other design factors into account like time required to complete the
assessments when planning the strategy to obtain evidence of validity.
3. Is there a platform besides MARS that might be available to host more technologically
involved measures (e.g., game-based assessments)?
a. Currently, assessments that are technologically involved are planned to be hosted
on MARS.
4. Should we be focusing on the overall competency for the assessment or on lower-level
KSAOs? Both? If the KSAO level, are there particular ones you are more interested in than
others for each construct?
a. The o(cid:431)eror should ensure coverage of the competencies and KSAs under each
competency to the extent feasible.
5. Can you anticipate how much time will be given for soldiers to take each assessment, either
individually or in concert with other assessments (e.g., convergent measures)?
a. There are generally no limits on how long Soldier participation can be requested, but
as the time requested for participation increases, the likelihood of the request being
supported decreases.
6. We were unable to locate the following report: Dickson, J. N. (2025). Data Governance and
Information Management to Improve Operational E(cid:431)ectiveness (Report No. FA8075-23-
F0030). Booz Allen Hamilton. Would it be possible to receive a PDF copy?
a. The in-text citation “Dickinson” was a misspelling. The author’s last name is spelled
the way it is in the References section, “Dickson.”
7. You noted a preference for SJTs or simulated task performance over self-report inventories.
Given the logistical constraints outlined on page 4 of the solicitation, what level of fidelity and
technological sophistication is expected or acceptable for the assessment platform?
a. At least moderate fidelity is expected. Measures may involve a computer or be paper-
and-pencil based.
1

---

8. Page 4 of the solicitation references the involvement of the Soldier population. Will
participant recruitment, data collection (e.g., proctoring, scheduling), and data sharing be
coordinated by your team, or will this be the responsibility of the performer? If the latter,
would the use of a general population sample (e.g., crowdsourced participants) be
acceptable for preliminary validation e(cid:431)orts?
a. ARI will work with the o(cid:431)eror to recruit Soldiers and collect data. The o(cid:431)eror will be
expected to travel for data collections. If o(cid:431)eror systems are not approved to hold
Army data, the o(cid:431)eror will need to obtain CACs and government-furnished
equipment to get access to Army systems. Data collection needs to be with U.S. Army
Soldiers, not a general population sample.
9. You also mention expert reviews on page 4 of the solicitation. Will Government-provided
SMEs be available for this, or should we plan to identify and engage our own subject matter
experts?
a. The o(cid:431)eror should identify who they would like to conduct the review and request
government assistance if needed to secure government/military SMEs.
10. Page 4 of the solicitation notes that evidence of criterion-related validity will be needed. If
Soldiers are used as participants, would we be able to access performance criteria in a
predictive or concurrent fashion? Alternatively, if we use a general population sample, would
validation via performance tasks or self-reported outcomes (e.g., GPA) be acceptable?
a. The o(cid:431)eror should propose performance criteria that will meet project objectives in
line with their design. Army concurrent or predictive performance criteria may be
available for us through an archival source or via data collection.
11. Is this e(cid:431)ort being managed out of Ft. Belvoir or Ft. Moore? Are any security clearances or
specific contractor facility requirements anticipated?
a. Ft. Belvoir. If o(cid:431)eror systems are not approved to hold Army data, the o(cid:431)eror will need
to obtain CACs and GFE to get access to Army systems.
2

---

13. Can you please confirm that this e(cid:431)ort is currently funded? We noticed a significant decrease
in funding for the option period—should we interpret this to mean that most of the IMAP
development and validation is expected in Year 1, with Year 2 focused on refinement or
sustainment?
a. Contracts are not funded until the funding is obligated at the time of award. The CTR’s
proposal should align with the total period of performance and the planned fiscal
distribution to accomplish the project’s goals.
14. What is the anticipated start date or fiscal year for project initiation—FY25 or FY26?
a. FY26
15. Will o(cid:431)erors be expected to come to the table with an existing contract vehicle, or is there a
preferred vehicle (e.g., GSA, IAC MAC) that will be used for this e(cid:431)ort?
a. No, the o(cid:431)eror is not expected to come to the table with an existing contract vehicle.
The government does not have a preferred vehicle.
3

---

IMAP Sources Sought Notice

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.d: ASSESSING AND DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGICAL FLUENCY FOR THE
FUTURE FORCE
“Information Management Assessment for Personnel (IMAP)”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.d: ASSESSING AND DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGICAL FLUENCY FOR THE
FUTURE FORCE. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
(ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph
6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and
applied research and that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or
hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is
considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of
Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments.
Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding
constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White
Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI
may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, megan.a.deluca.civ@army.mil, and
copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC), nina.j.rothstein.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal”.
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically in order to be eligible to
submit a formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

electronically no later than 3 July 2025, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for
additional details. BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract,
grant, cooperative agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the
Government is to award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of seven parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Megan Deluca, (919) 541-4682, megan.a.deluca.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Nina Rothstein, (703) 383-4874,
nina.j.rothstein.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
2

