12SAD122R0003 Amendment 3 Q and A.pdf

RFP#12SAD122R0003

SURPASS

Amendment 3 – Responses to Vendor Questions

45) Can you please enumerate the critical systems/services to be integrated with? Which applications need to communicate with each other? For each of these applications and/or integration requirements, could you please estimate the following;

• Number of Transactions per Second that the API/integration is expected to process?

Government’s Response: Since the Government’s current system is over 25 years old, we do not have these metrics. Since this is a Loan Origination System, various transactions can take different amounts of time. For example, pulling an applicant’s full credit report could take several seconds or more. However, the Government expects that the new system will provide a customer experience that is consistent with current online mortgage origination systems customer experience. See PWS Functional Area 1 and PWS Section

3.1 for additional information and the list of integrations. This will also depend on the request and solution.

• Total file size or the number of records that the API/integration is expected to process?

Government’s Response: Since the Government’s current system is over 25 years old, we do not have these metrics. File size and number of records depends on the origination business function being performed. For example, eligibility is a very small transaction whereas obtaining an applicant’s full credit report or bank account information is significant larger transaction. See PWS Functional Area 1 and PWS Section 3.1 for additional information and the list of integrations. This will also depend on the request and solution.

• Are there any strict SLA requirements to be met? Response time within 100ms etc.,?

Government’s Response: The Government expects that the new system will provide a customer experience that is consistent with current online mortgage origination systems customer experience. The Government expects that transaction that expect a response from an external provide will take longer than moving screen to screen while entering data. The Government expects transaction to be similar in size and similar or better in performance. This will also depend on the request and solution.

46) Could you please identify the data-stores (Databases, DataLakes, Legacy applications etc.,) where the data is currently stored/spread and what technology are they running on

(Oracle RDBMS, AWS, Mainframe systems etc.,)

Government’s Response: The data stores include ECF (Qflow), LoanServ 21.01 uses

VSAM to store data ; RD Tabular Data Warehouse (TDW) is Oracle 11g; Informatica

PowerCenter 10.5; UniFi is on Progress 11.7.5; FICO Blaze, Equifax for applicant credit reports.

47) How much of this data would need some kind of transformation/massaging before it gets passed on to users/consumers for consumption?

Government’s Response: This is dependent on the data collected, and the data type by the solution, and where the data needs to be sent next to support the origination process

48) The SURPASS solicitation requests a unique combination of capabilities with very specific commercial cloud-based mortgage lending and federal government FedRAMP experience. The lowest risk, highest value vendor to RD will offer a team with demonstrated success (i) implementing innovative cloud-based mortgage loan origination systems for commercial banks, and (ii) achieving/deploying FedRAMP authorized solutions for federal government agencies. Requiring all prior experience and past performance to come from the prime vendor significantly limits the number of vendors who can respond to this solicitation because it prevents industry from forming best-of-breed teams on behalf of RD. This will result in a very limited pool of vendors and thus limit price competition for the agency. Furthermore, the agency risks accepting a lower quality proposal as the offerors who have the breadth of experience as a prime compliant in all areas do not have the depth in each respective area needed to deliver an effective

SURPASS solution. To best support this important modernization program, we strongly encourage RD to reconsider the evaluation of prime experience only. Will the government consider evaluating the past performance of the prime as well as “Major

Subcontractors”? We’d recommend defining a Major Subcontractor as those teammates with a fully executed teaming agreement committing 25% or more workshare, which must be provided to the government as part of the offeror’s proposal. This would not include subcontractors with less than 25% workshare or affiliate company’ past performance. This will allow industry offer a complete solution with delivery partners that RD can be sure will be present and committed on day one and have the depth of capabilities required to deliver a SURPASS solution that is on par with commercial mortgage lenders and federal government (FedRAMP) compliant.

Government’s Response: For this particular solicitation subcontractor teaming agreements will not be evaluated. This particular solicitation is evaluating the prime offeror only.

49) The solicitation does not indicate the page limit for the Phase 1 response. We would recommend a 10-page limit for Phase 1. Can the government please confirm the page limit for Phase 1?

Government’s Response: For Phase 1 the page limitation will be 15 pages.

50) Can the Government please provide a page count for Phase 1 submissions?

51) Can the Government provide an estimated timeline for the Phase 1 downselect notifications and Phase 2? Government’s Response: Unknown at this time.

52) To ensure the Government receives high quality proposals and best value, would USDA modify the evaluation criteria to require offerors to be able to demonstrate strong qualifications and experience in Salesforce, Mulesoft, Scaled Agile, and implementing

Loan Origination Solutions (LOS) as a prime vendor?

Government’s Response: No

53) Can the Government indicate the minimum number of qualified offerors it expects to downselect for Phase 2?

Government’s Response: Unknown at this time

54) To ensure the Government receives best value, would the government consider downselecting all qualified Small Business offerors for Phase 2 and during that phase, use the small business tiers (SDVOSB, SB, Other than SB) in the evaluation and award determination process?

Government’s Response: No

55) Can the Government provide guidance on the page count limitations for Phase 2 -

Technical Section?

Government’s Response: The Government will provide page count guidance with Phase

2.

56) The RFP states for Sub-factor 4, “The Offeror shall discuss its Qualifications, clearly demonstrating how it supports all PWS requirements.” Could the Government please clarify whether this refers to the IDIQ-level PWS embedded in the RFP, or the separate

PWS for Task Order 1?

Government’s Response: Both

57) Does the Government intend to establish and communicate a ‘page count’ or ‘page limitation’ for the Phase I submissions?

58) For the FedRAMP compliance, where are the boundaries for the components subject to the certifications? What about any 3rd party services used on platform, like flood, income, etc.; are they subject to this as well? 3rd party services would not require a FedRAMP authorization as long as they are not retaining and storing Government data. For example, sending a transaction to a Credit Agency to pull an applicant’s credit file does not require that the Credit Agency’s system(s) be FedRAMP authorized.

Government’s Response:

a) 3rd party services would not require a FedRAMP authorization as long as they are not retaining and storing Government data. – Incorrect – any processing is in scope even if not stored (metadata applies). Any 3rd party systems that are outside the boundary must also be equal in accreditation or deployed in boundary as part of the solution.

b) For example, sending a transaction to a Credit Agency to pull an applicant’s credit file does not require that the Credit Agency’s system(s) be FedRAMP authorized.-

This example is dependent on how the actual pull occurs and the security behind the transmission of the request. This is not a generic example that can be applied blanketly to the solution and should be addressed appropriately within the proposed solution.

59) Reference: 12SAD122R0003_Amendment_1_Two_phased-approach, Quote: Vendor’s first phase proposal submissions are only to include the following sections of Volume

One, Question: Do Sub Factor 4 Qualifications need to be met by the Prime vendor on a team, or can they be met by a vendor team collectively?

Government’s Response: For this particular solicitation subcontractor teaming agreements will not be evaluated. This particular solicitation is evaluating the prime offeror only.