SOURCES SOUGHT
A -- Sensors
- Notice Date
- 10/15/2012
- Notice Type
- Sources Sought
- NAICS
- 541330
— Engineering Services
- Contracting Office
- Department of the Army, Army Contracting Command, ACC-APG - Adelphi, 2800 POWDER MILL RD, ADELPHI, Maryland, 20783-1197, United States
- ZIP Code
- 20783-1197
- Solicitation Number
- W911QX-13-T-0012
- Archive Date
- 11/23/2012
- Point of Contact
- Nikia S. Jelks, Phone: 4073845585, Jack Norfleet, Phone: (407)384-3897
- E-Mail Address
-
nikia.s.jelks@us.army.mil, jack.norfleet@us.army.mil
(nikia.s.jelks@us.army.mil, jack.norfleet@us.army.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) W91CRB-08-R-0073 was publicized on the Federal Business Opportunities on 11 Aug 2008 by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory-Human Research Engineering Directorate, Simulation and Training Technology Center (ARL-HRED STTC). This notice calls for white paper submissions in reference to the research interest Topic 6: Training Application Environments, Section 6B: Training Application Environments Medical. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the research effort will be to identify, incorporate, and test existing and emerging sensor technologies into medical simulations in order to objectively measure human performance. The targeted training population is any caregiver who touches or cuts a patient both internally and externally. ARL-HRED STTC is looking for research in this area to augment current training curricula. Specifically: 1. Embedded sensors that can be integrated into simulated tissue and body structures. These sensors will detect touch, piercing, and laceration of the tissues and will track fine motor movements of the trainee within the training space. 2. Objective measures of skills which are cross-walked to terminal learning objectives. These skills should include touch (e.g., pressure, location, duration), piercing (e.g., location, depth, patient outcome/response), laceration (e.g., location, length, depth, and patient outcome/response), and other measurable criteria that may be discovered and directly attributed to success or failure of a procedure. 3. External sensors and instrumentation that minimally impact the realism to the trainee while providing data that can be statistically linked to success or failure of a procedure. These technologies can include instrumented gloves, instrumented medical devices, eye tracking devices; motions capture systems, thermal or laser tracking systems or other sensor systems that may be unknown at this time. 4. Innovative solutions beyond the sensor technologies that can track, record, identify success or failure, or play back trainee performance in a form that facilitates learning. 5. Identification of specific medical examination skills at any level of care that can benefit from this technology and an identification of the forum, course, or exercise where these skills are learned and mastered. A few examples include external abdominal examinations, women's health examinations (e.g., breast and pelvic exams), men's health (e.g., prostate exams), and other internal and external examinations where touch, force, location, and duration are important performance requirements. 6. Identification of specific surgical skills that can benefit from this technology and identification of the forum, course, or exercise where these skills are learned and mastered. An example is a surgical procedure such as crichothyroidotomy where incision location (i.e., based on visible and palpable landmarks), depth, and length are important performance requirements. The planned method for accomplishing the research in this area is to utilize a phased approach. White papers should be structured so that the technical approach / solution address a Basic Award (Phase 1 / Year 1) and two priced options (Phase II and Phase III). The white paper must include the anticipated period of performance, a technical description of the proposed concepts, the technical objectives, and a planned approach to accomplish the stated objectives as well as a rough order of magnitude (ROM) cost. The ROM cost should consist of the total cost plus profit / fee / overhead. PHASE I. The phase I effort will begin with a rigorous literature review and identification of promising sensor technologies. The initial target is external abdominal examinations of healthy and diseased simulated patients. A task analysis that defines location, force, and duration of touch on the abdomen must be included and performance measures for novice, skilled, and master must be defined. A prototype that can simulate both healthy and diseased states with realistic look, feel, and performance shall be delivered as part of phase I. A usability study shall also be conducted as part of this phase. Phase I will be a 12-month effort with either a single award at approximately $500,000, or two awards at approximately $250,000 each, at the government's discretion. PHASE II. Phase II will consist of a validation study on the effectiveness of the prototype as a training tool and on the ability of the sensors to collect objective data that can be quickly and easily converted into human performance measures. A comparative analysis of the prototype against the current method of teaching is required. At this time, it is anticipated that Phase II will be a 12-month effort with either a single award at approximately $500,000, or two awards at approximately $250,000 each, at the government's discretion. PHASE III. Based on the results of the phase II evaluations, the program will be further refined. Additional scenarios will be created based upon user feedback. The end result of phase III should be a mature software package, ready to be transitioned. At this time, it is anticipated that Phase III will be a 12-month effort with a single award at approximately $600,000, or two awards at approximately $300,000 each, subject to budgeting constraints. Reference Documents are provided at http://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?page=8 THIS ANNOUNCEMENT CONSTITUTES THE ENTIRE SOLICITATION FOR THIS EFFORT. DO NOT SUBMIT A FORMAL PROPOSAL AT THIS TIME. WHITE PAPER SUBMISSION: Any responsible offeror capable of satisfying the objectives identified in this announcement may submit a white paper. White Paper submissions are encouraged as early as possible but must be received at electronically no later than 1600 EDT 8 Nov 2012 tojack.norfleet@us.army.mil. No extensions will be granted. White papers must address the objectives for all