---

This Sources Sought Notice specifically addresses the following research area:
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Information Management Assessment for Personnel (IMAP)
The modern operational environment is characterized by an unprecedented volume of information.
Soldiers are constantly bombarded with data from diverse sources, ranging from traditional intelligence
reports to social media feeds and sensor networks. The ability to effectively acquire, organize, and
evaluate this information is a critical requirement for achieving mission success (Endsley & Jones, 1997).
In this environment, information is a key weapon (Endsley & Jones, 1997), and the ability to manage
information is critical. The U.S. Army must transform its personnel to be more effective and make better
decisions in the Information Age (General McConville, as cited in Fogarty & Sparling, 2020). This means
a force equipped with the ability to utilize technology and to seek out new information sources, critically
evaluate and prioritize information, and exploit novel opportunities (Turulja & Bajgorić, 2016). To
achieve that transformation, the development of assessments and training must be at the forefront.
The increasing pace of technological advancement further exacerbates this challenge. As new
technologies emerge, Soldiers must rapidly adapt their information management skills to leverage these
tools effectively. This requires not only technical proficiency but also a deep understanding of
information principles, analytical techniques, and the ability to discern truth from falsehood in a complex
and contested information landscape. Failure to develop these competencies can lead to information
overload, cognitive biases, flawed decision-making, and ultimately, strategic disadvantage (Teska & Pac,
2020). A key factor in this process is that as the number of sources and volume of information increase,
the ability to adapt to novel situations decreases (Endsley & Jones, 1997).
To address this challenge, the U.S. Army Research Institute (ARI) is seeking innovative solutions to
assess Soldiers’ information management capabilities. This Sources Sought Notice focuses on the
Information Management Assessment for Personnel (IMAP), which aims to develop a reliable and valid
instrument for measuring key information management competencies within the Technological Fluency
(TF) model previously developed by ARI. The assessment will be used to inform Soldier selection,
assignment, and training decisions and contribute to the development of an effective and resilient Force
capable of navigating the complexities of the modern information environment.
This project adopts an approach recognizing that effective information management requires integration
of individual skills. These processes include:
• Information Acquisition: the ability to gather information from various sources; identifying
information that is useful and pertinent to fill knowledge gaps.
• Information Organization: the ability to structure and categorize information in a way that
facilitates efficient retrieval, analysis, and sharing.
• Information Evaluation: the ability to evaluate the reliability of information as well as the sources
of information; using information to conduct analyses, identify patterns, and draw inferences.
• Requested Input and Characteristics of a Successful White Paper:
To meet the research objectives under this request:
1. The Offeror shall describe the methods that they will use to answer the following questions:
a. What content should be included in the measure?
b. What type of framework should be used for the IMAP (e.g., cognitive, personality-based,
domain-specific, and information-focused)?
3

---

c. What method of assessment (e.g., Situational Judgment Test (SJT) involving information
management scenarios, simulated task performance within information systems) should
be used and whether or not it should be computerized, considering factors such as
feasibility, reliability, validity, and relevance to real-world information management
tasks? (Note that self-report inventory approaches are not preferred.)
A successful White Paper will:
a. Be designed and scalable for use in specialty occupations and General Purpose Forces.
b. Apply to multiple MOSs.
c. Apply to deployment and garrison settings.
d. Consider novel hardware and software technologies in the FOE.
e. Be informed by existing military-oriented information management research efforts (e.g.,
Dickinson, 2025) in scoping project tasks.
2. The Offeror shall describe the method that they will use to develop the IMAP including:
a. Specific strategies for identifying and incorporating relevant technological contexts and
tools.
b. Techniques for eliciting and evaluating construct-relevant responses within the chosen
technological environment.
c. A validation plan that will work within the confines of data collection with a Soldier
population.
d. A plan for iteratively refining the measure based on pilot testing and feedback.
A successful White Paper will:
a. Describe how the items will be refined to improve reliability and validity, including plans
for statistical analysis and expert review.
b. Outline the method used to develop a product that is scalable to General Purpose Forces,
considering factors such as administration time, resource requirements, and ease of
interpretation.
c. Describe a plan for validation of the measure to include:
 Evidence of discriminant validity, demonstrating that the measure is distinct from
other unrelated constructs.
 Evidence of predictive validity, demonstrating the ability of the measure to
predict future job performance or other relevant outcomes (e.g., success in
training programs).
The award will be a 24-month period of performance (Base, 12 months, not to exceed $450,000;
Option 1, 12 months, not to exceed $150,000) with a total budget not to exceed $600,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
4

---

Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPERS:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software
contained in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted
rights respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have
unlimited rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records
or data bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper, but must be clearly
marked. It is the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information
before the award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated
5

