Middle Tier of Acquisition (MTA)

Each page in this pathway presents a wealth of curated knowledge from acquisition policies, guides, templates, training, reports, websites, case studies, and other resources. It also provides a framework for functional experts and practitioners across DoD to contribute to the collective knowledge base. This site aggregates official DoD policies, guides, references, and more.

DoD and Service policy is indicated by a BLUE vertical line.

Directly quoted material is preceeded with a link to the Reference Source.

Reference Source: Contracting Cone – Commercial Items (FAR Part 12)

Supplies and services that meet the definition of a commercial item at FAR Part 2.1 may be acquired using the streamlined procedures set forth in FAR Part 12. Non-Developmental Item (NDI) and Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) are considered subsets of commercial items.

DFARS Part  212.102(a)(iii) further expands the application of commercial item procedures to supplies and services from nontraditional defense contractors and, when appropriate, from business segments of traditional contractors that meet the definition of nontraditional defense contractor, for purposes of enhancing defense innovation and investment and encouraging nontraditional vendors to do business with the government. A commercial item determination is not required when commercial item procedures are applied to procure supplies and services from nontraditional defense contractors, nor does applying commercial item procedures for such procurements mean an item is commercial.

As defined in 10 U.S.C. § 2302(9), a non-traditional defense contractor is an entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least the one-year period preceding the solicitation of sources by the DoD for the procurement or transaction, any contract or subcontract for the DoD that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting standards (CAS).

Many entities will find they qualify as nontraditional defense contractors because:

• They are a small business exempt from CAS requirements
• They exclusively perform contracts under commercial procedures
• They exclusively perform under firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts with adequate price competition
• They performed less than $50 million in CAS covered efforts during the preceding cost accounting period

Restrictions

• Commercial item determination required
• Contract types limited to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP), Fixed-Price with Economic Price Adjustment (FPEPA), and Time-and-Materials (T&M) (for services)

See additional references and resources for this strategy in the Contracting Cone – Commercial Items.

Reference Source: Contracting Cone - Partnership Intermediary Agreement

A Partnership Intermediary Agreement (PIA) is a contract, agreement, or memorandum of understanding with non-profit partnership intermediary to engage academia and industry on behalf of government to accelerate tech transfer and licensing.

Partnership intermediary means an agency of a state or local gov, or a nonprofit entity owned in whole or in part by, chartered by, funded in whole or in part by, or operated in whole or in part by or on behalf of a State or local Government, that assists, counsels, advises, evaluates, or otherwise cooperates with small business firms and institutions of higher education.

10 U.S.C. §4124 authorizes Science and Technology Reinvention Laboratories (STRLs) Center Directors to use PIAs. 

See additional references and resources for this strategy in the Contracting Cone – Partnership Intermediary Agreement.

Reference Source: DoD Prototyping Handbook, Oct 2022

A number of other FAR-based authorities exist that allow agencies to reduce transaction costs by reshaping existing processes while still operating within the confines of existing laws and regulations. These pathways can be executed quickly to obtain prototypes. Commercial Item Procurement under FAR Part 12, Micro-Purchases and Simplified Acquisition Procedures under FAR Part 13, and challenges and prize competitions authorized by the 2010 America COMPETES Reauthorization Act and the FY00 NDAA, are tools that can be used for securing innovation and prototypes. Examples of challenge/prize competitions include the following:

• The “incentive prize” tool uses the authorities provided by the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 to enable an agency to run a competition where the winner receives a prize for developing a viable solution to solve a government need.
• The “milestone-based competition” process allows agencies to enter into contractual relationships with a qualified pool of contractors and to issue task orders for a series of clear, technically feasible milestones, each with an assigned deadline and monetary value.
• The “rapid technology prototyping” model involves issuance of several contracts for small, inexpensive prototypes to be built within a short period of time (i.e., several months) and then tested in a relevant demonstration scenario to assess the viability of each prior to making a substantial investment.
• The “challenge-based acquisition” model is designed to explore the market and pay only for a successful solution, but is geared towards projects where solutions are likely to already exist as opposed to having to be developed. The key differentiator between challenge-based acquisition and a traditional performance based acquisition is the firm requirement to demonstrate product performance in real-world conditions prior to a major commitment of resources for full production.
• The “staged contract” method utilizes short concept papers to enable agencies to identify vendors who are most likely to receive an award and to help those who are less likely to receive an award avoid the cost of developing a detailed proposal.

Reference Source: DoD Prototyping Handbook, Oct 2022

Defense Innovation Unit (DIU)

DIU is a Joint DoD organization in OUSD(R&E) that connects commercial innovators with defense organizations to rapidly meet Joint warfighter needs. DIU uses a model they created, called Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO), to solicit solutions from nontraditional vendors. DIU works with its DoD partners to develop short (from a few sentences to a paragraph), broad Areas of Interest (AoI) in laymen’s terms that it posts to its website. Interested companies respond directly to DIU with solution briefs in the form of papers (five pages or less) or slide decks (fifteen slides or less).14 The CSO model is available for use by other DoD components as well. Ultimately, however, the key to DIU’s success is the networks they have cultivated that help them identify and encourage nontraditional vendors to respond to DoD AoIs.

