030ADV25R0130 Questions and Answers Final.pdf

030ADV25R0130 Questions and Answers

1. Is this a brand new contract?

i. Who is the incumbent contractor?

ii. Contract number

iii. Award value

Answer: This is a new contract for the work specified in the solicitation. This contract is related to contract LCCRS24C004, which was awarded to DSQUORUM LLC for $1,716,334.94.

2. Has the scope or size of the current contract changed in any nontrivial way between the incumbent contract and the present solicitation? / Is the scope and estimated workload for the present solicitation approximately the same as for the incumbent contract?

Answer: This is a new contract for the work specified in the solicitation but it is related in scope and size to LCCRS24C004. The SOW covers the same type of work, but for different modules and/or improvements.

3. Your SAM.gov listing states, “030ADV24R0053 is issued as a Request for Proposal (RFP) on an unrestricted basis”, but the SF-1449 lists in Box 14 that the Method of Solicitation is an RFQ. Would you please clarify this discrepancy?

Answer: The government is soliciting an RFP from interested offerors.

4. Could the Government clarify if there is an established or estimated budget ceiling for this effort that Offerors should be aware of when developing their pricing volume?

Answer: The Library has allocated no more than $2M for this effort.

5. What additional information or breakdown can CRS share about the allocated budget for the contract base deliverables (3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.10) and the various options?

Answer: There is no further information to share at this time. See question 4.

6. Please confirm the period of performance dates.

Answer: The period of performance will be 9/16/2025 to 9/15/2026. Note that the option periods of performance may be updated if/when those CLINs are exercised.

7. Would it be acceptable to submit Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) or letters of reference in lieu of CPARS?

Answer: Offerors are not required to submit a CPAR. If one is available, we may search it and use that information. Please submit references in accordance with Section L.

8. What were the specific reasons for not exercising an option year with the incumbent contractor from FY2024 (DSQUORUM LLC)?

Answer: The current Library policy does not permit the solicitation of options where future requirements are not known; therefore, the primary work is solicited on an annual basis.

9. Would the government consider a multi-year award with option periods after the base year that could be exercised each year to provide CRS more flexibility in project scope?

Answer: No, see Question 8.

10. Have there been performance issues, capability gaps, or unmet requirements with previous awardees (DSQUORUM LLC, Guidehouse Inc.)?

Answer: No.

11. Can you provide feedback or a debrief from the FY2024 contract, either publicly available or in summary, to help understand what improvements are expected this cycle?

Answer: A debrief is directed only towards the offerors to the FY2024 solicitation and is not publicly available.

12. Could you please clarify the evaluation criteria and the award process described in the RFP?

Answer: Please see Section M regarding the best value tradeoff information.

13. Will the Government evaluate total price by summing the base period plus all optional tasks, or only by the base tasks initially?

Answer: Pursuant to Section M, the Library will evaluate the sum of all deliverables stated in Section G, which does include options.

14. What is the page limitation for the Technical and Staffing Volume?

Answer: Pursuant to Section L, the page limit for Volume I is 15 pages.

15. Are resumes, cover page, table of contents counted towards page count?

Answer: Pursuant to Section L, the technical approach and staffing volume is limited to 15 pages including all cover pages, executive summaries, table of contents, attachments, and/or appendices. Resumes do not count toward the page limit for this volume.

16. What is the page limitation for the Pricing Volume?

Answer: Pursuant to Section L, price proposals do not have a page limit.

17. What is the page limitation for the Past Performance Volume?

Answer: Pursuant to Section L, the past performance volume is limited to 8 pages including all cover pages, executive summaries, table of contents, attachments, and/or appendices.

18. What is the estimated workload for this PWS?

Answer: The Library anticipates four fulltime key personnel with supplemental expertise, for a total of approximately eight fulltime equivalents (FTEs).

19. Can you clarify what platforms or environments the current CRS tools are built on?

(e.g., AWS, Strata, custom stacks)?

Answer: AWS

20. Are the seven existing CRS tools accessible for review or demonstration to inform proposed enhancements?

Answer: User guides for the existing models will be made available after award. We cannot provide review or demonstration before proposals are submitted.

21. What level of integration with existing platforms or data environments is required?

Are there limitations on programming languages or tools?