---

support contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or
critical information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
megan.a.deluca.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC), Dr. Nina Rothstein,
nina.j.rothstein.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite “ARI
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Information Management Assessment for Personnel (IMAP)” in the e-
mail subject line.
III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
A White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and also institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
6

---

Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Information
Management Assessment for Personnel (IMAP)” by e-mail no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight
Time on 3 July 2025. Any extension to the White Paper submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov
and Grants.gov as an amendment to this Notice. Note that a White Paper received within the deadline will
be evaluated to be determined if a proposal request will be issued.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered in the course of submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Megan Deluca, (919) 541-4682, megan.a.deluca.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. Nina Rothstein, (703) 383-4874,
nina.j.rothstein.civ@army.mil.
7

---

VII. REFERENCES:
Castillo-de-León, M. A., Méndez-Hinojosa, L. M., & Cárdenas-Rodríguez, M. (2024). Development and
psychometric validation of an information competency assessment: The information
management brief scale. European Journal of Educational Research, 13(2), 619-630.
https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.13.2.619
Dickson, J. N. (2025). Data Governance and Information Management to Improve Operational
Effectiveness (Report No. FA8075-23-F0030). Booz Allen Hamilton.
Endsley, M. R., & Jones, W. M. (1997). Situation awareness information dominance & information
warfare. (Report No. AL/CF-TR-1997-0156). U.S. Air Force Armstrong Laboratory, Human
Engineering Division.
Fogarty, S. G., & Sparling, B. N. (2020). Enabling the Army in an era of information warfare. The
Cyber Defense Review, 5(2), 17-25.
Gordon, S. R., & Tarafdar, M. (2007). How do a company’s information technology competences
influence its ability to innovate? Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 20(3), 271-290.
https://doi.org/10.1108/17410390710740736
Irwin, D., & Mandel, D. R. (Forthcoming). Improving information evaluation for intelligence production.
Intelligence and National Security.
Libicki, M. C. (1995). What is information warfare? Institute for National Strategic Studies, National
Defense University.
Teska, J., & Pac, B. (2020). The engineering of information warfare management. A system-process
approach. Internal Security, 12(2), 7-40. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0053.4195
Turulja, L., & Bajgorić, N. (2016). Innovation and information technology capability as antecedents of
firms’ success. Economic and Business Review, 14(2), 149-160.
https://doi.org/10.7906/indecs.14.2.4
8

---

Notice Organizational and Contextual Factors Source of Sought

W911NF-23-S-0010
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE
REQUEST FOR WHITE PAPERS
BAA TOPIC II A.2.d: ASSESSING AND DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGICAL FLUENCY FOR THE
FUTURE FORCE
“Impacts of Organizational and Contextual Factors on Technological Fluency: Model Expansion”
INTRODUCTION
Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W911NF-23-S-0010 was publicized on SAM.gov and Grants.gov
on 01 May 2023. This Sources Sought Notice calls for White Paper submissions in reference to the BAA
Topic II A.2.d: ASSESSING AND DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGICAL FLUENCY FOR THE
FUTURE FORCE. The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
(ARI) Broad Agency announcement W911NF-23-S-0010, issued under the provisions of paragraph
6.102(d)(2) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, provides for the competitive selection of basic and
applied research and that part of development not related to the development of a specific system or
hardware procurement. A Proposal submitted in response to this BAA and selected for award is
considered to be the result of full and open competition and in full compliance with the provisions of
Public Law 98-369, “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984," and subsequent amendments.
Funding of research and development (R&D) within ARI areas of interest will be determined by funding
constraints and priorities set during each budget cycle. Any award related to the submission of a White
Paper and subsequent Proposal requested by this Notice is subject to funds availability and priorities. ARI
may choose not to select any new award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
The sequence of steps leading to an award is:
1) Request for White Paper initiated by ARI through this Sources Sought Notice.
2) Submission of a timely White Paper no more than six pages in length (one page is the cover
page) to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command, megan.a.deluca.civ@army.mil, and
copy furnish (CC) the ARI Technical Point of Contact (TPOC), Dr. David Martinez,
david.martinez689.civ@army.mil.
3) The ARI will provide written or telephonic feedback for whitepapers submitted and will provide a
response with either “encouraged to submit a proposal” or “not encouraged to submit a proposal.”
as per established criteria presented in Part III.
4) If the White Paper merits it, a request of a formal proposal initiated by ARI.
5) Submission of a timely, formal proposal.
6) Evaluation of the formal proposal as per established criteria presented in Part III.
7) Award for selected proposal based on availability of funds or other factors.
This sequence allows earliest determination of the potential for funding and minimizes the labor and cost
associated with submission of a full proposal that has minimal probability of being selected for funding.
1
Ver. 20DEC2016