Defense Consortia

Defense Consortia are collaborative partnerships between the U.S. Government and a consortium of industry (large and small, traditional and nontraditional companies), non-profit organizations, research institutes, and academic institutions. Consortia are open to any U.S. entity and, depending on the consortium, may include as many as 500 organizations. A consortium is typically focused on a specific technology area or problem set and is managed by a consortium management firm that acts as the primary interface between the government and consortium members. The consortium management firm will work with a government partner to collaboratively develop a needs statement that it will communicate to its members and will assist in the proposal development and contracting actions of its members.

Partnership Intermediary Agreements

Partnership Intermediary Agreements are agreements between the Federal Government and State or local government agencies or nonprofit entities (i.e., intermediaries) that provide intermediary services between a Federal Government organization and small businesses, educational institutions, and laboratories. These public-facing intermediaries help government organizations find, collaborate with, and contract with industry, labs, and academic partners to discover and develop innovative solutions to solve problems that the organization is trying to solve. A good example of a partnership intermediary is SOFWERX, established through a partnership intermediary agreement between the U.S. Special Operations Command and the non-profit Doolittle Institute. Other partnership intermediaries include the Virginia Tech Applied Research Corporation; Defensewerx; Innovation and Modernization Patuxent River; and the Wright Brothers Institute.

Tradeshows, Conventions, and Industry Associations

Tradeshows, conventions, and industry associations offer great opportunities to discuss problems and mission needs and to announce new requirements, interest in new technologies, and rapid acquisition plans for the procurement of commercial-off-the-shelf technology, prototypes, or services.

Social Media and On-Line Resources

Several SMEs recommended the use of social media and on-line resources as solicitation venues. Social media outlet user groups (e.g., LinkedIn, Facebook, etc.) offer great access to targeted technology networks where nontraditional innovators may have a presence. Posting solicitations to these groups may generate solutions from innovators who otherwise would not have responded to traditional DoD solicitation approaches. Another option is to use crowd-sourcing sites (e.g., InnoCentive) to generate innovative ideas. These approaches may produce some very viable innovative solutions, but they may also spawn unrealistic or unfeasible solutions.

Reference Source: DoD Prototyping Handbook, Oct 2022

Several SMEs offered the following best practices for soliciting solutions for warfighter gaps:

• When developing solicitations, it is important to remember their intended audiences— especially when pursuing non-traditional defense contractors and academia. PMs should make an effort to translate the warfighter gaps from typical military terminology to technical needs that can be understood by all potential recipients. Any metrics included in the solicitation should also be drafted with the same vocabulary considerations.

   

• Before publishing solicitations, operations security analyses and public release reviews should be conducted to protect For Official Use Only or other sensitive information from being released to the public.

   

• Solicitations should include a request that respondents provide whatever data sets they have that support their solution or approach. These data sets will assist in determining the feasibility of the proposed solution.

   

• If applicable, solicitations should include a statement addressing the possibility of follow-on production.

   

• PMs should consider binning the needs into functional areas and having technical SMEs in those functional areas put together outlines of things they need to see from vendors for each functional area. These outlines can then be provided as part of the solicitation.

   

• The targeted commercial marketplace should be researched to identify venues and techniques typically used by that marketplace for soliciting specific needs. Potential venues and techniques include catalogs, product directories, trade journals, seminars, professional organizations, contractor briefings, meetings and conversations with companies, in-house experts, on-line resources, social media, and vendor surveys.

Reference Source: DoD Prototyping Handbook, Oct 2022

The following are examples of selection criteria that defense organizations have used to select prototyping projects.

• The Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) Capability and Technology Evaluation (JCTE) team annually invites industry to submit solutions that address JSOC’s Technology Interest Areas and compete for Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADA). The JCTE Team uses the following major criteria areas to assess submissions. Each of these major criteria areas has six possible responses, weighted 0-5.
• • Operational Relevance: Does the submission address a known gap?
  • Technical Merit: What level of supporting data accompanies the submission?
  • Deliverable: Will this be a paper product or a product for operational use?
  • Internal IRAD-to-Date: What level of funding has been invested in this proposed project to date?
  • Planned Future IRAD: What level of IRAD funding is planned to complete the project?
  • Schedule: Will this project be completed in less than 6 months or will it take longer than 24 months?
• The Rapid Prototyping Program (RPP) established criteria according to three guidelines—strategic, implied, and other guidelines. Their specific criteria are found in Table 4.

Reference Source: USSOCOM Middle Tier Acquisition Authorities and Guidance, 1 Aug 2018

Contract Management: The KO supports the PM’s MTA strategy by providing contracting solutions that best address the schedule constraints. This contract strategy could be FAR or non-FARbased or a combination of both and consider the tools that are available to SOF AT&L such as the PIA, OT A’s, Grants or Cooperative Agreements, IOIQ’s, other transactions for research (10 USC 2371), experimental authority (10 USC 2373) and FAR Part 12 procedures where appropriate.