1

Technology Accelerator Prototype Program

Defense Logistics Agency (“DLA”)

INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................................... 2

BACKGROUND AND AUTHORITY...................................................................................................................................2

MISSION STATEMENT ...................................................................................................................................................3

OVERVIEW.....................................................................................................................................................................3

ACQUISITION PROCESS DETAILS............................................................................................................................. 4

PROBLEM STATEMENTS................................................................................................................................................4

PREAWARD: THREE PHASES.........................................................................................................................................4

PHASE I. APPLICATIONS. ..........................................................................................................................................5

PHASE II. PITCH. .......................................................................................................................................................5

PHASE III. REQUEST FOR PROTOTYPE PROPOSALS. .................................................................................................5

EVALUATION CRITERIA..................................................................................................................................................7

EVALUATION CRITERIA – FIVE FACTORS ...................................................................................................................7

4. RESPONSIVENESS..............................................................................................................................................8

5. TIME-TO-IMPACT ASSESSMENT........................................................................................................................8

AWARDS ............................................................................................................................................................... 9

COMPTROLLER GENERAL ACCESS TO INFORMATION.............................................................................................. 9

PROCUREMENT INTEGRITY ACT ........................................................................................................................... 10

ITERATIVE PROTOTYPING .................................................................................................................................... 10

FOLLOW-ON PRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 10

SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION................................................................................................................................... 10

NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS............................................................................................................................ 11

DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................................................................ 11

SUBMISSION GUIDANCE .............................................................................................................................................12
2

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND AND AUTHORITY 

The 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (“QDR”) established innovation as a central line of effort in 

the U.S. national defense strategy. Our decisive military advantage over adversaries and peer 

competitors is steadily eroding. Globalization driven a renaissance in commercial innovation fueled by 

venture capital investment that far exceeds the research and development budget of the Department 

of Defense (“DoD”). As a result, the global technology ‘water line’ has risen faster than DoD’s ability 

to outpace it alone. Both state and non-state actors have gained access to new technologies, allowing 

them to compete in entirely new domains of warfare. 

The Defense Logistics Agency (“DLA”) is the Department of Defense’s largest logistics combat 

support activity. DLA provides worldwide support, primarily to the military services. Other 

customers include US civilian entities and foreign countries. Given DLA’s reach across DoD, it is 

essential that we also rapidly adapt. In 2016, the DLA CIO launched its Technology Accelerator to 

meet that challenge. The DLA Technology Accelerator’s mission is to deliver prototype capabilities 

rapidly to DLA and its customers. Depending on the underlying problem we are trying to solve, DLA 

either “builds it” through internal (Silicon Valley-derived) methods or “buys it.” 

The bottom line: in prior decades, the most valuable technological advancements were driven by DoD 

research and development efforts. Today, commercial innovations make those the comparable 

advancements much faster than DoD. This program allows DLA to tap into these commercial 

innovations. 

DLA uses 10 U.S.C. 2371b Other Transaction Agreements (“OTA”) to partner with nontraditional 

and traditional defense contractors and non-profit research institutions to carry out prototype projects. 

These prototype projects must either: 

• enhance mission effectiveness of military personnel and the supporting platforms, systems, 

components or materials; or 

• improve platforms, systems, components, or materials in use by the armed forces. 

The information provided in this document ensures, to the maximum extent practicable, that DLA 

uses competitive procedures with these agreements to carry out these prototype projects. 
3

MISSION STATEMENT

This program seeks competitive proposals for innovative, commercial technologies. In this context, 

innovative means any new technology, process, or business practice, or any new application of an 

existing technology, process, or business practice that contributes to enhancing military effectiveness 

and sustaining global peace and U.S. national security. This program awards prototype projects that 

include: 

• commercially-available technologies fueled by commercial or strategic investment; 

• concept demonstrations, pilots and agile development activities that can incrementally improve 

commercial technologies, existing government-owned capabilities, or concepts for defense 

application. 

OVERVIEW

This program is designed for speed and flexibility. The application process consists of three-stages that 

remove the onerous application requirements associated with traditional government contracting. The 

first stage is a written application that asks applicants for basic information that maps to the evaluation 

criteria. The government will then ask successful applicants to provide an in-person or virtual pitch. 