---

Note that an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically to be eligible to submit a
formal proposal under this Notice. This Notice requires that a White Paper be submitted electronically no
later than 3 July 2025, 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. See Part V, Deadlines, for additional details.
BAA W911NF-23-S-0010 allows several potential instrument types (e.g., contract, grant, cooperative
agreement) to result from a successful proposal. For this Notice, the intention of the Government is to
award a contract.
THOSE SUBMITTING A WHITE PAPER/PROPOSAL ARE CAUTIONED THAT ONLY A
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING OR GRANTS OFFICER CAN OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT
THROUGH AWARD OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT INVOLVING EXPENDITURE OF
GOVERNMENT FUNDS.
This Sources Sought Notice for a Requested White Paper consists of eight parts as follows:
• Part I: Research and Development Interests of the Requested White Paper
• Part II: Preparation and Submission
• Part III: Evaluation Criteria
• Part IV: Feedback
• Part V: Deadlines
• Part VI: Inquiries
• Part VII: References
• Part VIII: Appendix
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact:
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Megan Deluca, (919) 541-4682, megan.a.deluca.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact:
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. David Martinez, (571) 373-0076,
david.martinez689.civ@army.mil.
I. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS OF THE REQUESTED WHITE PAPER:
The United States Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences is the Army’s lead
agency for the conduct of research, development, and analyses for Army readiness and performance via
research advances and applications of the behavioral and social sciences that address personnel,
organization, training, and leader development issues. ARI contracts with educational institutions, non-
profit organizations, and private industry for research and development (R&D) in different areas,
including the areas specifically identified in Section II - A W911NF-23-S-0010. Efforts funded under this
White Paper request will only include Applied Research and/or Advanced Technology Development.
2

---

Applied Research provides a systematic expansion and application of knowledge to design and develop
useful strategies, techniques, methods, tests, or measures that provide the means to meet a recognized and
specific Army need. Applied Research precedes system specific technology investigations or
development, but it should have a high potential to transition into the Advanced Technology
Development (ATD) Program.
The ARI ATD Program includes the development of technologies, components, or prototypes that can be
tested in field experiments and/or simulated environments. Projects in this category have a direct
relevance to identified military needs. These projects should demonstrate the general military utility or
cost reduction potential of technology in the areas of personnel selection, assignment, and retention;
training strategies and techniques; leader education and development; performance measurement; and
team and inter-organizational mission effectiveness. These projects should be focused on a more direct
operational benefit and if successful, the technology should be available for transition.
WHITE PAPER TOPIC: Impacts of Organizational and Contextual Factors on Technological Fluency:
Model Expansion
To maintain dominance in the Future Operational Environment, the Army needs to rapidly field emerging
technologies and ensure its people can adopt and adapt these technologies faster than its adversaries
(Department of the Army, 2019; Driscoll & George, 2025). Ongoing work at the U.S. Army Research
Institute (ARI) is identifying the competencies and knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) Soldiers need
to be technologically fluent (TF), or able to quickly and creatively use, synthesize, and adapt emerging
technologies. However, individuals are situated within organizations, departments, units, and teams. The
Army needs to understand the meso and macro organizational and contextual factors that affect TF. To
that end, ARI wishes to expand the current TF model (see the Appendix) by incorporating meso and
macro organizational and contextual factors that interact with TF attributes to produce TF behaviors. The
expanded model will be used to guide future research on TF assessment and training.
A variety of organizational and contextual factors can inhibit or promote behaviors and performance in
organizations generally and through interactions with individual factors. Examples of organizational
factors that can affect performance include the communication values; offering of training, incentives,
and resources; and recruitment of individuals who display valued behaviors (de Jong & Hartog, 2007;
Kristof-Brown et al., 2022; Laufer et al., 2024; Meredith et al., 2017; Oh et al., 2018). Contextual factors,
such as job complexity and supervisory style, can also impact behaviors (Oldham & Cummings, 1996).
Importantly, organizational and contextual factors can interact with individual characteristics, such that
one individual might be motivated by or resilient to an external factor, while another individual is not
(Tett et al., 2021).
Within the Army, the interplay of organizational, contextual, and individual factors likely influence
technological fluency. For instance, Army leadership is currently encouraging creativity (Beagle, 2023),
providing training to develop creative thinking and problem solving (Upton et al., 2024), and supplying
the means to pursue innovative solutions (e.g., Hirschi, et al., 2020; South, 2024). Whether or not
individuals are able to avail themselves of these opportunities will depend on whether they are made
aware of available resources, motivated, capable, and supported by their immediate supervisors.
Many other individual, overlapping, or interacting organizational and contextual factors may impact TF
or specific KSAs. By identifying and modeling the organizational and contextual factors that impact TF
KSAs, this effort will inform what and how a variety of factors influence TF predictors and outcomes in
the Army and inform future research, training, and policy recommendations.
3

