The Missile Defense Agency Agile Professional Services Solutions (MAPSS) program is MDA's fourth-generation buy of Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS), the direct follow-on to TEAMS Next. It is not a single solicitation you bid once. It is a portfolio of roughly 28 separate requirements rolling out over six tranches through 2030, with an estimated value of about $5.5 billion and roughly 3,000 full-time equivalents in scope.
If you support MDA today, or you want to break into the missile defense services market, MAPSS is the franchise you need to understand, not just the next requirement on the calendar. And the single most important thing to understand about it is that the organizational conflict of interest (OCI) rules will determine which contracts you are even allowed to compete for. More on that below.
The lineage: where MAPSS comes from
MDA has run professional services support under a series of named programs. MAPSS is the latest in that chain, following Missile Defense Agency Engineering and Support Services (MiDAESS, 2009 to 2016), TEAMS (2015 to 2024), and TEAMS Next (2020 to 2029). As TEAMS Next requirements expire, their scope is being deconsolidated and rebuilt as standalone MAPSS requirements.
That deconsolidation is the structural story of MAPSS. Where TEAMS Next bundled broad functions together (Missile Defense System Engineering, Program Planning and Acquisition, Agency Operations, Security Operations and Intelligence, Facilities/Logistics/Environmental, and Specialized Engineering Analysis), MAPSS breaks them into narrower, separately competed contracts. Missile Defense System Engineering alone splits into four MAPSS requirements: Core Engineering, Sensors and Command & Control (C2) Engineering, Ground-Based Weapons Systems Engineering, and Sea-Based Weapons Systems Engineering.
For contractors, deconsolidation cuts both ways. More, smaller contracts mean more bites at the apple and more room for small businesses and mid-tier firms. But it also means more discrete competitions to track, more proposals to resource, and, as we'll see, more OCI walls between adjacent scopes.
The acquisition strategy: OASIS+ and category management
MAPSS leans on Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 16 authorities and streamlined processes. Rather than stand up a brand-new agency IDIQ for everything, MDA intends to leverage GSA's One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services Plus (OASIS+) MA-IDIQ for the majority of the services in the portfolio. That choice is driven in part by a category management goal: MDA is using MAPSS as its primary lever to reach 80% spend under management by 2029.
The practical implication is direct. For most MAPSS requirements, holding the right OASIS+ domain is your access pass. If you are not on OASIS+ in the relevant domain, you are watching from the sidelines or teaming with a holder. If OASIS+ positioning is on your roadmap, it should move up, because the MAPSS task order flow is a major reason to be on the vehicle. (For a refresher on how these vehicles work, see our guide to federal contract vehicles and our OASIS+ task order triage guide.)
Each individual MAPSS contract carries a five-year period of performance, with a base of either two or three years depending on stakeholder need, plus options.
The six-tranche rollout
MDA is releasing MAPSS incrementally so that strategy decisions stay relevant for requirements that won't begin until late in the decade. Tranche 1 (Quality & Mission Assurance and Safety, both small business) is already in execution. The table below shows the planned approximate final solicitation and award-need dates by requirement, per the published planning timeline.
