B3 Feasibility Study Solicitation Questions and Answers.docx

Feasibility Study Solicitation Questions and Answers

1. I am writing to seek clarification regarding the competitive nature of the RFP. Specifically, I am interested in understanding whether this RFP is open to all qualified vendors or if there are any pre-identified preferred vendors involved in the process.

a. I first want to clarify that this is an RFQ (Request for Quote), not an RFP (Request for Proposal). The biggest difference between these two solicitation types are the FAR requirements/Parts that cover the process of solicitation and award. RFQ falls under FAR Part 13 whereas RFP falls under FAR Part 15. This is also considered a commercial service so FAR Part 12 also applies to this requirement.

b. This RFQ is a total small business set aside. This means that any small business with an active SAM registration can submit a quote and be considered for award.

2. To ensure that our proposal aligns with the USDA's expectations and constraints, could you please provide any guidance on the target budget or funding range for this project?

a. We are requesting that any interested contractor submit a performance work statement (PWS) detailing how they will accomplish the objectives laid out in the Statement of Objectives (SOO) along with their quoted pricing for that PWS.

b. Our budget for this effort is $100k per contractor for up to 2 contractors or a total project budget of $200k.

3. Is there a page limit for the PWS and the overall proposal?

a. No, your PWS, if selected for award, becomes part of the contract as it should fully describe what and how you will do to accomplish the objectives. While there is no limit, it should be concise and not filled with fluff that is not relevant to the work that will be performed to meet the objectives.

4. Does the USDA have a preference for cloud service providers, or should we propose our recommended solution?

a. Contractors must propose their own recommended solution.

5. Regarding the intention to award two contracts, could you clarify if these are for identical scopes of work, or if there are distinct goals for each contract?

a. The government, through market research, determined that it was in its best interest to award this requirement to two contractors. The contracts will be for the same requirement of achieving the objectives as laid out in the SOO, but the methods/PWS will be different as they will be submitted by two separate contractors. One contractor will not receive both contracts as this defeats the intention of the government to achieve its best interest.

6. We requests a 7-day extension.

a. The response are due by Friday July 5th so that we can make an award before the cattle show at the end of July. We want the 2 contractors that get an award to make it to this show and delaying the responses by 7 days will make this very difficult. I obviously won’t be in the office over the weekend so I could delay the response time to mid-day Monday the 8th, but I really cannot delay further than that unless it appears that we will not received at least 3 quotes by the original date.

7. We seek clarification on the page limit as it was not detailed in the provided solicitation.

a. There is no page limitation listed because there is no page limitation. We do ask that the PWS be separate from any capabilities, or technical pieces that are not specific to your technical approach to achieve the objectives. The PWS of the two awardees will be part of the contract as you are telling us what and how you will meet the objectives of the study. But we are not limiting you on page nor are we dictating a font or size or spacing. Present your PWS and quote in the manner that best describes how and what you will do if awarded the contract. You may also provided any additional information in the form of a capabilities statement either under a separate header or in a separate attachment to your response.

8. Do we need to provide any additional information outside of our SAM registration in regards to past performance?

a. there is nothing you have to do. I believe I asked for references, which is different than past performance. If the solicitation requests references, please provide what the solicitation asks for, but you do not need to do anything as far as past performance. I will look for any past performance ratings on both the government systems and anything I can find online through internet searches.

9. 52.222-52 Exemption from Application of the Service Contract Labor Standards to Contracts for Certain Services-Certification. (May 2014) – This solution is NOT offered and sold regularly to non-Governmental customers and to the general public. Therefore, we are to check “Does Not Certify” and that constitutes compliance for paragraph (d)?

a. For all provisions, please check as appropriate. I disagree with your assessment that these services are not regularly offered and sold to non-government buyers and to the general public. Remember this is a feasibility study/proof of concept/data gathering.

10. Which mobile platforms should the app support (iOS, Android, both)? Are there any specific versions of these operating systems that the app must be compatible with?

a. This pilot will be limited to iOS. AMS is seeking to determine if this is a viable option.

11. Can you provide detailed specifications for the skeletal measurements required (e.g., body length, height at withers)?

a. See attached Appendix

12. Can you please provide more details into the hardware integration framework the company expects, are there any APIs that we need to integrate? Or will the proposing agency be responsible to pitch a solution?

a. Unknown at this point. This is a pilot to determine the feasibility of collecting this type of data.

13. What specific details should be included in the generated reports?

a. This is a pilot to determine the feasibility of collecting and analyzing livestock attributes and match it to USDA AMS Grade Standards. A Report might entail a “Data Export” of the data collected but nothing more.

14. How frequently will reports need to be generated and shared?

a. See answer above.

15. Are there any specific formats or templates that should be used for the proposal?

a. No

16. What key elements should be included in the PWS?

a. See Section 6.2 of SOO

17. How detailed should the explanation of the contractor’s experience and expertise be?

a. Any experience related to capturing data elements mentioned in Section 6.2 (animal or human) – using technology would be relevant.

18. Are there any specific technical requirements or constraints that need to be addressed in the proposal?

a. No, this is a pilot, a proof of concept. This is a learning experience. This pilot is designed to flush out those technical constraints.

19. What is the budget for this opportunity?

a. This pilot, phase 1, is limited to 100k.

20. Is there any incumbent for this opportunity?

a. No. This is a new requirement.

21. The SOO requests the vendor to perform iterative development to include the integration of features and functionality. Is this request for after delivery of the POC (separate contract action), or in conjunction with the period of performance for this contract?

a. This pilot, proof of concept focused only on capturing metrics using LiDAR that match the USDA AMS Grading standards. Data is the output of this requirement. No full blown app is envisioned for this phase of the pilot. A partial app is envisioned that will show the livestock attributes that were captured and generated. AMS is simply trying to determine the feasibility of collecting livestock attributes real time, and calibrating them to match USDA AMS Grading standards.

22. It is not necessarily clear whether the government wishes to enhance existing systems or replace them. Could you please clarify?

a. This pilot, proof of concept focuses only on capturing and generating metrics using LiDAR that match the USDA AMS Grading standards. Data is the output of this requirement. If in fact this pilot proves worthy in terms of accurate data collection and reporting, AMS will evaluate the feasibility of integrating with the existing AMS Market News mobile app.

b. It is a feasibility study to test the ability to capture livestock attributes and fine tune that technology to see if it is a viable alternative to USDA grading.

23. Which USDA location is designated for the discovery phase?

a. TBD. AMS envisions no more than six trips focused in the Midwest (Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma). Based on the volume of cattle that are captured with this technology, the less trips needs. The more data the better.

24. Which USDA locations will be used for testing?

a. TBD. AMS envisions no more than six trips focused in the Midwest (Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma). Based on the volume of cattle that are captured with this technology, the less trips needs. The more data the better.

25. How many livestock test subjects will be available for the contractor to test?

a. TBD, but AMS envisions 300-500 head. The more data, the better the results.

26. What is the USDA's designated location for updating the Point of Contact (POC)?

a. TBD. The onsite visits will be focused no capturing data. The contractor is free to return to their location to finish.

27. Does the USDA envision using the same herd throughout the entire process?

a. This will be mixed. There could be where AMS runs the same set of cattle through to refine the instruments of data collection. Others, may be random cattle that come through a location.

28. Will the USDA be able to coordinate with preferred ranchers to arrange visits to cattle?

a. Yes. USDA will handle logistics.

29. Are there specific environmental conditions required for conducting the LiDAR tests?

a. No. AMS intends for this to be real world conditions found at feed yards or sale barns, which are various.

30. Will the USDA POC or staff be present or assist during the testing phases?

a. USDA will always be present during these onsite activities.

31. Does the USDA have an estimated budget for this initiative?

a. 100k for the pilot

32. Could you clarify the expected frequency and format for progress reports?

a. AMS expects to export the transactional data and then generated data to compare to USDA Grading standards. There is no real report format envisioned. As to the frequency, it will be ad-hoc.

33. Can you confirm the number of required trips?

a. Six trips or less, based on the volume of livestock evaluated. The more data collected, the better the results.

34. What members of the contractor team does the USDA require to be present for presenting the POC and performing updates?

a. This will be left up to the contractor to decide.

35. Are there specific accuracy thresholds for the measurements that need to be met to consider the POC successful?

a. Section 6.2 of the SOO is the attributes that are envisioned to be captured. Those are further discussed in the Appendix of the SOO. The outcome will be determined by the algorithm used and refined over time, using AI. AMS envisions a collaborative environment where SME’s work with the contractor to refine the specific metrics being reported and attempt to match them to USDA Grading standards.

36. Are there any specific data security protocols or standards that need to be followed?

a. Not for the pilot

37. How should the data be stored and managed to ensure compliance with USDA and federal regulations?

a. This data will be stored on contractor equipment. This data is not consider sensitive. AMS will ask to export that data from time to time during the pilot to be analyzed inhouse.

38. To Can you provide more details on the inspection and acceptance process for deliverables?

a. No. This pilot is subjective in nature.

39. What are the criteria for the acceptance of deliverables by the COR?

a. The COR understands that this is pilot, proof of concept and acceptance criteria will be fluid because of the unknown(s) in this pilot.

40. Can you provide more detailed timelines or milestones for the incremental development phase? We follow a traditional 2 week sprint process and want to ensure that is in line with USDA expectations.

a. AMS envisions this to be a fluid process due to the challenges of logistics, the unknowns of this pilot, and timing of animal availably.

41. Can the government please confirm that a POC (proof of concept) is the expected final product over the course of the one year PoP?

a. Yes

42. Assuming the final product is a POC, can the government please confirm that all data and code will be vendor owned and managed?

a. This is too early to tell. TBD. AMS needs to determine if this pilot is even feasible. That is the unknown. Will technology allow for the accurate raw data collection and generation refined outputs that match what a USDA Grader would grade?

43. Are there preferred or desired 3rd party tool of off-the-shelf-solutions required by the USDA to meet the contract requirements?

a. No. AMS defers to the contractor to make the more informed decision on this.

44. Similarly, what tools, resources, and existing documentation might we expect to receive from USDA to assist un in delivering the proof of concept?

a. USDA SME’s will be present at all onsite events, offering collaborative support and assistance to help the contractor continuously improve the data collection, and generation of refined outputs.

45. Are there specific or desired Key Personnel roles or skills to be reflected in our proposal team and key personnel resumes?

a. This is left to the contractor to bring the most qualified staff onto the project.

46. Will contractor personnel be required to use and government furnished property to carry out this effort?

a. No.

47. In travel expenses are to be reimbursed and deducted from the total award amount, what is the travel expense ceiling we can assume for us to factor travel costs into our $100k budget?

a. Expenses incurred will be deducted from the award amount.

48. Is the July cattle show included in the expected six trips to be taken throughout the POP?

a. AMS is unclear what July event that is being referenced. AMS needs more specifics to answer.

49. What is the typical herd size when creating an AMS Market News report?

a. N/A at this time.

50. How about for a single observation in the aggregated report?

a. For this pilot, AMS will be looking at individual cattle at a time, potentially looking at more than one at time if the system can handle it.

51. What is the expected volume of measurements intended to be captured from a herd? For example if there are 100 animals in a pen, how many should be measured?

a. Reference Section 6.2 for measurements

52. Has the team documented the success criteria for the various cattle measurements, including priority?

a. All references in Section 6.2 are all desired.

53. For the proof of concept’s focus on cattle, will a SME be provided to provide insights and expand on the data being collected?

a. Yes. Several.

54. For the initial role out of the application, have any adopters and key stakeholders been identified to support design, testing, and feedback sessions?

a. If this requirement goes beyond the pilot due to its success, then livestock producers would be the initial key benefactor of this application.

55. With the understanding that the white paper will guide the next steps, is there a known budget for the development, licensing, and ownership of the solution?

a. The next phase would be TBD based on the success or failure of the pilot.

56. Does the USDA currently have a labeled data set of livestock images with validated measurements to be used for machine learning model development?

a. No

57. What is the expected user interface and user experience (UI/UX) for the app?

a. This is TBD and to early in the process to define. The focus of this pilot is determining the feasibility of accurately evaluating an individual livestock.

58. Have ideal solution requirements been captured? For example would this solution better serve users as a handheld or would a fixed station.

a. AMS believes it could be a combination of both during the pilot. AMS envisions that the final product, later in life would be the phone or tablet.

59. Are cattle going to be processed for data capture one at a time, for example coming out of a chute or will they be processed in an open pen?

a. Yes, initially.

60. Does the data need to be processed live?

a. AMS prefers live, but is agreeable to other options.

61. Has the team taken a stance on offline processing of data and acceptable turnaround time of data?

a. AMS has not taken a stance.

62. What are the connectivity constraints (eg Wi-Fi, cellular) for data measurements?

a. Feed lots and sale barns have a variety of environmental challenges. AMS can offer a hot spot for internet, but understand that infrastructure challenges at these locations are various.

63. What accuracy and precision are expected for each type of measurement?

a. Section 6.2 of the SOO are the attributes that are envisioned to be capture. Those are further discussed in the Appendix of the SOO. The outcome will be determined by the algorithm used and refined over time, using AI. AMS envisions a collaborative environment where SME’s work with the contractor to refine the specific metrics being reported and attempt to match them to USDA Grading standards.

64. What environmental conditions (eg lighting, weather, vibration) will the app need to function under?

a. No. AMS intends for this to be real world conditions found at feed yards or sale barns, which are various.

65. What are the power consumption constraints for the mobile app and associated hardware?

a. AMS can not answer this question. That is beyond our capabilities to answer.

66. Can you please provide more details into the hardware integration framework the company expects, are there any APIs that we need to integrate? Or will the proposing agency be responsible to pitch a solution?

a. Unknown at this point. This is a pilot to determine the feasibility of collecting this type of data.

67. What specific details should be included in the generated reports?

a. This is a pilot to determine the feasibility of collecting and analyzing livestock attributes and match it to USDA AMS Grade Standards. A Report might entail a “Data Export” of the data collected but nothing more.

68. How frequently will reports need to be generated and shared?

a. See answer above.