Questions_and_Answers_amendment_P0001_FINAL.docx

Questions and Answers Request for Proposal – 140G0119R0018 amendment P0001 Multiple-award IDIQ Contracts for the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Support for Geospatial Platform Shared Services

Question 1: Does DEVIATION 2019-O0003 apply to FAR 52.219-14?

Answer 1: Yes. It is applicable. Clause 52.219-14 is covered under FAR clause 52.212-5, which has been updated to reflect the version from May 2019 and the deviation to 52.219-14.

Question 2: I understand that most of the work on this project will be performed remotely. And on that note, does the sub-contractor have to be in the US? Or can it be a foreign company that has off-shore resources and can provide local resources when on-site visits to DC are needed within the 24-hour timeframe as mentioned in the RFP?

Answer 2: Any and all services whether performed by the prime contractor or any subcontractor shall be in compliance with the requirements of FAR 25 -- Foreign Acquisition and their subparts that are applicable to the solicitation and resulting contracts. This includes any applicable restriction identified under FAR Subpart 25.7 -- Prohibited Sources. FAR Clause 52.225-13 -- Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases and Clause 52.225-25 -- Prohibition on Contracting with Entities Engaging in Certain Activities or Transactions Relating to Iran—Representation and Certifications are applicable to this solicitation and resulting contracts.

Question 3: Does the prime contractor need to have a GSA Schedule?

Answer 3: No. This is an open market procurement under FAR 15 -- Contracting by Negotiation, not a procurement under FAR Subpart 8.4 -- Federal Supply Schedules. It is not required that an offeror have a GSA schedule as open market, not GSA, pricing is being requested. Per Section L.18 of the RFP the USGS is request open market pricing.

Question 4: Please provide us with the incumbent Information, if any.

Answer 4: The previous effort was for multiple-award Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity Contracts. The current contract holders are: Image Matters, LLC; Ardent Management Consulting, Inc.; Five 9 Group, Inc.; and Mason Bruce and Girard, Inc.

Question 5: What will be the contract value for this opportunity?

Answer 5: The Government has set a combined ceiling of $30,000,000 for the resulting multiple-award Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contracts. The sum of all orders placed under the resulting multiple-award IDIQ contracts shall not exceed $30,000,000. The overall minimum guarantee for the life (5 years) of each awarded IDIQ contract is: $25,000 total (This minimum is guaranteed). The USGS will award no more than 3 IDIQ contracts resulting for the current opportunity.

Question 6: What will be the Place of Performance?

Answer 6: Majority of work will be at the contractor’s location. However, this contract may result in task orders requiring contractors to be located anywhere in the United States or its territories. Contractor personnel will be located off of government facilities. The contractor shall identify and have local staff available within the Washington D.C. metropolitan area for local travel to the USGS Reston, VA location within 24 hours of being requested.

Question 7: Does an offeror need to be on the GSA in order to submit a response?

Answer 7: No. This is an open market procurement under FAR 15 -- Contracting by Negotiation, not a procurement under FAR Subpart 8.4 -- Federal Supply Schedules. It is not required that an offeror have a GSA schedule as open market, not GSA, pricing is being requested. Per Section L.18 of the RFP the USGS is request open market pricing.

Question 8: As this procurement is a 100% Small Business Set-aside, we wish to confirm that a small business prime can have a large business subcontractor on their team, is that correct?

Answer 8: As the requirement is total small business set-aside FAR clause 52.219-14 -- Limitations on Subcontracting (Jan 2017) (DEVIATION 2019-O0003) (dtd 12/3/18) is applicable to this solicitation and resulting award(s). In particular, 52.219-14(e)(1) which states, “Agreement. By submission of an offer and execution of a contract, the Offeror/Contractor agrees in performance of the contract in the case of a contract for—Services (except construction), it will not pay more than 50 percent of the amount paid by the Government for contract performance to subcontractors that are not similarly situated entities. Any work that a similarly situated entity further subcontracts will count toward the 50 percent subcontract amount that cannot be exceeded”. Offers and resulting work performed by any contractor awarded an IDIQ contract shall follow the applicable Limitations on Subcontracting terms and conditions of the solicitation and/or contract.

Question 9: We wish to confirm that at least 50% of the cost of performance across the total contract must be performed by employees of the small business prime, is that correct?

Answer 9: See the answer to questions 8 above.

Question 10: We wish to confirm that there is no limit on the percent workshare that subcontractors can perform on an individual task order, so long as the small business prime meets the 50% workshare requirement over the life of the contract, is that correct?

Answer 10: Since the solicitation is a total small business set-aside, the limitation on subcontracting clause applies to all orders which will be placed against the resulting IDIQ contracts.

Question 11: We understand that the required Times New Roman font size is 10. Is this for text only? Can we use smaller and/or different fonts in graphics and tables, as long as they are clearly legible at a normal (100%) reading scale?

Answer 11: Yes, offerors may use smaller and/or different fonts in graphics and tables only so long as they are clearly legible at a normal (100%) reading scale.

Question 12: We understand that teaming agreements must be included in the Cost volume, which according to the RFP is limited to 20 pages. We currently have signed teaming agreements in place that exceed this limit. Can we place the existing agreements in an appendix that is not included in the page limit for the Cost volume, and merely reference these agreements in the main body of VOLUME II (Price Proposal)?

Answer 12: No. Everything is to be include within the page limit specified in the RFP. The USGS has increased the total volume limit for Volume II – Price Proposal from 20 pages to 50 pages.

Question 13: We understand that detailed cost breakdowns must be provided in VOLUME II (Price Proposal). Due to the proprietary, sensitive nature of subcontractor’s detailed cost breakdown data, can subcontractors please provide this information directly to the CO as a sealed bid? If so, can these sealed bids be excluded from the page count of VOLUME II (Price Proposal), since the Prime will not have access to this information?

Answer 13: No. All information requested in Volume II – Price Proposal shall be submitted by the Prime contractor in one package.

Question 14: What do you mean by “File” in the format instructions? Is it your intent to have each separate part of Volume I & II delivered in a separate document file?

Answer 14: Yes. Each offeror is to submit two separate volumes. Volume I – Technical Proposal and Volume II – Price Proposal. Within each volume submitted the offerors shall clearly label and/or separate by “file number”/”file name” as defined under Section L. 16 of the RFP. For example, an offeror submits two complete volumes (Volume I – Technical Proposal and Volume II – Price Proposal). Within the first volume and/or single PDF submission for their technical proposal, this volume I includes all subsequent files (i.e. File 1, File 2 (File 2.1, File 2.2, File 2.3), File 3, File 4, File 5 (File 5.1, File 5.2, File 5.3), File 6 and File 7. Each file should have its own section within the volume and describe the information per the instructions under Section L of the solicitation.

Question 15: In order to conserve space, can we submit Volume I (Technical Proposal) in one physical file, with all parts (Factors and Subfactors) clearly demarcated and concatenated into one document, and Volume II (Price Proposal) in a separate single document? The RFP instructions (L.16) seem to suggest that all parts must be in separate files (eleven named files for Volume I and twelve named files for Volume II). This number of files will consume valuable proposal space at forced page breaks (This is particularly concerning to us given the limit of the size of the price proposal to 20 pages, especially since we expect some of the required price proposal part responses to be very limited.)

Answer 15: Offerors are to submit two separate volumes. Within each volume the offerors are to follow the formatting as specified within Section L.16 of the solicitation. Each section/file doesn’t need to begin on a separate page so long as the sections/files are clearly separated and defined with the appropriate header and file name per the instructions under section L.16.

Question 16: We have done a preliminary analysis of the Volume II (price proposal) requirements, and believe that we will have difficulty satisfying the full requirements and stay within the page count of 20 pages. Will you please consider changing the limit to 50 pages (a number we arrived at through analysis) so that adequate space is provided for us to satisfy all of your requirements (including SF1449, cost tables, cost details, Teaming Agreements, and all other requirements).

Answer 16: Yes. The USGS has increased the total volume limit for Volume II – Price Proposal from 20 pages to 50 pages.

Question 17: What is expected to be included in the Personnel Availability Chart, as required for the cost proposal?

Answer 17: At a minimum, the chart shall specify the labor category, name of the personnel performing that labor category, the time that individual will be available for performance under a resulting IDIQ contract and any issued Task Orders.

Question 18: If a VOLUME II (Price Proposal) requirement is not applicable, e.g., “Involvement of Current/former Employees Information (See Clause GS2112)”, can we exclude this “File” from our response and simply so indicate this exclusion in the opening narrative for the volume.