| Tranche | Requirement | Approx. Final Solicitation | Award Need |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Quality & Mission Assurance (SB) | June 2025 | Dec 2025 |
| 1 | Safety (SB) | Nov 2025 | July 2026 |
| 2 | Intelligence | Feb 2027 | July 2027 |
| 2 | Counterintelligence | Mar 2027 | Aug 2027 |
| 2 | Program Protection | Mar 2027 | Aug 2027 |
| 2 | Trusted Workforce Security | Mar 2027 | Aug 2027 |
| 2 | Facilities Lifecycle Management | Mar 2027 | Aug 2027 |
| 2 | Test Support | Apr 2027 | Sep 2027 |
| 2 | Public Affairs [8(a)] | Oct 2027 | Feb 2028 |
| 3 | Core Engineering | Dec 2027 | July 2028 |
| 3 | Sensors & C2 Engineering | Jan 2028 | July 2028 |
| 3 | Ground-Based Weapons Sys Engineering | Jan 2028 | July 2028 |
| 3 | Sea-Based Weapons Sys Engineering | Jan 2028 | July 2028 |
| 3 | Environmental Management | Apr 2028 | Sep 2028 |
| 3 | Facilities Logistics (Space Mgmt) | Apr 2028 | Sep 2028 |
| 3 | Logistics | Apr 2028 | Sep 2028 |
| 4 | Acquisition & Program Planning | Sep 2028 | Mar 2029 |
| 4 | International Affairs | Oct 2028 | Mar 2029 |
| 4 | Business Operations | Jan 2029 | June 2029 |
| 4 | Human Resources & Training | Feb 2029 | June 2029 |
| 4 | Warfighter Integration | Jan 2029 | July 2029 |
| 5 | IT & Cybersecurity Management | Mar 2029 | Sep 2029 |
| 5 | Office Administration | May 2029 | Sep 2029 |
| 5 | Protocol | May 2029 | Sep 2029 |
| 5 | Cybersecurity Compliance & Risk Mgmt | Apr 2029 | Oct 2029 |
| 6 | Across Agency Engineering | Sep 2029 | Feb 2030 |
| 6 | Partnership & Technology (Engineering) | Sep 2029 | Feb 2030 |
| 6 | Agency Advisors | Apr 2030 | Sep 2030 |
MDA has been explicit that these are planning projections, subject to adjustment as it conducts stakeholder engagements, refreshes market research, and validates the acquisition approach for each tranche.
Tranche 2 Industry Day: June 25, 2026
With Tranche 1 in execution, Tranche 2 is the next live wave, and MDA has now scheduled an Industry Day to walk through it. The MAPSS Tranche 2 Acquisition Team will host the session on June 25, 2026 at 10:00 AM CST via Jabber. Per the May 26, 2026 SAM.gov notice, the team plans to review the requirements alongside its technical experts, walk through the evaluation methodology, and lay out the anticipated schedule.
The May 26 notice lists the Tranche 2 scope as six areas: Intelligence, Counterintelligence, Security, Test Support, Public Affairs, and Facilities Lifecycle Management. That is a tighter grouping than the seven-requirement breakout in the 3QCY25 information paper, where the security work was split into Program Protection and Trusted Workforce Security. If you have been tracking the older list, note that "Security" now appears to consolidate that scope, so confirm the exact boundaries during the Industry Day.
Two scopes that carry the heaviest OCI weight
Two of these areas deserve special attention because of how they interact with the OCI rules. Under MDA's OCI principles, Trusted Workforce Security is an exclusive contract: holding it walls you out of essentially every other MDA contract, so watch closely how the consolidated "Security" scope gets defined. Test Support appears repeatedly on the restricted and conflict lists, meaning it constrains what else you can hold across the engineering and analytical scopes. If Tranche 2 is on your radar, build your capture plan and your OCI strategy at the same time, not in sequence.
HTRO: the evaluation method to prepare for
MDA has indicated Tranche 2 will use an HTRO (Highest Technically Rated Offeror) methodology, which the Industry Day will cover. HTRO is a self-scoring approach: you score your own qualifications against defined criteria, the government ranks offerors by score, then verifies the top-ranked submissions. Verification can only move your score down, never up, so the work sits in documentation and evidence (CPARS ratings, certifications, qualifying projects) rather than narrative persuasion. If HTRO is confirmed for your target requirement, pull your CPARS record early and assess your scored position honestly before you commit.
The OCI regime: read this before you build a pipeline
This is the part of MAPSS that trips up contractors who treat it like a normal services buy. MDA's OCI Guiding Principles, grounded in FAR Subpart 9.5 and DFARS Subpart 209.571, are unusually aggressive, and they apply at the prime level and flow down to every subcontractor tier.
