Integrated Workforce and Readiness Platform (ARMOR)

An Integrated Workforce and Readiness Platform for the Defense Health Agency

NAICS Code(s): 541511, 541512, and 541519

1.0 Disclaimer
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) ONLY. This RFI is being issued solely for information and planning purposes. It does not constitute a Request for Proposal (RFP) or a promise to issue an RFP in the future. This request for information does not commit the Government to contract for any supply or service whatsoever. Further, the Defense Health Agency (DHA) is not at this time seeking proposals and will not accept unsolicited proposals. Respondents are advised that the U.S. Government will not pay for any information or administrative costs incurred in response to this RFI; all costs associated with responding to this RFI will be solely at the interested party’s expense. Not responding to this RFI does not preclude participation in any future RFP, if any is issued.

2.0 Background
The Defense Health Agency (DHA) is responsible for managing a complex, global healthcare enterprise. A primary challenge is the fragmentation of critical workforce data across distinct, standalone platforms. Manpower systems track billet assignments, credentialing systems manage clinical privileging, and separate databases monitor medical clearances, operational skillsets (JKSAs), and other position specific training. Because these systems lack native interoperability, leadership must manually reconcile who is assigned with what they are authorized, medically cleared, and operationally ready to perform.

This architectural disconnect introduces unacceptable risk, severely restricting our capacity to dynamically assess or model the downstream effects of operational deployments on our garrison healthcare mission. The goal of this initiative is to acquire a comprehensive solution that natively links these critical domains, providing a single, integrated view to meet the dynamic demands of both garrison healthcare and the operational environment.

DHA envisions an integrated workforce and readiness platform which will eliminate manual reconciliation and unlock transformative capabilities such as automated clinical scheduling and predictive impact analysis, empowering leaders to dynamically balance all mission requirements. This RFI is intended to gather information on industry best practices and innovative commercial technologies that could enable DHA to achieve this vision. To illustrate our specific needs and desired outcomes, DHA has included high-level use cases that describe how we envision leveraging data across our organization. Please be advised that these use cases are illustrative and subject to further refinement based on the information received from this RFI.

3.0 RFI Responses

• Submission Deadline: 22 July 2205 5:00 PM EST, submitted electronically via e-mail to Louise Lewis (louise.b.lewis.civ@health.mil) (Contracting Officer) and Rachael Bealer (rachael.n.bealer.civ@health.mil) (Contract Specialist)
• Interested vendors are invited to submit a capability statement addressing the five high-level use cases outlined in Section 5: Integrated Workforce and Readiness Use Cases. The capability statement should demonstrate your understanding of DHA's challenges and your ability to provide effective solutions to ALL use cases outlined.
• 3.1 Capability Statement Format:
  • Length: Maximum 10 pages (excluding cover page). No more than the first 10 pages (excluding cover) will be reviewed, if submitted.
  • Format: 8.5x11 inches, single spaced, 12pt font, in MS Word document or PDF format.
  • Focus: Clearly and concisely address how your technical capabilities could address each of the five use cases.
  • Considerations: Responses must address ALL five use cases in order to be considered as complete and be assessed. Late or non-compliant submissions will not be assessed or considered.
• 3.2.1 Name, mailing address, phone number, and e-mail of designated point of contact.
• 3.2.2. In order for the Government to assess the market capability of your company or organization as to one or more aspects of the Professional and Administrative Services, please provide the following company information:
  • Company Name;
  • Unique Entity ID;
  • CAGE;
  • Applicable NAICS Codes;
  • Business size status and date of last certification;
  • Applicable GSA SINs [to include description of SIN product/service classification/description];
  • All Applicable Contract Numbers [i.e. GSA OASIS+, GSA Multiple Award Schedules, DoW CDAO Tradewinds, etc.] (This information is for Market Research only and does not preclude your company from responding to this notice.)
• 3.3 Vendors will be required to be registered through the System for Award Management (SAM) at https://www.sam.gov/portal/SAM/#1 to be eligible for award of any possible future Government contract opportunities.
• 3.4 Questions and Answers: There will be no formal question period for this RFI. Please ensure your capability statement is comprehensive and addresses all relevant aspects of each of the use cases.
• 3.5  Proprietary information may be submitted; however, RFI respondents are responsible for adequately marking proprietary, restricted or competition sensitive information contained in their response. If a submission is marked, it will be protected from disclosure outside of Government personnel, unless permission is granted for Government support contractors to view the material.

  The following companies and individual employees are bound contractually by Organizational Conflict of Interest and disclosure clauses with respect to proprietary information, and they will take all reasonable action necessary to preclude unauthorized use or disclosure of an RFI respondent’s proprietary data. RFI responses MUST clearly state whether permission is granted allowing the support contractors identified below access to any proprietary information.

• Boston Consulting Group (BCG)
• Andrew Morgan Consulting, LLC
• Monterey Consultants, INC

4.0 Integrated Workforce and Readiness Use Cases
The below proposed use cases are designed to describe the types of capabilities we desire. This is not an exhaustive list but is intended to communicate our core capability objectives to interested industry partners.

USE CASE 1: Total Force Visibility: Manpower vs. Personnel Reconciliation

• Problem: In any large-scale enterprise, tracking authorized positions (the "spaces") versus the actual personnel assigned (the "faces") is a significant challenge. Manpower systems track the authorized billets for an organization but often have a data lag or incomplete fidelity regarding the specific individuals filling those roles, especially when dealing with contractors or personnel on temporary assignment from other departments. This can create "ghost" vacancies or hidden over-manning, preventing leadership from knowing their true assigned strength and skill mix at any given moment.
• Data Sources: Service MILPER Systems (e.g., IPPS-A, NSIPS), DCPDS (for civilians), and DHMRSi (for manually entered contractor//local national/volunteer data).
• Desired Capability: The platform must be capable of natively ingesting and reconciling data from disparate HR and manpower systems to create a single, authoritative "Total Force Profile." The system must automatically link the specific individual (the person) to their authorized position (the billet), clearly distinguishing their personnel category (e.g., Military, Civilian, Contractor, Local National, or Volunteer), and instantly alerting leadership to critical mismatches between authorized strength and actual assigned personnel.