Answer 18: If a particular requirement is not applicable for that offeror (i.e. Subcontracting and/or Teaming Arrangement Agreement, if applicable; exceptions to solicitation terms and conditions, if applicable; Involvement of Current/former Employees Information (See Clause GS2112)) the offeror is to still identify this file/section within their volume response and provide a statement confirming the requirement is not applicable and an explanation as to why. It is very important that each factor/sub-factor and/or files identified within the RFP are clearly identified and presented in the offeror’s proposal response even if that particular requirement is not applicable to that offeror as the Contracting Officer will screen proposal packages to identify and eliminate any offer that is so incomplete or non-conforming to the instructions or terms and conditions of the Request for Proposal (RFP) or other RFP requirements, as to preclude a meaningful evaluation. The Contracting Officer reserves the right to eliminate any offer from further evaluation or consideration for award if that offeror’s proposal package fails to comply or conform to the RFP’s minimum specifications, instructions or terms and conditions, or is missing information requested in this solicitation. If an offeror fails to provide information requested in the solicitation (i.e. Involvement of Current/Former Employees Information) as they believe this requirement is not applicable to them, if the offeror does not confirm this requirement is not applicable with an explanation the CO may believe the offeror just failed to address this requirement and could ultimately eliminate that offeror from the competition and further evaluation.

Question 19: Given multiple awards, will subsequent Task Orders (beyond the initial two) be bid on competitively by the awardees of the ID/IQ contract?

Answer 19: Yes, the USGS intends to complete subsequent Task Order against the multiple-award IDIQ contracts unless an exemption under FAR 16.505(B)(2) applies.

Question 20: Does FGDC have a current method of coordinating performance across multiple awardees? If so, please describe it.

Answer 20: The FGDC previously utilized vendor support for a PMO office and project management services in conjunction with a Federal POC to coordinate effort and performance across the project and suite of vendors. It is the intent of the FGDC to identify the process for coordination and reporting for the project based on requirements outlined in the Geospatial Data Act and other governance requirements associated with the FGDC, geospatial data, etc.

Question 21: There is a requirement for "Potentially migrating the GeoPlatform from one commercial cloud vendor to another." Is there a similar requirement for migrating from one commercial GIS vendor's software to another's?

Answer 21: Attachment E (Task Order 1) and F (Task Order 2) identifies the requirements and deliverables. Any other requirement is considered out of scope for the current procurement action.

Question 22: What is the existing set of GIS software that is supported and deployed as part of the GeoPlatform?

Answer 22: Software supported and deployed as a part of the GeoPlatform include HTML, XML/XSL, Jason, JDBC, JNDI, LDAP, JavaScript, Java EJBs/applets/servlets, CKAN, Wordpress, Esri APIs, OpenLayers, Open Geospatial Consortium Web Services; HAL and Hateoas. More details can be found in Section 3.3 through 3.4 in the RFP document.

Question 23: Were multiple-awards made on this ID/IQ contract to support the GeoPlatform the last time it was competed? If so, who were the awardees?

Answer 23: Yes. The previous effort was for multiple-award Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity Contracts. The current contract holders are: Image Matters, LLC; Ardent Management Consulting, Inc.; Five 9 Group, Inc.; and Mason Bruce and Girard, Inc.

Question 24: How many Task Orders were issued under the ID/IQ contract that this one will replace?

Answer 24: Currently there are 14 task orders issued against the multiple-award IDIQ contracts.

Question 25: How many dollars were spent under the ID/IQ contract that this one will replace?

Answer 25: Roughly $15,000,000 has been obligated towards Task Orders issued under the current IDIQ contracts.

Question 26: Given that Esri ArcGIS software is part of the GeoPlatform software environment, is support for this software paid and provided for separately from this ID/IQ contract?

Answer 26: The Government may provide, without cost to the contractor relevant software license for resources necessary to support GeoPlatform.gov operations.

Question 27: Does FGDC have access to a current ELA with Esri? If yes, can details of this ELA be provided to potential bidders on the current ID/IQ solicitation?

Answer 27: The Government may provide, without cost to the contractor relevant software license for resources necessary to support GeoPlatform.gov operations.

Question 28: Page 61 - Section L.13 - In email submission, are files allowed to be posted on a link such that the CO can download via link provided in email submission - where CO will confirm files were downloaded successfully?

Answer 28: No. The USGS is requesting that the two volumes themselves be emailed.

Question 29: Page 62 - Volume I - (Technical Proposal) - Factor A - Please clarify how many files are being requested for Factor A? Is this one (1) Factor A File 2, with sub-sections 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 for factor A1, A2, A3 respectively? Or is there NO “File 2”, but three (3) separate files for 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 for factor A1, A2, A3 respectively?

Answer 29: See the chart under Section L.16. Within Volume I, there should be a section headed as Factor A - Technical Approach. Under Section Factor A within Volume I, there should be three subsections (Sub-factor A1: Master Statement of Work, Sub-factor A2: Task Order 1 – Technical Support Services and Sub-factor A3: Task Order 2 – Portfolio Management). Under each subsection is where the offerors are to provide their proposal response for that subfactor per the instructions of the RFP.