After another down-select, the top companies will be asked to provide a prototype proposal (template 

supplied by the government). This proposal will be the basis for final negotiations and awards.

This program makes use of the flexible payment milestones. Typically, the first payment milestone is 

participation in a collaborative kickoff workshop. This is followed by intermediate development 

milestones which are tailored to the specifics of each project. The final payment milestone is complete 

delivery of the prototype(s) to the government. Each effort’s milestones will be unique and 

collaboratively developed between offerors and the government.

After receiving an OT award, companies will participate in a collaborative design and kickoff event 

with the government as the first payment milestone. These events typically run for 3 or 4 days, and 

bring together the awardee with government stakeholders. In the workshop, the attendees 

collaboratively develop implementation plans, address myriad issues such as obtaining access to data 

or government testing, and delineate roles and responsibilities between the government stakeholders 

and awardees. These are highly collaborative events intended to compress initial set-up timelines and 

to get awardees working towards their development milestones as quickly as possible.

The following pages describe the application process, evaluation criteria, and procedures that are used 

by this program.
4

ACQUISITION PROCESS DETAILS

PROBLEM STATEMENTS 

The core of every DLA OTA solicitation is a “problem statement.” The Technology Accelerator

extensively vets each problem statement, though interviews with DLA senior leaders, stakeholders 

across DoD and DLA and industry leaders. The problem statement describes a capability gap on the 

part of DLA or one of its military customers. As discussed in the introduction, the QDR makes 

innovation a priority because “the decisive military advantage of the United States over its adversaries 

and peer competitors is steadily eroding.” Problem statements are specific instances where this 

erosion has occurred. Appropriate problem statements have many of these characteristics: 

• Potential for significant return on investment 

• No obvious solution path already exists 

• Strong nexus with IT, though not necessarily traditional IT 

• Not technology for technology’s sake (cannot be ‘do something with block chain’) 

• Able to scope down to actionable chunk (cannot be too big) 

• Rapid prototype potential (cannot have systemic barriers where prototype would take years) 

Most important: problem statements are purposefully written to describe a tangible problem rather 

than define strict requirements dictating a solution. DLA will identify the capability gap and offerors 

will provide a variety of disparate technologies to solve that problem. 

PREAWARD: THREE PHASES 

DLA recognizes that the industry segment we are trying to reach—startups and non-traditional 

defense contractors—are not familiar with the standard federal procurement process. The standard 

process is often lengthy, confusing and prevents the kind of meaningful give-and-take with which 

innovative companies are familiar in their standard dealings. Therefore, this program attempts to 

adapt familiar innovation terms and concepts and streamline the process. Benefits include: 

• A streamlined application process requiring only minimal corporate and technical information 

• Fast track evaluation timelines for solution briefs 

• Negotiable payment terms 

• Capital is non-dilutive 

• All intellectual property (“IP”) rights are negotiable; the government does not plan to own IP 

• Direct feedback from operators, customers and users within the DoD to help product teams 

develop and hone product design and functionality 

• Potential follow-on funding for promising technologies and sponsorship of user test cases for 

prototypes and possible follow-on production contract or transaction 

The process uses three phases/gates to minimize unnecessary burdens on offerors. We measure for 

product-market fit with increasing levels of specificity. 
5

PHASE I. APPLICATIONS. 

The government solicits proposals through an application that can be found on the program’s website. 

The application consists of three sections: Basic information, Company Posture, and Solution Concept. As part 

of the Solution Concept, applicants will complete a one-page Rough-Order-Magnitude (“ROM”) cost 

estimate. Applicants may attach 1-page of visual aids to clarify written responses in their application, 

but this will not be used to introduce additional information for evaluation.

The government shall review all applications in accordance with the evaluation criteria. General 

explanations of these criteria are described later in this document, but applicants should expect to find 

specific criteria included in the OTA Solicitation document and/or the application itself. After review, 

the government may elect to invite a company into phase two: the Pitch. In phase two, offerors pitch 

and further discuss their proposed concept/technology/solution in person or virtually. 

PHASE II. PITCH. 

Unlike traditional pitches, this is an interactive give-and-take between government and industry. 

Selected applicants typically receive a one-hour window for an in-person or virtual presentation and 

discussion that provides additional details on their application. The government will not pay offerors 

for costs associated with pitches. Post presentation, the government will invite the offerors with a 

realistic path to an award to participate in phase three. Pitches must include the following information: 

Required Pitch Content:

• Response to government questions that arise from the application. 

• Suggested technical development milestones

• Proposed schedule

• Detailed cost breakdown

• Any intellectual property involved in the effort and associated restrictions on the government’s 

use of that intellectual property.

Applicants are encouraged to check the program’s website for additional guidance and tips for 

successful presentations. 

PHASE III. REQUEST FOR PROTOTYPE PROPOSALS. 

The government shall further down-select potential awardees and issue a request for prototype 

proposals (“RPP”) to the remaining candidate firm(s). The RPP will have specific guidelines. The 

government shall also provide a draft contract to selected firms, on which offerors return an iteration. 

Upon receipt, the government works collaboratively with the offeror/offerors that make sense based 

on technical factors and pricing. Prototype proposals must include the following information: 
6

Technical Proposal (Section #1) 

Title Page – Company Name, Title, Point of Contact Name, Date, E-Mail Address, Phone, and 

Address and any subcontractors or team members. Include an abstract that provides a concise 

description of the proposal. 

Approach – Describe the background and objectives of the proposed work, the approach, 

deliverables, and the resources needed to execute it. Include the nature and extent of the anticipated 

results. Include ancillary and operational issues such as certifications, algorithms, and any 

engineering/software development methodologies that you plan to use to perform. This proposal 

must include a Statement of Work (“SOW”). 

You may refer to the solution brief that prompted this proposal request, but do not duplicate it. 

Government Support Required – Identify the type of support, if any, the offeror requests of the 

government in general such as facilities, equipment, data, and information or materials. 

Price Proposal (Section #2) 

The offeror shall propose the total price to complete the prototype project and shall provide any other 

data or supporting information the parties agree is necessary for the determination of a fair and 

reasonable price. This can include commercial price catalog or other proprietary information to help 

the government assess project cost. This must include a detailed project schedule that outlines the 

various phases of work to align with this basic paradigm for payment milestones: 

• Collaborative Kickoff Workshop

• Completion of intermediate development milestones (one for each milestone)

• Delivery of final prototype to government 

After award, the successful offeror shall work with the government’s technical team to develop this 

detailed project plan for the eventual prototype in the collaborative kickoff workshop. The 

government recognizes that, prior to award, offerors will have limited knowledge of the government’s 

relevant IT infrastructure. This collaborative phase allows the awardee to conduct relevant beneficiary 

discovery and to determine the exact changes that must be made. 
7

EVALUATION CRITERIA 

The Government shall evaluate each submission of each phase under the following five technical 

criteria, all of equal importance. The government shall also consider price. The first three technical 

criteria, popularized by IDEO1, is a common method to drive enterprise innovation and build 

successful prototypes. This document describes the general IDEO criteria features, but each 

solicitation will give further direction, customized for each acquisition. These criteria help prevent 

common dead ends and drive prototypes that are actionable, which the government is likely to adopt 

and scale. 

The government shall evaluate all submission on the basis of the merit of the proposed concept in 

addressing the problem statement but not against other solution briefs submitted in response to the 

same problem statement. The Government may elect to use external market research to ensure 

offerors are likely to perform throughout the period of performance. 

EVALUATION CRITERIA – FIVE FACTORS

1. DESIRABILITY 

Desirability Evaluation Criterion

This criterion measures whether end users are likely to adopt the offeror’s prototype solution. An 

example of something that is not desirable is a piece of field equipment that is so uncomfortable to 

carry that end users refuse to bring it into the field. 

Criteria Examples:

• Scalability

• Ease of use

• Safety

• Effectiveness

• Maintenance & sustainment considerations

2. VIABILITY 

Viability Evaluation Criterion

The proposed solution is compatible with DoD constraints, technical environments and other 

organizational requirements. This criterion measures whether DoD could easily adopt the prototype. 

An example of something that is not viable is a technology that has no chance of passing DoD 

cybersecurity requirements, whereas a clearly viable technology may have an existing authority to 

operate (“ATO”).