---

Objectives
The overarching objective of this effort is to expand the current TF model by incorporating meso and
macro organizational and contextual factors that interact with KSAs and affect the expression of TF. The
expanded model will be used to guide future research on TF assessment and training.
In order to accomplish this objective, the offeror shall:
1) Complete a literature review to identify macro and meso organizational and contextual factors
that are likely to impact technological fluency performance and behaviors in U.S. Army Soldiers.
2) Collect data from Soldiers to inform this expansion of the current technological fluency model.
3) Synthesize results.
4) Present findings and, based on the model, recommendations to support technological fluency
assessment and training in the Army.
In addition to adhering to the instructions provided in Part II (below), a successful white paper will:
1) Include a budget for travel.
2) Consider the existing ARI technological fluency competency model.
3) Consider garrison, training, and combat organizational and contextual factors.
4) Consider the impact this work will have on assessment and training of TF KSAs.
The award will be a 12-month period of performance with a budget not to exceed $350,000.
The Army Contracting Command- Aberdeen Proving Ground, RTP Division has the authority to award a
variety of instruments, to include contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements. The ACC (APG) RTP
Division reserves the right to use the type of instrument most appropriate for the effort proposed
(contract, cooperative, or grant).
II. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF A WHITE PAPER:
Preparation of White Paper
A White Paper should focus on describing details of the proposed research for both the base and if
applicable, option (s) approach, including how it is innovative and how it could substantially advance the
state of the science. Army relevance and potential impact should also be described, as well as an estimate
of total cost for both the base and option approach. White Papers should present the effort in sufficient
detail to allow evaluation of the concept's technical merit and its potential contributions to the Army
mission.
A White Paper must be limited to six (6) pages (page one is the cover page) and an addendum in
which the Applicant must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key
personnel (i.e., Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the
research, highlighting their qualifications and experience as discussed below. All files and forms
4

---

must be compiled into a single PDF file or MS Word document before submitting. Reviewers will
be advised that they are only to review the cover page and up to five pages plus the addendum. Any
pages submitted in excess of the six (6) page limit will not be reviewed or evaluated.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION FOR A WHITE PAPER:
1. Technical Approach: A detailed discussion of the effort's scientific research objectives, approach,
relationship to similar research, level of effort, and estimated total cost; include the nature and
extent of the anticipated results, and if known, the manner in which the work will contribute to
the accomplishment of the Army's mission related to this request and how this would be
demonstrated.
2. Requests for Government Support: The type of support, if any that the Applicant requests of the
Government (such as facilities, equipment, demonstration sites, test ranges, software, personnel
or materials) shall be identified as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE), Government
Furnished Information (GFI), Government Furnished Property (GFP), or Government Furnished
Data (GFD). The Applicant shall indicate any Government coordination that may be required for
obtaining equipment or facilities necessary to perform any simulations or exercises that would
demonstrate the proposed capability.
3. The cost portion of the whitepaper shall contain a brief cost estimate including research hours,
burden, material costs, travel, etc.
4. Key Personnel Biographical Information: As an addendum to the White Paper, the Applicant
must include a biographical sketch (up to 300 words per individual) of all key personnel (i.e.,
Principal Investigators and Co-Principal Investigators) who will perform the research,
highlighting their qualifications and experience.
RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS ON WHITE PAPERS:
1. The Applicant must identify any proprietary data the Applicant intends to be used only by the
Government. The Applicant must also identify any technical data or computer software contained
in the White Paper that is to be treated by the Government as limited rights or restricted rights
respectively. In the absence of such identification, the Government will assume to have unlimited
rights to all technical data or computer software presented in the White Paper. Records or data
bearing a restrictive legend may be included in the White Paper but must be clearly marked. It is
the intent of the Army to treat all White Papers as procurement sensitive information before the
award and to disclose their contents only to Government employees or designated support
contractors for the purpose of procurement related activities only. Classified, sensitive, or critical
information on technologies should not be included in a White Paper.
2. An Applicant is cautioned that portions of White Papers may be subject to release under terms of
the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended.
Submission of White Paper
White Papers must be submitted by e-mail to the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting Command,
megan.a.deluca.civ@army.mil, and cc’d to the ARI Point of Contact (POC), Dr. David Martinez,
david.martinez689.civ@army.mil, in electronic MS Word document format or PDF file format. Cite
“ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Impacts of Organizational and Contextual Factors on
Technological Fluency: Model Expansion” in the e-mail subject line.
5