Question 30: Page 63 - Volume I - (Technical Proposal) - Factor D - Please clarify how many files are being requested for Factor D? Is this one (1) Factor D File 5, with sub-sections 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 for factor D1, D2, D3 respectively? Or is there NO “File 5”, but three (3) separate files for 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 for factor D1, D2, D3 respectively?

Answer 30: See the chart under Section L.16. Within Volume I, there should be a section headed as Factor D: Management/Staffing Plan and Key Personnel Qualifications. Under Section Factor D within Volume I, there should be three subsections (Sub-factor D1: Management/Staffing Plan and Key Personnel Qualifications/Information (Master IDIQ Statement of Work), Sub-factor D2: Key Personnel Qualifications (Task Order 1 - Technical Support) and Sub-factor D3: Key Personnel Qualifications (Task Order 2 - Portfolio Management). Under each subsection is where the offerors are to provide their proposal response for that subfactor per the instructions of the RFP.

Question 31: Page 63 - Volume I - (Technical Proposal) - Factor D - For “statement of commitment or commitment letter for staff/Key Personnel”, is this letter included in Page Count?

Answer 31: Yes.

Question 32: Page 63 - Volume I - (Technical Proposal) - Factor D - Can the statement of commitment be a statement in the resume and signed within?

Answer 32: Yes. So long as the statement of commitment is identified within Volume I, Section Factor D, Subsections D1, D2 and D3.

Question 33: Page 63 - Volume I (Technical Proposal) - Factor D - On the resume, is it required to cite the role, labor category or both?

Answer 33: The Government would need to see what labor category and/or role each proposed contractor personnel will be performing for the overall IDIQ as well as the Task Orders. It is the responsibility of the offeror to ensure all information is provided per the instructions of the RFP. How that information is provided is up to the offeror so long as it is present and compliant with the formatting and instructions under Section L.

Question 34: Page 64 - Volume II (Price Proposal) - Factor G - Price - Are the File 6 attachments included in Pricing Volume Page count? We request that it is not to assure we provide the file in full.

Answer 34: All information requested under Volume II (Price Proposal) shall be included in the specified page limit for that volume. The page limit for Volume II (Price Proposal) has been increased from 20 pages to 50 pages.

Question 35: Page 64 - Volume II (Price Proposal) - Factor G - Price - If any of the pricing files have no response, is it preferred to cite such in Volume II File 1 and acknowledging as not providing or have an empty file for each noting no reply provided or another preferred solution?

Answer 35: Within each volume offerors should specific a specific section for each file. If a particular file is not applicable to that offeror (i.e. File 6 - Subcontracting and/or Teaming Arrangement Agreement, if applicable) the offeror is still to have this file within their submitted volume specifying this is not applicable with an explanation as to why. (See question and answer 19 above for further explanation)

Question 36: Page 65 - Section L.17 - Can tables, images, charts use a different font than Times New Roman (e.g. sans serif)? Is there additional or different guidance on size requirement if different than minimum 10pt for narrative?

Answer 36: The Times New Roman font size is applicable to all text, tables, graphics, etc.

Question 37: Page 69 - Section L.18 - Factor G: Price - This section notes unburdened rates such as “an evaluation of the burdened and unburdened labor rates, total firm-fixed prices for each Task Order”. Where other places, e.g. Page 64 File 4 and File 5 guidance or Page 3 “Burdened Labor Rates and Categories for all Key Personnel and staff which could potentially perform work under the Master Statement of Work:” Please validate fully-loaded, burdened rates only are required?

Answer 37: An evaluated of the burdened labor rates will be conducted. The USGS is asking for burdened/loaded labor rates and a cost breakdown of the burdened/loaded labor rates. Section M.1(e) – Pricing has been revised to take out the reference to “unburdened” labor rates. Failure to provide a cost breakdown of the proposed fixed burdened rates could result in the offeror being determined as non-conforming to solicitation instructions and could result in the offeror being automatically eliminated from the competition, further evaluation or consideration for award.

Question 38: Attachment F - Task Order 2 PWS - Portfolio Management Support, Scope (2nd para, 3rd sentence), page 1 of 4: The sentence states "Technical transition may be required in order to continue the efforts of portfolio management." Would the Government please provide an explanation of this statement? Is it technical transition to another platform or technical transition to another contractor (under the transition period)?

Answer 38: Technical transition to another contractor under the transition period is the intent of the statement.