Phases and shall not exceed 10 pages in length of computerized text at 12-pitch, excluding resumes. Only unclassified white papers will be accepted. All white papers must include Phase II and III as priced options. The white papers will be reviewed to determine that the proposed effort is within the scope and interest of this solicitation. A proposal will only be solicited from white papers deemed to best meet the program objectives. White papers will be evaluated by a technical review board using the following criteria listed in descending order of importance: (1) Scientific and Technical Merit: Proposed efforts should create new, or apply existing technology in a new way, that is advantageous to the proposed research topic. The overall scientific and technical merit of the proposal must be clearly identifiable. The technical concept should be clearly defined and developed. Emphasis should be placed on the offeror's technical approach through a comprehensive, logical, orderly, concise, phased plan that indicates major milestones, critical paths, key events, capabilities that can be spun off, demonstration articles, etc. Consideration should be given to the extent which current State-of-the-Art technology is expanded. Offeror should discuss how their concept will be documented, demonstrated, or evaluated, and this discussion should be indicative of the understanding of what is required in this program. (2) Potential Contribution to Military Services Needs and Transition to other Programs: The offeror must adequately address how the proposed solution will meet the goal of the research topic. The proposal must show understanding of the potential approach and make a compelling case for the viability of the proposed effort. The relevance is further indicated by the offeror's understanding of the operating environment of the product or demonstration (current Military or Industrial technical problems/issues, limitations, etc.). The relationships of the proposed effort with other ongoing or anticipated initiatives (military or civilian) that are focused on improving the Medical Modeling and Simulation should be considered. Offeror should recognize and identify potential strategies for transitioning technology within the DoD. Plans on how offeror intends to get developed technology, and information on these developments, to the user community should be considered. (3) Personnel: The qualifications, experience, capabilities, and demonstrated achievements of the proposed principal investigators and other key personnel for the primary and subcontractor organizations should be examined and assessed for the proposal objectives. (4) Corporate Capabilities and Facilities: Offerors are required to describe their relevant capabilities and accomplishments. The offeror must have a demonstrated capability to conceptualize, develop theories, identify concept deficiencies, analyze, and develop mature concepts for rapid application/ demonstration. Consider the offeror's history of related work. Also consider any unique facilities or equipment that the offeror possesses. (5) Cost: The overall estimated cost to accomplish the effort should be considered as well as the substantiation of the costs for the technical complexity described. Evaluation should consider the extent to which the proposed management plan will effectively allocate and provide accounting of funds, equipment, and personnel, select subprojects, monitor and evaluate the program to achieve the proposed objectives, and respond to contingencies created by unanticipated technical barriers or breakthroughs. Cost reasonableness and realism will be assessed, but this assessment is of a lower priority than the technical evaluation. White Papers found to be consistent with the requirements of this announcement and deemed to best meet the program objectives may be invited to submit a technical and cost proposal. To be eligible for award a white paper must be submitted. Upon completion of white paper evaluations, Offerors will be notified whether or not their white paper was favorably received. Favorable review of a white paper does not constitute selection of the proposed effort for contract award and will not establish a binding commitment for the Government to fund the effort in whole or part. Upon notification, the Government will issue a request for proposal letter to the qualified offeror(s), who best meet the program objectives and funding availability. If proposals are solicited, proposals are due NLT 11 January 2013. The requirements for proposal preparation and submission can be found at http://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?page=8. This announcement is an expression of interest only and does not commit the government to reimburse any proposal preparation cost for responding. The cost of proposal preparation in response to this announcement is not considered an allowable expense to the normal bid and proposal indirect costs as specified in FAR 31.205-18. Any request for white paper or submission of a full proposal does not guarantee award. The Government reserves the right to cancel this requirement at any time and shall not be liable for any cost of proposal preparation or submission. Within the meaning of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) at 6.102 and 35.016, this announcement constitutes the Government's solicitation for this effort. There will be no other solicitation issued in regard to this requirement. Offerors should be alert for any BAA amendments that may be published. WHITE PAPER FORMAT: White Papers shall not exceed 10 pages of computerized text at 12 pitch (excluding resumes) Contractor format is acceptable. The white papers should be provided in electronic format no later than 1600 hrs EDT 8 November 2012 to jack.norfleet@us.army.mil. The administrative addresses are: Technical Point of Contact: Mr. Jack Norfleet Phone: (407)384-3897 Email: jack.norfleet@us.army.mil (Preferred Contact Method) Contracting Point of Contact: US Army Contracting Command Attn: Ms. Jessica McTaggart, Contract Specialist Phone: (301) 394-3180 Email: Jessica.H.McTaggart.civ@mail.mil Or US Army Contracting Command Attn: Ms. Nikia S. Jelks, Contracting Officer Phone: 407-384-5585 Email: nikia.s.jelks@us.army.mil
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/notices/6b4625b45326b356dd5c82391d201860)
- Place of Performance
- Address: N/A, United States
- Record
- SN02913589-W 20121017/121015233923-6b4625b45326b356dd5c82391d201860 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |