In This Week’s Newsletter:

• Opportunity Spotlight of the Week: NAVWAR C4ISR
• Four To Follow: Four Interesting Pursuits
• Capture Corner: Teaming Considerations
• Pricing Insights: Why Job Boards Are Great for Labor-Based PTW

Opportunity Alert – NAVWAR C4ISR

Contact Katie: katie.clatterbuck@hinzconsulting.com

Department of the Navy, Naval Information Warfare Systems Command (NAVWAR), Afloat Global C4ISR Installation Services.

NAVWAR is preparing the recompete of its Afloat Global C4ISR Installation Services vehicle, which delivers command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance installation services on surface ships, submarines, and special-purpose craft worldwide. The scope spans decommissioning and modernization of existing platforms and the design and installation of integrated C4ISR systems, with contractors providing program and project management, engineering design, industrial work, troubleshooting, operational verification, and end-user training. The vehicle expressly excludes the Navy Marine Corps Intranet and Next Generation Enterprise Network. The multiple-award IDIQ carries an estimated value of $2.45B over a five-year base and one five-year option and will be competed on a full and open basis. The final RFP is estimated for release in September 2027, with an estimated award in March 2029.

Contact Us

Four to Follow

1. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Enterprise Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT) Software Solution. USCIS is preparing to acquire an enterprise open-source intelligence software solution to support investigations, threat assessments, and situational awareness. The tool would collect, analyze, and visualize publicly available information from public and commercial sources in real time, automating the surfacing of derogatory information to reduce the time analysts spend on manual review. It must operate within a persistent misattribution environment for secure, anonymous research and include subject recognition and batch querying for processing multiple subjects at once. The $100M firm-fixed-price task order will be competed as a HUBZone set-aside through NASA’s Solutions for Enterprise-Wide Procurement V vehicle, with a five-year period of performance. This is a new requirement with no incumbent. The solicitation is estimated for release in December 2026, with an estimated award in March 2027.
2. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Coast Guard, Data, Analytics, and Artificial Intelligence (DAAI) Support. The Coast Guard is preparing a support contract for its Data, Analytics, and Artificial Intelligence organization, spanning strategic analysis, AI capability development, enterprise metadata management, system engineering lifecycle improvements, and data architecture and engineering transformation. The work reaches across eleven mission domains, including intelligence, logistics, finance, operations, cyber, command and control and IT, legal, acquisition, and capabilities. The effort carries a value of more than $100M and will be competed as a woman-owned small business set-aside through the GSA Schedule, with a one-year base and four one-year options running through September 2031. The solicitation is anticipated in summer 2026, with award expected in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2026.
3. General Services Administration, 2nd Generation Information Technology BPA (2GIT II). The General Services Administration is preparing 2GIT II, the follow-on to its 2nd Generation Information Technology BPA, the governmentwide one-stop shop for commercial IT hardware and software commodities spanning data center, end-user, network, and radio equipment. Built to replace the Air Force’s NETCENTS-2 Products vehicle, 2GIT remains the Air Force’s mandatory channel for commercial off-the-shelf IT purchases and is open to other Defense, civilian, and state, local, and tribal buyers. The recompete emphasizes modernization, with a stronger focus on cyber supply chain risk management, zero-trust-aligned and cloud-ready secure endpoints, and AI and machine learning enabled devices. The multiple-award BPA runs under the GSA Multiple Award Schedule with a five-year ordering period, and eligibility is limited to GSA Schedule holders. The effort will be competed on a full and open basis and carries an estimated ceiling of up to $5.5B, with the final RFP estimated for release in September 2026 and an estimated award in December 2026.
4. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Cancer Institute Biomedical Information Technology, Software Development and Informatics Support 2 (BITSDIS 2). The National Cancer Institute, through its Center for Biomedical Informatics and Information Technology, is preparing BITSDIS 2, the recompete of its biomedical IT and informatics support vehicle serving NCI and the broader NIH. The scope covers professional biomedical informatics, data science, information technology, software development, and artificial intelligence support for integrated IT and biomedical informatics coordination and management. The requirement is being run by the Interior Department’s Acquisition Services Directorate on behalf of NIH, so the notice carries a Department of the Interior identifier. The multiple-award IDIQ carries an estimated value of roughly $1B over a one-year base and four one-year options and will be competed on a full and open basis. The final RFP is estimated for release in October 2026, with an estimated award in February 2027.

Contact Us

Teaming Considerations

Contact Nick: nick.mccauley@hinzconsulting.com

Most capture teams lock in teammates too early — or scramble too late. The moment the government releases new information (whether a pre-solicitation notice, Sources Sought, RFI, draft RFP, or final RFP) is one of the highest-leverage points in the pursuit. Too many teams treat early teaming agreements as permanent and miss the chance to adjust.

Here’s a practical approach that works across different release types.

1. Treat every new release as a decision gate: New government information almost always changes the calculus. Updated scope, shifted priorities, clarified labor categories, security requirements, or evaluation emphasis can make a previously strong teammate less relevant — or suddenly essential. Re-open the teaming conversation deliberately instead of simply confirming earlier handshake deals.

2. Run a rapid gap analysis against the new information: Within a few days of any meaningful release, map the updated requirements against your current team. Score major work areas on:

• Technical capability
• Past performance relevance
• Price competitiveness
• Customer access / intimacy
• Small business utilization / socioeconomic credit
• Risk (performance, compliance, or contractual)

Any clear gap becomes a teaming priority. Small business utilization deserves explicit weight — it frequently appears as an evaluation factor, subcontracting goal, or source selection consideration, and it can be decisive in close competitions.

3. Protect the teammates you truly need: Some teammates are not optional. If a company brings unique past performance, critical clearances, specialized technical capability, or customer intimacy that materially improves your PWin, treat them as a “must-have.” Move early to secure exclusivity or a strong right-of-first-refusal, and be prepared to structure the workshare and terms in a way that keeps them committed. The cost of losing a true must-have teammate is almost always higher than the cost of slightly less favorable terms.

4. Be deliberate about workshare: Workshare should reflect actual value, not just the desire to keep a teammate happy. Consider two primary drivers when deciding how much work to commit:

• Execution value — How important is this teammate to successful performance after award?
• Proposal value — How much do you need their people, past performance, or solution input to submit a winning bid?

Teammates who score high on either (or both) generally warrant a meaningful workshare commitment. Teammates who fill a narrow gap or primarily help with compliance or small business goals often do not need a large or early workshare promise. Not every company on the team requires a formal workshare commitment up front — over-committing early reduces your flexibility and can create problems later if scope or pricing shifts.

5. Know when to actually issue a Teaming Agreement A formal Teaming Agreement should be issued only when the cost of nothaving one becomes higher than the cost of locking something in. Use this simple tiered approach:

• Must-have teammates → Issue a formal Teaming Agreement (with exclusivity and meaningful workshare language) as soon as you are confident they are essential. This often occurs before or immediately after a meaningful government release.
• Important but replaceable teammates→ Use a Letter of Intent or non-exclusive agreement first. Move to a formal Teaming Agreement only after requirements are clear enough to judge their real value (often after a draft RFP or detailed pre-solicitation information).
• Niche / compliance / small business fill-ins → A formal Teaming Agreement is frequently unnecessary, or can wait until late in the process.

Exclusivity is the real commitment. A non-exclusive agreement is often little more than a polite agreement to keep talking. Once you grant exclusivity, treat it as a true decision gate. Hard workshare percentages should generally lag behind capability confirmation — promising significant workshare before the requirements are well understood is a common way teams create problems for themselves later.

6. Be selective with exclusivity on everyone elseFor non-critical gaps, keep options open longer so you can still compare capabilities, pricing, and small business qualifications. Over-exclusive teaming early is one of the most common ways teams limit their own flexibility.

7. Use the Q&A or response period as a teaming tool: When the government is accepting questions or RFI responses, coordinate with potential teammates. A well-crafted question or input can surface information that strengthens your joint solution or exposes a weakness in a competitor’s likely approach.

8. Document the “why” behind every teammate: When leadership or the proposal team asks why a company is on the team, you should be able to point to a specific requirement, evaluation factor, or small business objective that teammate addresses better than other available options. Vague answers lose credibility once real requirements are on the street.

Bottom line: Every new piece of government information is a forcing function to pressure-test your team. Organizations that treat it that way — while protecting true must-have partners, allocating workshare based on real value, timing Teaming Agreements deliberately, and factoring in small business utilization — consistently show up with stronger, more defensible solutions.

How does your team handle teaming and workshare decisions when new pre-solicitation information is released?

Contact Us

Why Job Boards Are Great for Labor-Based PTW

Contact Dr. Tom: thomas.hudgins@hinzconsulting.com

During one PTW analysis I was showing results from a review of actions in various job boards which contained ads of labor categories that matched the opportunity I was profiling, and an audience member asked me why that was important to do and remembering that instance inspired this article.

In service-oriented, labor-based government contracting, direct labor costs often make up the vast majority of a proposal’s total cost structure. Uncovering a competitor’s true direct labor rates can feel like trying to solve an equation with too many unknowns. This is where competitive job board analysis becomes a powerful, real-time intelligence tool for Price-to-Win (PTW) due diligence.

1. Decoding True Direct Labor Costs

While public wrap-rate averages provide rough estimates, job postings on platforms like Indeed, LinkedIn, or Glassdoor often disclose actual salary ranges, signing bonuses, and clearance premiums. By auditing active listings for key staff or specialized labor categories in specific geographic markets, analysts can establish an empirical baseline for a competitor’s unburdened direct labor costs. This eliminates guesswork when estimating their core floor costs.

2. Spotting Teaming and Staffing Strategies

Active requisitions tell a story about how a competitor intends to execute the contract:

• Incumbent Retention vs. New Hires: A sudden surge in listings referencing specific contract qualifications usually signals that an incumbent is struggling with staff retention or expecting major attrition.
• Subcontractor Dependencies: Job postings frequently reveal whether a prime contractor is self-performing or quietly recruiting niche subcontractor talent to cover technical skill gaps.
• Seniority Mix Adjustments: Analyzing required years of experience in job specs helps you reverse-engineer whether the rival is proposing a low-cost, junior-heavy labor model to undercut the market.

Intelligence Tip: A company’s active hiring postings show their current market realities—not just the outdated historical rates found in old contract awards.

The Bottom Line

Scrutinizing competitor job boards bridges the gap between theoretical market data and real-time execution. It gives your PTW team concrete empirical proof to model a rival’s cost buildup with surgical precision, leading to a far more defensible bid strategy.

Contact Us

• August 17-20th: Premier Navy Procurement Expoin San Diego, CA
• August 27th: 2026 Navy Summit 27th in Falls Church, VA
• September 24th: 2026 Intel Summit in Falls Church, VA

Contact Us