---

III. EVALUATION CRITERIA:
White Papers and full Proposals received in response to this request will be evaluated by the ARI
designated point of contact identified in this request using the following factors/criteria:
1. Scientific and Technical Merit- The overall scientific and/or technical merits of the proposed
research.
2. Potential Contribution- The potential contributions to ARI’s mission.
3. Qualifications/Capabilities- Proposed principal investigator and key personnel qualifications,
capabilities, related experience, and techniques and institutional resources and facilities.
4. Cost- Addresses the level of support requested. Will be considered for realism, affordability,
and appropriateness, and may be grounds for rejection independent of evaluation on other factors.
The request for a proposal will be made based on the overall evaluation of a White Paper using the four
criteria listed above. The overall scientific and/or technical merit of the proposed approach will be
weighted more strongly than all of the other non-cost factors combined. All evaluation factors/criteria
other than cost, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. A request for
proposal may not necessarily be made to the lowest proposed price. During the evaluation of White
Papers, ARI’s POC for technical matters may request a telecon with an Applicant, but telecons are not
guaranteed nor required for competition and award purposes. ARI’s POC for technical matters reserves
the right to evaluate a White Paper and request a proposal without discussions. The Applicant’s initial
submission should contain the Applicant’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. Once a full
proposal has been requested, all communications must go through the POC for the U.S. Army
Contracting Command.
If the White Paper evaluation results in the request and submission of a full proposal, the proposal will be
evaluated by a panel of scientific peers using the same factors/criteria as those listed above under
Evaluation Criteria. A request for a full proposal does not guarantee an award. The decision to award will
be based on feedback from the panel, considerations presented by ARI’s POC for technical matters
identified in this document, and other factors like budgetary constraints. ARI may choose not to select any
award due to unavailability of funds or other factors.
IV. FEEDBACK:
Written or telephonic feedback will be provided to the Applicant regarding the White Paper’s scientific
merit and potential contributions to the ARI’s mission. If the Government decides to request a full
proposal, a written request will be sent to the Applicant. The Written Request will, at a minimum, invite a
full proposal. The request may also include feedback intended to improve the proposal’s potential for
award.
V. DEADLINES:
Electronic versions of the White Paper must be received by the POC for the U.S. Army Contracting
Command and the ARI POC, with e-mail subject line “ARI BAA W911NF-23-S-0010, Impacts of
Organizational and Contextual Factors on Technological Fluency: Model Expansion” by e-mail no
later than 5:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time on 3 July 2025. Any extension to the White Paper
submission deadline will be posted to SAM.gov and Grants.gov as an amendment to this Notice. Note
6

---

that a White Paper received within the deadline will be evaluated to be determined if a proposal request
will be issued.
Please refer to the BAA, W911NF-23-S-0010 for instructions for the submission of a full Proposal.
An Applicant is responsible for submitting an electronic White Paper or full proposal so as to be received
and accepted at the Government site indicated in this Notice no later than the date and time specified
above. When sending electronic files, an Applicant shall account for potential delays in file transfer from
the originator’s computer to the Government website/computer server. An Applicant is encouraged to
submit their response early (48 hours if possible) to avoid potential file transfer delays due to high
demand or problems encountered during submission.
An Applicant should receive confirmation of delivery at the Government site, not just successful relay
from the Applicant’s system. Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government site
includes documentary and electronic evidence of receipt maintained by the Government site. All
submissions shall be submitted before the deadline identified above in order to be considered – no
exceptions.
If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that a White Paper or
full proposal cannot be received at the site designated for receipt by the date and time specified above,
then the date and time specified for receipt will be deemed to be extended to the same day and time
specified in this Notice on the first workday on which normal Government processes resume.
An Applicant agrees to hold the terms of their White Paper and any subsequent proposal valid for 180
calendar days from the date of submission.
VI. INQUIRIES:
ACC (APG) RTP Agency Point of Contact (Contractual Questions)
The POC for the US Army Contracting Command (Aberdeen Proving Ground) Research Triangle Park
Division is: Ms. Megan Deluca, (919) 541-4682, megan.a.deluca.civ@army.mil.
ARI Agency Point of Contact (Technical Questions)
The ARI POC for technical matters for this White Paper topic is: Dr. David Martinez, (571) 373-0076,
david.martinez689.civ@army.mil.
VII. REFERENCES:
Beagle, M. H. Jr., & Gaines, T. (2024). Creating Strategic Problem Solvers. Military Review.
https://www.armyupress.army.mil/journals/military-review/online-exclusive/2024-ole/creating-
strategic-problem-solvers/
Beagle, M. H. Jr. (2024). Disruption Is the Key to Delivering the Army of 20XX. Military Review.
https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/Online-Exclusive/2024-
OLE/Disruption-Is-the-
Key/#:~:text=To%20transform%2C%20we%20must%20disrupt,our%20next%20battles%20and%2
0engagements.
7