1 https://medium.com/innovation-sweet-spot/desirability-feasibility-viability-the-sweet-spot-forinnovationd7946de2183c 
8

Criteria Examples:

• Past certification / approval by relevant governing authorities

• Existing partnerships with government organizations

• Domestic vs. international production

• Domestic vs. international ownership and financing

• Meets NIST cybersecurity guidelines

3. FEASIBILITY 

Feasibility Evaluation Criterion

The proposed solution is technically possible. This criterion measures whether the technology exists or 

is likely to be developed in the scope of this prototype effort. An example of something that is not 

feasible is a “Star Trek” transporter. An example of something that is highly feasible is a technology 

that has been successfully deployed in a government or commercial environment.

Criteria Examples:

• Existing prototypes

• Commercial equivalents

• Demonstrated Effectiveness

• Relevant studies published in reputable scientific journals or by government entities

4. RESPONSIVENESS

All submissions must be responsive to the solicitation’s problem statement. The government reserves 

the right to award any submission (as described in the Program Procedures). However, for the 

purposes of this effort, the government will ONLY consider CLEARLY responsive submissions. 

Non-responsive submissions may receive further consideration later, as dictated by available funding 

and priorities.

5. TIME-TO-IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Time-to-impact measures the time it will take to develop and deploy within the DoD against the 

demonstrable value it will provide DLA’s end users. Solutions that offer major impacts with quick 

development and deployment timelines are better than solutions with negligible impacts and long 

timelines. The best solutions will begin to quickly deliver major gains while still in the iterative design 

and development phase. To illustrate this, the following visual aid breaks out Time-to-Impact into a 

quad chart that offerors can use to self-assess.
9

AWARDS

Upon favorable review and available funds, the government may choose to make an award. 

Companies must have a Dunn and Bradstreet (“DUNS”) number and must register in the System for 

Award Management (“SAM”). Companies should commence SAM registration upon (or before) 

receipt of an RPP. 

Companies must also register in the prescribed government invoicing system (ex. Wide Area Work 

Flow). The agreements officer will provide assistance to those offerors from whom a full proposal is 

requested. 

The company must be considered a responsible party by the Agreements Officer and must not be 

suspended or debarred from award by the Federal Government, nor be prohibited by Presidential 

Executive Order and/or law from receiving award. 

Receipt of an RPP does not guarantee that a Company will receive an award and the Government 

reserves the right, at any point prior to award of an OTA, to cancel the RPP. 

COMPTROLLER GENERAL ACCESS TO INFORMATION

In projects that provide for payments in a total amount in excess of $5,000,000, the agreement will 

include a mandatory clause that provides for the Comptroller General the ability to examine the 

records of any party to the agreement or any entity that participates in the performance of the 

agreement. 
10

PROCUREMENT INTEGRITY ACT

In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2371b(h), all Agreements awarded under this program shall be treated as 

Federal Agency procurements for purpose of Chapter 21 of Title 41 of the United States Code. 

ITERATIVE PROTOTYPING

Prototype OTAs awarded under this program will allow for an iterative prototyping process. 

An iterative prototyping process will allow the government to modify, by mutual agreement, the scope

and/or period of performance of a prototype project. These iterations may result in a separate 

prototype project rather than a modification of the original prototype project. These additional unique 

and discrete purposes/mission sets can be generated by the original government customer or originate 

with other organizations within the DoD Enterprise. 

FOLLOW-ON PRODUCTION

Upon successful completion of a prototype project under the OTA, the Government and company 

may negotiate a follow-on production contract or agreement, without the need for further 

competition. Any concept/technology/solution successfully proven through the prototype OTA can 

be transitioned to production. Production OTAs might even occur prior to the end of the prototype

effort if a specific aspect of the effort is sufficiently mature.

Solicited problem statements and awarded prototype OTAs will explicitly identify follow-on 

production OTAs as a potential outcome of a successful prototyping effort as authorized under 10

U.S.C. 2371b(f). 

SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION

A transaction for a prototype project is complete upon the written determination of the appropriate 

approving official for the matter in question that efforts conducted under a Prototype OT: (1) met the 

key technical goals of a project; (2) satisfied success metrics incorporated into the Prototype OT; or (3) 

accomplished a particularly favorable or unexpected result that justifies the transition to production. 

Furthermore, successful completion can occur prior to the conclusion of a prototype project to allow 

the government to transition any aspect of the prototype project determined to provide utility into 

production while other aspects of the prototype project have yet to be completed. Any Prototype OT 

shall contain a provision that sets forth the conditions under which that prototype agreement must be 

successfully completed. 
11

NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS

The government may use non-government advisors to evaluate all submissions. These individuals will 

have signed non-disclosure agreements with the government. 

The government understands that information provided in confidence and may contain trade secret or 

commercial or financial information, and it agrees to protect such information from unauthorized 

disclosure to the maximum extent permitted or required by Law, to include: 

• 18 USC 1905 (Trade Secrets Act); 

• 18 USC 1831 et seq. (Economic Espionage Act); 

• 5 USC 552(b)(4) (Freedom of Information Act); 

• Executive Order 12600 (Pre-disclosure Notification Procedures for Confidential Commercial 

Information); and 

• Any other statute, regulation, or requirement applicable to Government employees. 

DEFINITIONS

"Other Transaction for Prototype Projects” refers to the type of Other Transaction Agreement 

(“OTA”) described in this document. This type of OTA is authorized by 10 U.S.C. 2371b for 

prototype projects directly relevant to enhancing the mission effectiveness of military personnel and 

the supporting platforms, systems, components, or materials proposed to be acquired or developed by 

the DoD, or for the improvement of platforms, systems, components, or materials in use by the armed 

forces. This type of OTA is treated by DoD as an acquisition instrument, commonly referred to as an 

"other transaction" for a prototype project or a Section 2371b "other transaction". 

“Prototype Project” is a preliminary pilot, test, evaluation, demonstration, or agile development activity 

used to evaluate the technical or manufacturing feasibility or military utility of a particular technology, 

process, concept, end item, effect, or other discrete feature. Prototype projects may include systems, 

subsystems, components, materials, methodology, technology, or processes. For example, a prototype 

project may involve: a proof of concept; a pilot; a novel application of commercial technologies for 

defense purposes; a creation, design, development, demonstration of technical or operational utility; or 

combinations of the foregoing, related to a prototype. The quantity should generally be limited to that 

needed to prove technical or manufacturing feasibility or evaluate military utility. (ref: pg 4, sec. C1.6., 

Jan 2017 DoD OT guide v1.2.0) 

“Nontraditional Defense Contractor” is defined in section 2302(9) of title 10, United States Code as 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 Department of Defense for the procurement or 

transaction, any contract or subcontract for the Department of Defense that is subject to full coverage 

under the cost accounting standards prescribed pursuant to section 1502 of title 41 and the regulations 

implementing such section. This includes all small business concerns under the criteria and size 

standards in Title 13, Code of Federal Regulations, part 121 (13 CFR 121). 
12

“Nonprofit Research Institution” means a nonprofit institution, as defined in 15 U.S.C. 3703: An 

organization owned and operated exclusively for scientific or educational purposes, no part of the net 

earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. 

“Small Business” is defined under section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632) 

“Innovative” means—

• any new technology, process, or method, including research and development; or 

• any new application of an existing technology, process, or method. 

 

SUBMISSION GUIDANCE 

• Offerors bear all costs to prepare and submit responses to solicitations; 

• Technical data with military application may require appropriate approval, authorization, or 

license for lawful exportation; 

• All offeror submissions shall be unclassified. In the event that an offeror requires certain 

information withheld from the public, shall include the following paragraph on the cover page: 

“This solution brief includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government, 

except to non-Government personnel for evaluation purposes, and shall not be 

duplicated, used, or disclosed -- in whole or in part -- for any purpose other than to 

evaluate this submission. If, however, an agreement is awarded to this Company 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 agreed upon by 

both parties in the resulting agreement. This restriction does not limit the 

Government's right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from 

another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained 

in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets]” 

• Offerors should mark each restricted data sheet as follows: 

“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the 

title page of this proposal.” 

• To be eligible for award, offerors must be able to obtain necessary clearances. This is 

especially relevant for foreign-owned business 

Please direct all questions and comments to accelerate@dla.mil