USE CASE 2: The Joint Staff & Assured Operational Readiness (Clinical)

• Problem: When sourcing personnel for high-stakes operational assignments (e.g., a forward surgical team, a disaster response unit), a planner may see that a provider is assigned to an operational platform but lack immediate, real-time visibility into whether that provider has the required clinical repetitions ("sets and reps") to perform complex procedures in an austere environment. Relying on manually updated spreadsheets or separate training dashboards to verify this "procedural currency" introduces delays and risk into the operational planning cycle.
• Data Sources: Service Personnel Systems (for operational assignment), MHS GENESIS (for clinical case logs/CPT codes), and the operational currency hub (JKSA trackers).
• Desired Capability: The platform must natively link the person, their operational billet, their credentials, and their live clinical currency. The system must be capable of ingesting clinical activity data from the EHR to automatically update a provider’s readiness dashboard without manual entry. This ensures that deployed medical personnel are not just credentialed but are also certified as clinically current and ready for their specific operational mission.

USE CASE 3: Enterprise Visibility for Non-Clinical & Support Personnel

• Problem: While many systems focus on tracking the credentials of privileged medical providers, large healthcare organizations often lack enterprise visibility into the compliance and certification status of the wider workforce. This includes non-privileged clinical staff (e.g., surgical techs, respiratory therapists) and critical non-clinical support staff (e.g., medical logisticians, sterile processing technicians, administrative personnel). If these personnel lack specific, mandatory certifications (e.g., HIPAA, Basic Life Support, Hazmat), the facility cannot operate safely or in compliance with regulatory standards. Tracking these certifications in localized spreadsheets creates risk and administrative overhead.
• Data Sources: Localized MTF Excel trackers, Service-specific training databases (JKO, Relias), and CCQAS.
• Desired Capability: The platform must provide a comprehensive competency tracking module that expands beyond privileged providers. The system must allow leadership to define, assign, and track position-specific training requirements and certifications for all personnel categories (clinical, non-clinical, and support staff). The system must proactively alert supervisors of expiring certifications that would render a staff member non-deployable or ineligible to work in a specific garrison role.

USE CASE 4: Intelligent, Automated Workforce Scheduling & Compliance

• Problem: In complex healthcare environments, manually constructing clinical rosters and facility support schedules is highly inefficient and creates risk. Schedulers must often cross-reference a provider’s daily availability against their clinical privileges in separate systems. Simultaneously, they must check disparate local trackers to verify that non-privileged support staff and administrative personnel have completed mandatory compliance training (e.g., ACLS, HIPAA, Sterile Processing). Furthermore, schedulers must verify Occupational Health data to ensure no staff member is placed on a schedule that violates a temporary limiting physical profile. Relying on manual, multi-system reconciliation increases the risk of placing non-compliant or unprivileged staff on the schedule or causing vital facility functions to fail due to lapsed certifications.

• Data Sources: CCQAS (for privileged provider credentials and risk status), DHMRSI (for daily availability, leave, and assigned positions), Occupational Health Systems of Record (e.g., ASIMS, MEDPROS, MRRS) for physical limiting profiles and deployability flags, and Various Compliance/Training Portals (e.g., Relias, JKO) for non-privileged certifications and administrative compliance.

• Desired Capability:
  DHA seeks a scheduling engine that functions as an intelligent rules-based system for the entire MTF workforce. When a manager attempts to schedule a staff member – whether a surgeon, a clinic nurse, or an administrative contractor – the system must automatically verify their baseline identity, current availability, required credentials, and current physical/occupational health profile in real-time. If a staff member’s privileges are suspended, a critical certification has expired, or the assigned shift violates an active Occupational Health limiting profile, the system must enforce a "hard stop," preventing them from being scheduled for that specific duty and immediately notifying the supervisor.

USE CASE 5: The MTF Commander & Predictive Capacity Modeling

• Problem: Healthcare enterprise leadership requires the ability to instantly ascertain the true clinical capacity of a facility at any given moment. Without an integrated system, staff must manually aggregate data across separate HR, clinical, and facility trackers to determine how staffing changes impact bed availability. This lack of integration prevents leadership from maintaining real-time visibility into specialized bed availability (e.g., ICU, Burn, Trauma) and the specific provider coverage required to keep those physical beds operational. It makes it difficult to model how shifting personnel resources will simultaneously degrade home-station care capabilities while reducing the capacity to receive incoming patients during a surge event.
• Data Sources: MHS GENESIS, Facility Management systems/MEPRS (for baseline physical bed capacity and square footage), DHMRSi, CCQAS, Local hospital surge/expansion plans.
• Desired Capability: DHA seeks an orchestration layer capable of providing a real-time "Net Assessment" of MTF capacity. The system must ingest facility data (physical beds) and instantly cross-reference it against personnel data (staff available and credentialed to work those beds). When a staffing change is proposed (e.g., a deployment tasking or a surge event), the system must be able to automatically model the downstream impact: e.g., "If 5 ICU nurses are reassigned, Facility 'X' will lose 10 staffed ICU beds for patient care." The solution must automatically alert leadership when staffed bed capacity drops below established readiness thresholds.