---

Department of the Army. (2019). The Army people strategy.
https://www.army.mil/e2/downloads/rv7/the_army_people_strategy_2019_10_11_signed_final.pdf
Driscoll, D., George, R. A. (2025). Letter to the Force: Army transformation initiative.
https://www.army.mil/article/285100/letter_to_the_force_army_transformation_initiative
De Jong, J. P., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2007). How leaders influence employees' innovative
behaviour. European Journal of Innovation Management, 10(1), 41-64.
https://doi.org/10.1108/14601060710720546
Hirschi, S. D., Morrison, D. A., Kreiger, M. A., Carrasquillo-Mangual, M., Diggs-McGee, B. N., Goebel,
J. M., & Oberg, B. K. (2020). Army installation makerspaces in the Morale, Welfare, and Recreation
(MWR) operational environment: a business case analysis. http://dx.doi.org/10.21079/11681/37553
Kristof‐Brown, A., Schneider, B., & Su, R. (2023). Person‐organization fit theory and research:
Conundrums, conclusions, and calls to action. Personnel Psychology, 76(2), 375-412.
https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12581
Laufer, M., Deacon, B., Mende, M. A., & Schäfer, L. O. (2025). Leading with trust: How university
leaders can foster innovation with educational technology through organizational trust. Innovative
Higher Education, 50(1), 303-327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09733-5
Meredith, L. S., Sims, C. S., Batorsky, B. S., Okunogbe, A. T., Bannon, B. L., & Myatt, C. A.
(2017). Identifying Promising Approaches to US Army Institutional Change (Vol. 10). RAND
Corporation.
Oh, I. S., Guay, R. P., Kim, K., Harold, C. M., Lee, J. H., Heo, C. G., & Shin, K. H. (2014). Fit happens
globally: A meta‐analytic comparison of the relationships of person–environment fit dimensions
with work attitudes and performance across East Asia, Europe, and North America. Personnel
Psychology, 67(1), 99-152. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12026
Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at
work. Academy of management journal, 39(3), 607-634. https://doi.org/10.2307/256657
South, T. (2024, November 19). Soldier creates device that speeds up Apache missile system rearming.
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2024/11/19/soldier-creates-device-that-speeds-up-
apache-missile-system-rearming/
Tett, R. P., Toich, M. J., & Ozkum, S. B. (2021). Trait activation theory: A review of the literature and
applications to five lines of personality dynamics research. Annual Review of Organizational
Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 8(1), 199-233. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-
012420-062228
Upton, T., Fosmoe, D., McConnell, R. (2024) From research to reality: Cultivating VUCA resistant
thinking at CGSC. Military Review Online Exclusive. https://
www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/militaryreview/Archives/English/Online-Exclusive/2024/
Research-to-Reality/mcconnell-research-to-realityUA.pdf
8

---

APPENDIX
TF Model Figure
TF Competency Definitions
Information Management
Information Acquisition: Gathers information from various sources; identifies information that
is useful and pertinent to fill knowledge gaps.
Information Organization: Is familiar with information management systems and how to use
these systems to organize and maintain information, data, and/or files.
Information Evaluation: Evaluates the reliability of information as well as sources of
information; uses information to conduct analyses, identify patterns, and draw inferences.
Dispositions
Achievement Orientation: Sets challenging goals and standards, is willing to give one’s best
effort, works hard to achieve difficult objectives, and is confident and resourceful in striving for
accomplishment.
Technological Self-Efficacy: Is confident in one’s ability to succeed, effectively meet challenges,
and overcome obstacles when using technology.
Positive Attitudes Toward Technology: Trusts and enjoys engaging with technology and fixing
technology-related issues; finds value in using technology for various purposes.
9

---

Learning Orientation: Seeks out learning opportunities, enjoys acquiring new knowledge and
skills, and is comfortable applying new knowledge and skills to different contexts.
Self-Awareness: Recognizes and monitors one's thoughts, feelings, and behavior.
Tolerance for Ambiguity: Tolerates situations where the right goal or correct path to the goal is
unclear, vague, or ill-defined.
Adaptability: Modifies behavior or plans as necessary to reach goals. Is able to maintain
effectiveness in varying environments with various tasks, responsibilities, or people.
Openness to Experience: Tendency towards intellectual curiosity and willingness to try new
things.
Emotional Control: Acts rationally, displays a generally calm and even mood, maintains
composure, and is not overly distraught by stressful situations.
Risk Taking: Inclined to consider risky ideas; willing to cautiously engage in high-risk
endeavors.
Interpersonal Skills
Communication: Effectively communicates through written and spoken word.
Teamwork: Works with others to achieve a goal or complete a task effectively and efficiently.
Perspective Taking: Understands how people interpret events and interpersonal interactions.
Leadership: Influences people, either formally or informally, by providing purpose, direction,
and motivation to meet goals or complete tasks.
Critical Thinking
Problem Sensitivity: Identifies when something is wrong or is likely to go wrong. It does not
involve solving the problem, only recognizing there is a problem.
Cognitive Flexibility: Considers new approaches to solving problems, creates new plans and
ideas, and initiates and accepts change and innovation.
Systems Thinking: Considers the factors of a situation or a solution as a system of interrelated
parts with inputs, processes, outputs and feedback.
Abstract Thinking: Comprehends ideas that aren't tangible or concrete.
Analytical Thinking: Analyzes information and applies general rules and logic to address work-
related issues and problems.
(continued on next page)
10