MDA recognizes the three standard OCI categories: impaired objectivity (your financial interest could skew the impartial advice you owe the government), biased ground rules (your current work lets you shape a future competition in your favor), and unequal access to non-public information. For impaired objectivity and biased ground rules, MDA's stated expectation is that industry avoids the conflict up front rather than proposing to mitigate it. Offerors who submit proposals that depend on mitigation risk being found un-awardable if the government decides the mitigation is inadequate.
Choose your lane: developer or SETA
MDA expects firms to pick a side. Offerors competing for MAPSS Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA) efforts are expected to have no involvement in the development, production, or testing of the Missile Defense System (MDS). For requirements MDA designates as SETA, the solicitation will carry DFARS 252.209-7008 and 252.209-7009, the Major Defense Acquisition Program OCI clauses. If your company builds, produces, or tests pieces of the MDS, whether directly or through MDA-funded work administered by another agency, that role can disqualify you from the corresponding SETA support work.
The internal walls between MAPSS contracts
Beyond the developer and SETA divide, MDA's principles define several layers of internal restriction:
- Restricted pairs: certain MAPSS contracts conflict with specific others and must be avoided, neutralized, or mitigated. Examples cluster heavily around the engineering scopes, Test Support, and the business, HR, and A3 functions.
- Exclusive contracts: Trusted Workforce Security, plus the C3PO and TACS acquisition-support efforts, conflict with all other MDA contracts. Win one of these and you are effectively out of the rest of the MDA market.
- IT oversight walls: because IT & Cybersecurity Management (ITCM) and Cybersecurity Compliance & Risk Management (CCRM) oversee MDA's network, holders are barred from the IRES and RECS contracts (and their follow-ons) on top of the other restrictions.
- TEAMS Next overlap: because legacy TEAMS Next contracts run concurrently with early MAPSS awards, current incumbents must resolve conflicts between what they hold now and what they bid on.
OCI management plans are evaluated during source selection, incorporated at award, and your performance managing OCIs is assessed under CPARS. Only the MDA Director can waive an un-mitigatable OCI, and only when it is in the government's best interest, so do not plan around a waiver.
What this means in practice
The OCI map should drive your MAPSS portfolio strategy before you write a single proposal. Decide which lane your company is in, identify which one or two requirements are your true must-wins, and confirm that pursuing them doesn't quietly foreclose the rest of your MDA pipeline or conflict with work you already hold. A capture decision on one Tranche 2 requirement can have downstream consequences across Tranches 3 through 6.
How to track MAPSS without drowning in it
Twenty-eight requirements across six tranches, each with its own draft RFP, RFI, industry day, Q&A document, and final solicitation, is a lot of paper to monitor over five years. The contractors who win on franchises like this aren't reading every document end to end. They triage fast, decide what merits real capture investment, and reserve deep reads for the handful of requirements that fit their lane and clear the OCI map.
That is exactly the workflow RFP Snapshot is built for. Drop a MAPSS draft RFP, RFI, or final solicitation in, and you get a standardized Opportunity Snapshot with 20+ triage data points (agency, NAICS, set-aside, value, place of performance, key dates, evaluation criteria, and key personnel) in minutes. When a requirement clears triage, the Proposal Kickoff Accelerator and Recruiter Accelerator turn the SOW into a kickoff deck, compliance matrix, government questions, and recruiter-ready job reqs so your team starts on day one instead of week two.
Bottom line
MAPSS is a decade-long, ~$5.5B reshaping of how MDA buys professional services. The deconsolidation creates real openings for small and mid-tier firms, OASIS+ is the access pass for most of it, and the EO 14222 review means the final shape may shift. But the rule that should anchor your strategy is the OCI regime. On MAPSS, the question isn't only "can we win this?" It is "what does winning this prevent us from ever bidding again?" Answer that first, and the rest of your MAPSS plan gets a lot clearer.