Answer: The current models reside in our AWS environment. There are limitations that are common to federal government hosted and maintained cloud environments.

22. What types of optional enhancements would be viewed most favorably (e.g., UI/UX improvements, automation, advanced analytics, AI modeling)?

Answer: Each of the aforementioned enhancements would be considered favorably.

Each model has unique enhancement opportunities that would include all of those listed. Please refer to Section C.3.7 for a non-exhaustive list of some of the proposed enhancements to each model

23. Are there specific use cases or pain points from prior implementations that offer insight into what enhancements would be valued?

Answer: Compute and processing limitations for some models required adjustments to the pipeline to accommodate larger data calls.

24. What format is preferred for the training sessions (in-person, virtual, asynchronous modules)?

Answer: Please refer to Section C.3.4 for training requirements.

25. Is there a required Learning Management System (LMS) or platform for hosting training materials?

Answer: No, we use MS Teams platform.

26. Could you please clarify the expected data volume and data formats for ingestion across all data models?

Answer: The potential data size for each model is unlimited. Currently we are ingesting and manipulating terabytes of data for at least one model but this level varies from model to model with some being considerably smaller.

27. Could you please clarify the frequency across all data models?

Answer: The Library anticipates that the data could be used daily by multiple users.

28. Is there a preferred or mandated cloud platform or hosting environment for deploying the solution (e.g., FedRAMP-compliant cloud)?

Answer: The models reside in AWS in a FedRAMP compliant environment.

29. Is there any flexibility regarding the U.S. citizenship requirement for key personnel, especially for roles requiring specialized skills?

Answer: No

30. Are subcontractors permitted to perform work under this contract? If so, what are the citizenship and security clearance requirements for subcontractor personnel?

Answer: Offerors may partner with subcontractors as they wish; however, all citizenship and security requirements would flow down to all subcontractor personnel.

31. Could you specify the cybersecurity and compliance standards the solution must adhere to (e.g., NIST, FedRAMP, FIPS)?

Answer: The LOC ISSO determines compliance standards and FedRAMP compliant is the common standard. Refer to clauses H.8, H.9, and H.11 in the solicitation regarding NIST and FIPS applicability.

32. What are the preferred formats, templates, and frequency for the monthly status reports and other project deliverables?

Answer: The formats and templates can be worked out at the kickoff meeting after award.

33. Are there any preferred or existing architectural standards or templates that CRS wants to follow for solution design and documentation?

Answer: No

34. What methods should the contractor use to track and report on external developments in data science? Are there specific sources or formats that are preferred?

Answer: No preferred format, though a white paper with a presentation summarizing the developments is expected.

35. What level of ongoing support and coaching is expected for CRS personnel after deployment?

Answer: Ongoing support is expected as the tools/models are made available to more analysts and CRS staff.

36. Are there any specific formatting or content requirements for the technical proposal that we must strictly follow?

Answer: Please respond sequentially to the items in the SOW.

37. Kindly clarify whether only contractors with U.S. citizenship can be hired for this project? We assume that the U.S. citizenship requirement applies only to the key personnel and not to the bidder.

Answer: All contractor personnel assigned to this contract must be US citizens. All contractors must have a background check as identified in LCFARS LC52.204-4, Contractor Employee Fitness.

38. Regarding the schedule of payments, would CRS accept more granular pricing for the deliverables within each contract option? This would include pricing for individual deliverables, such as training sessions (3.4), and intermediate deliverables, such as requirements gathering for model enhancements (3.7).

Answer: Offerors may propose a more granular pricing for the deliverables within each option. Accepted elements of the proposal may be incorporated in the bilateral contract award resulting from the solicitation.

39. Our understanding is that 3.10 is focused on maintenance and support of the existing models; 3.7 concerns the development of enhancements beyond the existing model implementations; and 3.8 is related to support and training for the resulting enhanced tools. Is this an accurate summary of these deliverables as CRS sees them?

Answer: Yes, while development of enhancements of existing models progresses, support for analysts using the existing state of the models would be expected. One would expect some overlap between the two support functions.

40. What is the current state of Project 2—Historic Appropriations, Department of State and Foreign Operations (SFOPS)? What additional information can CRS provide regarding the current codebase and technologies used, data pipelines, data validation procedures, documentation, user profiles, and number of regular users for this project?

Answer: The model is functioning at a basic level. The objective is that we would increase the functionality so that it mirrors some of the functionality from the DoD Budget Justification model.

41. Regarding the enhancements to Project 2—Historic Appropriations, Department of State and Foreign Operations (SFOPS), what would be the data sources for the additional appropriations legislation, and what format are they in? What kinds of data validation checks will be required?

Answer: The legislative data are in PDF and HTML format. Data validation would include ensuring the information/data ingested and processed matches the published data.

42. What is the current state of Project 3—Workforce Information Systems Data Consolidation? What additional information can CRS provide regarding the current codebase and technologies used, data pipelines, data validation procedures, documentation, user profiles, and number of regular users for this project?

Answer: The model is functioning at a basic level using test data. The objective is to enhance the data ingestion.

43. Regarding the enhancements to Project 3—Workforce Information Systems Data Consolidation, what kinds of reports would CRS like to generate from the consolidated data, and what formats or reporting technologies would be preferred?

Answer: Standard and ad hoc reports should capture workforce demographic, contact, and position information; performance appraisals; promotion eligibility; accession and attrition data; and organizational structure information. Based on user roles, report stakeholders should be able to define selection criteria, select date ranges, provide options to sort and group data, and generate subsets of reports, if needed. Report output should include Excel, PDF, .csv, and data visualization.

44. How does CRS see the Data Governance Outline (3.9) extending or building upon existing data governance policies and procedures within CRS or LOC?

Answer: CRS and the LOC do not have a coordinated, formal data governance strategy.

Internal ‘business’ data are maintained by the individual offices in accordance with federal records management regulations. Research and policy data as ingested and transformed in each of the models, also follow records management protocols, though compliance is dispersed among research divisions and individuals. There is not a coordinating entity or data officer.

45. What would CRS consider the key success criteria for the Data Governance Outline (3.9)?

Answer: The outline would provide tangible next steps for senior managers. The outline would provide a foundation for slowly building a governance strategy that can adapt to changes in workflows and modernized data ingestion techniques, processing, and storage needs created in part by the model work in 3.7.

46. Does CRS expect that work on the Data Governance Outline (3.9) and Project 3— Workforce Information Systems Data Consolidation will involve access to Personally Identifiable Information (PII)?

Answer: Yes

47. Would CRS be open to virtual-only training delivery of a given training session if a minimum number of staff do not register specifically for on-site participation?

Answer: Yes

48. Would CRS consider allowing the contractor to implement a survey for CRS staff regarding topics of interests to inform training and forum proposals to the DSWG?

Answer: No. An informal assessment would be supported.

49. What are the Library’s expectations regarding storage and hosting of the monthly training-session recordings? Will the Contractor provide a secure hosting platform, or will the Government provide an internal repository?

Answer: LOC will provide an internal storage repository for all contract deliverables.

50. Are there any restrictions or required approvals for including open-source libraries or machine-learning frameworks as part of the model enhancements, beyond ensuring FedRAMP compliance?

Answer: Yes. Our ISSO (housed in the Office of the Chief Information Officer, OCIO, the LOC IT Office) would need to approve all model enhancement to ensure compliance with our ATO.

51. For “daily” user support on deployed tools, is there a maximum expected volume of requests or a formal ticketing system to manage interactions with CRS staff, so we can properly scope staffing?

Answer: No, we do not have an estimate of the maximum expected volume or a formal ticketing system. The expected volume will ebb and flow but the Library does not anticipate daily contact. We do not require a helpdesk. The support would be ad hoc.

52. What is the approximate volume (in gigabytes or terabytes) and update frequency of new data sets for these seven models, so that we can accurately size the cloud infrastructure and labor hours for ingestion?

Answer: Please see the answer to Question 26.

53. As regards Project 6, does the Government have a preferred or existing cloud platform (e.g., AWS GovCloud, Azure Government) already under an ATO for large-scale data processing, or should the Offeror propose a new FedRAMP-authorized environment from scratch?

Answer: LOC/CRS already has an ATO for an AWS cloud environment. The preference is to continue in the space.

54. Are there any Library-specific requirements, standards, or constraints around containerization and orchestration platforms (e.g., Docker, Kubernetes) that the Contractor must follow for these new or enhanced data science tools?

Answer: Based on use case we do use docker or podman for containerization. AWS projects utilize ECS, Fargate, EKS depending on the best fit for the solution being developed. We have git ci pipeline tasks that are run during the container build process that scans the container for vulnerabilities CVEs etc.

55. As regards Project 1, Is there an existing standardized document structure or taxonomy for non-DoD Congressional Budget Justifications that the Contractor can leverage, or do we need to build a unique parsing method for each agency’s CBJ format?

Answer: Each agency will likely have a unique document library and structure. However, CBJs generally provide like information and some agencies may have similar structure.

56. As regards Project 2, For the appropriations account matching and name changes over time, will CRS provide any existing crosswalk or reference documentation, or should the Contractor plan on extensive historical research and manual mapping with SMEs?

Answer: LOC SMEs will work closely with the contractor to map name changes over time.

57. If the Contractor brings in external experts for the quarterly forums, will CRS handle speaker contracting/clearance and any honorarium, or should we plan to include speaker sourcing and costs in our proposal and manage any necessary approvals?

Answer: The expectation is the Contractor will include sourcing and costs in the proposal.

58. Are there established guidelines or frameworks for integrating new web-based dashboards or interactive tools into CRS’s existing intranet (or SharePoint environment), or should the Contractor propose a standalone solution?

Answer: An integrated solution is preferred.

59. Although the PWS states all tools and enhancements become Library property, does the Library anticipate restrictions on using open-source code with permissive licenses, or is the inclusion of open-source libraries freely allowed as long as the final application is not encumbered by proprietary obligations?

Answer: The inclusion of open-source libraries freely allowed as long as the final application is not encumbered by proprietary obligations.

60. Training Sessions and Quarterly Forums are to be delivered in hybrid format. Does the Government have a preference for the amount of trainings and forums that both presenters must physically travel to the Madison Building?

Answer: Only training sessions are to be delivered in a hybrid format. Each training would require physical travel to the Madison Building.

61. The Place of Performance includes the Madison Building, but the solicitation does not specify travel basis. Shall offerors price travel using the GSA CONUS per diem schedule for Washington DC, or another basis?

Answer: If travel is required, offerors must adhere to GSA FTR. Note, travel prices must be included in the fixed price. The Library cannot award cost reimbursable line items.

62. For each SDLC document (SRD, SDD, Test Report, Release Memo), please provide an expected page count or confirm that CRS templates will be supplied.

Answer: The Library does not have templates nor dictate a specific page count for these items.

63. The contractor is to enhance seven existing tools. Please provide any available sizing metrics—approximate lines of code, new feature/story point counts, or integration endpoints—for each of the seven tools.

Answer: Contractor shall continue to enhance the user interface of existing CRS Data Science Models or tools as indicated in each of the sections containing the model descriptions. While there are no specific metrics, please refer to Section C.3.7 for more detail on the non-exhaustive list of proposed enhancements.

64. Mandatory annual IT Security Awareness training is required. Please confirm that all offerors must budget annual labor hours for each such employee to complete the Library’s mandatory IT Security Awareness training prior to, and each year after, onboarding in order to be responsive.

Answer: H.4 LC52.204-3: Contractor staff must successfully complete mandatory information systems security training and access forms prior to use of or access to any of the Library’s digital assets. Given that there are not annual options, this will not be an annual requirement. Additionally, these training should only take about two hours per person. As such, the Library does not anticipate that this needs to be an itemized detail in the price proposal.

65. SDLC artefacts (SRD, SDD, test reports, etc.) are required. Please confirm that all offerors must produce the full suite of SDLC artefacts in the Library’s template—or an approved equivalent—for every tool enhancement delivered in order to be responsive.

Answer: Please refer to H.10 LC52.239-2 SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE (SEP 2018).

66. FedRAMP and A&A support are required, but scope is undefined. How many separate environments (dev, test, staging, prod) must be authorized, and at what FIPS 199 impact level does the Government prefer, if any?

Answer: Please refer to Section H.10 LC52.239-2 and the Government does not have preferred FIPS 199 impact level. The Library does not require a specific number of separate environments. The contractor should expect to use best practices.

67. Section G.4 allows invoicing upon deliverable acceptance. For deliverables with multiple units (e.g., 12 Monthly Status Reports), does CRS want one invoice per unit or may invoices be consolidated (e.g., quarterly)?

Answer: Offerors should submit a consolidated invoice per month that identifies the appropriate CLIN and associated deliverable(s).

68. The Kick off Meeting is to be held within five days. Approximately how many CRS attendees should the contractor anticipate when sizing room logistics and minutes taking effort?

Answer: The government (CRS) will have at most 12 attendees. We anticipate this meeting will be conducted virtually so room size should not be a factor.

69. Contractor employee fitness determinations are required. Please confirm that all offerors must enroll every contractor employee who needs network or facility access in the Library’s continuous vetting and Rap Back fitness program, and budget for the associated administrative effort in order to be responsive.

Answer: Confirmed

70. The Library requires CUI protections including encryption and patching. Please confirm that all offerors must ensure that all information labelled “Security Category Moderate” or higher is encrypted at rest and in transit using FIPS 140 2 validated modules and include any resulting license or configuration costs in the fixed price in order to be responsive.

Answer: Confirmed

71. What specific application development skills (languages, frameworks, platforms) are required to be considered compliant and suitable under this solicitation?

Answer: All contractors must have the specialized knowledge, skills, abilities and educational background to successfully accomplish the tasks required by their position within the scope of this contract. The expectation is experience in Python and familiarity with an AWS environment.

72. As per the Software Engineer role, are there any application development activities required under this proposal scope (e.g., new tool development, dashboard coding, or API integrations)?

Answer: The requirements for the Software Engineer Role are provided in Section C.

Note, this includes full software development lifecycle.

73. Is the Software Engineer role more focused on system support and maintenance?

Can you please clarify?

Answer: Please see the answer to Question 72 for the scope of the Software Engineer role.

74. For the Digital Interface/Data Visualization Specialist: Could the Government confirm the preferred or required tools (e.g., Tableau, Power BI, D3.js, Adobe Creative Suite) to be deemed Compliant & suitable?

Answer: During development, the Government will advise the contractor which visualization tool is suitable/preferable. The Library currently uses Power BI and AWS but vendors are not limited to these tools.

75. What are the Cloud based tools experience that the agency is expecting from the vendor?

Answer: Extensive experience with Cloud Tools offered by vendors such as Amazon Web Services and Azure are expected.

76. Can the Government provide more detail on the expected types and number of data analysis models to be developed under CLIN 0001?

Answer: Section C Part 3.7 Identifies seven separate models for enhancement.

77. Does the Government have a list of specific use cases or research domains that these models should support?

Answer: No.

78. Are any specific data sources or systems (internal or external) anticipated to be used during model development? This will help scope the data ingestion, preprocessing, and integration effort.

Answer: Most of the data is publicly available, such as regulations.gov and the budget reports for multiple agencies. With the calculators and simulators, scenarios are largely generated based on changing policies.

79. Can the Government clarify how many dashboards, visualizations, or interactive interfaces are anticipated under the model development and enhancement scope?

Answer: The Library anticipates one dashboard for each model but each model needs to be responsive to different visualizations to be able to respond to changing policies or newly available data.

80. Are there any preferred platforms or tools for data visualization (e.g., Tableau, Power BI, D3.js)?

Answer: Please see the answer to Question 74.

81. Does the Government have a preferred technology stack (languages, platforms, cloud providers), or is the offeror free to propose the most suitable tools for model development and deployment?

Answer: While not required to use the existing technology stack, tools, and established Cloud presence, enhancements would likely build on the infrastructure currently in place which is Python for development code and AWS cloud applications Bedrock for AI and Textract.

82. Are there any expected performance metrics, such as model accuracy, response time for tools, or user load for dashboards, that should guide development?

Answer: There is not a performance metric per se but the nature of the work is that the models have to have high accuracy as they inform Congress. The expectation is that the model enhancements will maintain a standard of authoritative and objective analysis. A UI standard of “Low-Code” is desirable for dashboards.

83. Does the Government require Section 508/WCAG compliance for visualizations or interfaces built under this CLIN?

Answer: Yes

84. The RFP lists four labor categories in Section C.5: Program Manager, Data Scientist, Software Engineer, and Visualization Specialist. Does the Government anticipate the need for any additional roles—such as QA Engineer, Data Analyst, Technical Writer, or Security/DevOps Engineer—for CLIN 0001?

Answer: The Library does not dictate a specific labor mix beyond the listed Key Personnel.

85. What is the status of each of the existing models? Are the existing models currently being leveraged by CRS staff?

Answer: All models will be functioning at contract award and used in analysis.

86. Hosting: In prior Data Science support contracts for the Library of Congress and the Congressional Research Service, contractors were required to host models during the period of performance. Are the seven (7) models identified expected to be hosted in a contractor environment (cloud or local)?

Answer: The objective is to work within the LOC/CRS cloud environment.

87. Transition: Are there any requirements for data migration, continuity of service, or license transferability at the end of the contract period?

Answer: Any tools and enhancements created as part of this contract shall become property of the Library of Congress. This includes the transfer of any commercial software licenses. The contractor shall not provide them to other entities without approval by the Library.

88. Software Licensing: Should the proposed solution include all necessary software licenses as part of the offer, and if so, what is the software, the expected duration and type of licensing (e.g., perpetual, subscription-based)?

Answer: The Contractor will be working within the LOC environment and the expectation is that contractors will be using the tools within the CRS AWS environment and the existing software, like Python for development and PowerBI (or similar applications) for visualizations.

89. Is Microsoft Azure the Cloud Service provider for all 7 data models? Confirm that Azure Government is currently being used for all projects.

Answer: No. AWS is the Cloud service currently supporting the 7 models

90. Do all seven projects currently deployed in Azure Government share a common architecture, or are they architected independently?

Answer: See response to Question 89.

91. Which of the projects involve structured, unstructured or semi-structured source data?

Answer: The data is largely derived from public sources and is in various formats. For example, the budget data is structured but the structure changes from year to year while the information and data provided by the Regulations.gov API endpoints is generally unstructured.

92. For each project, identify tools and services used for

i. Data storage (databases, data lakes, blob storage) Answer: AWS S3 buckets

ii. Data processing and pipeline orchestration Answer: AWS Lambda

iii. Analysis and visualizations Answer: Generally, PowerBI and React Javascript Library for UI

iv. Application or user facing web interfaces (if any) Answer: Amazon CloudFront and React Javascript Library

v. Data Modeling Answer: The Tax Simulator uses and opensource, python-based, model “Policy Simulation Library (PSL)” and the Student Loan Calculator was built in-house.

vi. Data science initiatives Answer: Nothing specific has been used for Data Science Initiatives.

93. Are there any additional Azure services or third-party tools integrated into the current environment?

Answer: They are currently in an AWS Cloud environment. Please see the response to Question 89.

94. What service is currently used for workflow orchestration and scheduling?

Answer: Government does not currently have an established orchestration and scheduling service.

95. What is the process for requesting access for new users or provisioning additional cloud services? What is the typical turnaround time for these requests?

Answer: New users are provisioned with a Privileged Rules of Behavior (PROB), followed up by the AWS Role Request form. The timing varies depending on the approver’s availability and Personnel Security Directorate (PSD) clearance validation. Once the PROB is approved the user can be granted to role within two business days.

96. For deliverables related to Coaching and Support (3.8, 3.10): (1) Who is the primary audience (technical, functional users, business analysts). (2) On average, how many users require one-on-one support on a daily/weekly basis?

Answer: (1) Functional users and policy analysts. (2) The Library does not have metrics available at this time.

97. Will the training be performed onsite or can it be performed remotely?

Answer: For Training Sessions, hybrid format is required with an on-site component for up to 24 attendees and virtual attendance for up to 26 attendees

98. For the 7 projects, are there separate PMs / POCs that the contractor is expected to work with instead of a single Government PM who will coordinate work across all the projects?

Answer: There will be a single Government PM and one contract COR.

99. For enhancements / changes to projects, is there a separate change control board for each project with different stakeholders? If not, can the Government clarify what the change governance structure will be?

Answer: There is not a formal change control board. Government SMEs will work with vendor to confirm changes and enhancements.

100. Does the Library of Congress currently have any Artificial Intelligence efforts that may impact the AI usage within the projects?

Answer: The LOC and CRS both support AI working groups. New AI use cases must be reviewed and approved by each AIWG. Note, the Library is not currently authorized to implement AI but RPA may be utilized where deemed necessary.