---

Knowledge and Experience
General Technology Principles: Knows and is able to apply general information regarding
technological principles, systems, equipment, operation, and repair.
Specific Technology Principles: Possesses deep expertise in how specific types of technology
works. Uses specialized technology effectively and/or is able to diagnose and correct problems
with technology or machines.
Technology Experience: Demonstrates a history of engagement with and/or regular use of
technology (e.g., in childhood, grade school).
Cognitive Ability
Mathematical Reasoning: Uses the right mathematical methods or formulas to solve a problem.
Verbal Reasoning: Reasons and draws conclusions based on verbal or written materials.
Attention Control: Focuses and controls one’s attention, processes multiple sources of sensory
information while avoiding distractions, and identifies what information or sources require
attention.
Spatial Ability: Is aware of one’s physical location in relation to the environment or where other
objects are in relation to oneself. Identifies and mentally manipulates the position or direction of
objects or points in space.
Pattern Recognition: Detects similarities or differences in objects, words, or numbers.
Memory: Retains and recalls information without using external tools or aids.
Management
Task Planning and Management: Manages time, budget, equipment, and resources for
appropriate task completion.
Team Management: Oversees people, either formally or informally, to accomplish a mission.
Delegates tasks and provides guidance as needed.
11

---

Q and A Organizational and Contextual Factors SSN

Impacts of Organizational and Contextual Factors on Technological Fluency: Model Expansion
Questions and Answers
Is ARI looking to validate previous work, or can we propose innovative approaches?
You can propose innovative approaches. The current TF model is focused on the individual. The intent of
this effort is to expand the current model to include meso and macro organizational and contextual factors
that impact TF in the Army.
Does ARI have a preferred methodological approach (e.g., qualitative vs. quantitative, survey vs.
observational) when it comes to collecting and synthesizing the results? Or is the intent to let
offerors propose what best fits the model expansion?
We do not have a preferred methodological approach.
Is there a way to review findings or better understand the prior scope?
Ongoing work is focused on the individual. No other ARI funded work has looked at organizational or
contextual factors impacting TF.

---

Q and A Round 2 Organizational and Contextual Factors

Impacts of Organizational and Contextual Factors on Technological Fluency: Model Expansion
Questions and Answers Round 2
Is there a dataset that is provided for this project? If so, what does that data look like?
There is no dataset currently available. As the solicitation states, to accomplish the objective, the offeror
will “Collect data from Soldiers to inform this expansion of the current technological fluency model.”
When a full report detailing the effort to model technological fluency knowledge, skills, and abilities is
releasable, it will be made available.
I have not had an opportunity to interview soldiers. Does that adversely affect my ability to receive
the grant?
The intent of the Government is to award a contract. The offeror should include information that describes
their skills to be able to carry out the tasks needed to accomplish the objectives. Prior experience
interviewing or otherwise collecting data from Soldiers is beneficial but is not the only factor we will
consider.
I see that the grant asks to consider the existing ARI tech fluency model and then on page 9 a model
is provided. Is this the model that we are improving? If so, what are its current limitations?
Correct, the model provided on page 9 of the Notice is the model we would like to expand to include
organizational and contextual factors. When a full report detailing the effort to model technological
fluency knowledge, skills, and abilities is releasable, it will be made available.
Is the goal of this effort to develop a computational model or platform?
The goal of this effort is to expand the current model or framework provided on page 9 to include
organizational and contextual factors. Thus, this effort is considered Applied Research rather than
Advanced Technology Development as defined on page 3 of the Notice.
Is this a qualitative study?
Offerors should propose the research design and methods they believe will best accomplish the goals of
this project.
What are you looking for in a team? Does the team need to have an AI/ML expert?
The team should be able to accomplish the goals of the project. Ideally, the team will provide evidence of
prior experience with the same or similar population, processes, and methods that will be used to carry
out this effort. Note we also take into consideration institutional resources and facilities (e.g.,
administrative support)—see page 6 of the Notice.
No, the team does not necessarily need an AI/ML expert.
If the proposed study is human-subjects research, will IRB approval be required?
Human subjects research must undergo review and approval prior to execution. The review is typically
conducted by ARI’s Human Research Protection Program or Institutional Review Board.

---

In addition, Human Research Protection Official (HRPO) review is required for all human subjects
research supported by the DoD that is conducted by non-DoD institutions. ARI will provide HRPO
review.
Do we need to submit a letter of intent?
No, but an interested Applicant must submit a White Paper electronically to be eligible to submit a formal
proposal under this Notice.