Question 39: Attachment F - Task Order 2 PWS - Portfolio Management Support, 9th bullet on page 2 of 4, The 9th bullet states "Coordinate training and education events"

a) Is it anticipated that training and education events will require travel, or will the majority of events be through webinars?

b) If travel is required, what is the anticipated number of events requiring travel per year?

Answer 39a: Events should be conducted via use of technology. In the event of travel, vendor must receive written approval from BOTH the Federal POC, COR and CO prior to traveling.

Answer 39b: Approved travel-related events will not exceed 2 per year.

Question 40: Attachment F - Task Order 2 PWS - Portfolio Management Support Deliverables (6th item), page 3 of 4. Would the Government please explain the sixth deliverable listed, Proposed SLA management process? What SLA's will be managed? SLA's are not mentioned in the scope nor in the requirements of TO-2. Do these SLA's refer to SLA's generated under Attachment E: TO-1?

Answer 40: Service Level Agreements for management of the GeoPlatform applications and services supporting management of, and reporting on, NGDA Assets within the GeoPlatform.

Question 41: Attachment F - Task Order 2 PWS - Portfolio Management Support Transition Period Services (2nd sentence), page 3 of 4. Would the Government please explain what this statement in the second sentence means: “…submitted and reviewed/approved by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) during evaluation and upon Task Order award…" Does this mean that a transition plan will be submitted for evaluation as part of the RFP for the task order?

Answer 41: Yes, the transition plan should be submitted as part of the RFP for the task order.

Question 42: 140G0119R0018 - sections B through M, Section 3.4, pages 9 - 14 of 74. Historical Utilization: The contract provides a wide range of potential utilization - $25,000 - $30,000,000 over five years.

a) What is the historical annual spend on each task from the previous IDIQ Task Orders?

b) What has been the historical annual spend on each category of “Example Types of Services” (Section C.3.4)

c) In order to anticipate resource needs, what is expected $ utilization of each Task Order moving forward?

Answer 42a: In the past, the annual spend varies, but the Government has spent anywhere from $1 - $3M dollars per year on issued Task Orders with technical Support weighing heavier in cost then Portfolio Management and Project Management.

Answer 42b: Firm fixed priced task orders does not support tracking costs by “Types of Services”. Service types are correlate to Task Order categories.

Answer 42c: Task order value are associated with identified requirements. Past utilization has been heavily focused on Technical support resources (60%) and other areas absorbing the remaining 40%. The government anticipates similar breakdown going forward.

Question 43: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. Firm Fixed Pricing does not seem to fit with TO 1.A

a) Much of the open-ended language in Task Order 1.A, as well as the past performance as reported through FGDC Coordination Meetings, suggests a desire for a team of agile app development support providing variable levels of feature support at fixed time intervals; would this not suggest that a time and materials approach to the contract with a fixed limit be more appropriate?

b) Would FGDC consider providing specific direction for a fixed payment amount (or tiers) and requesting proposals that specify what size and skills could be provided for development team support for that price. For example, the TO suggests support for undetermined scopes of activities such as “Develop…applications and services in support of the Geospatial Platform” (TO 1.A.1 - what kinds, how many?), “Participate in development of requirements…through agile prototyping and interactive development” (TO 1.A.3), “work with FGDC on specified tasks defined through supplemental technical direction, which will be progressively elaborated…as its processes mature” (TO 1.A.4) and ‘evaluating and deploying emerging technologies” (TO 1.A.6). Further the deliverables are due ‘as directed’ suggesting an unknown number new or enhanced features or the scope.

c) Can you clarify the meaning of the Performance Standard for TO 1 A Deliverables? What does it mean to have 99% Functionality of GeoPlatform.gov mean for New/Enhanced features as the performance standard? Does this mean to maintain 99% uptime or existing functionality of the core applications while adding new features (i.e. not breaking the apps during deployment)?

Answer 43a: The contract and resulting Task Order awards are going to be Firm Fixed Price only.

Answer 43b: It is anticipated that a minimum of quarterly releases will occur annually. Through the development of an annual workplan, the vendor and Federal POC will identify the requirements that may include enhancements and or development activities.

Answer 43c: Port and deploy the existing Platform environment at GSA into the Cloud environment procured through the Department of the Interior. The system availability target is 99.9%. Identified defects will be corrected and minor enhancements will be implemented as approved by the COR.

Question 44: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support. New Development [Task Order 1(A)]: this meant to an opportunity to make geoplatform more robust with new features, what are the top 3 use cases of current use of the Geoplatform?

Answer 44: Information about the GeoPlatform can be found on the GeoPlatform website (geoplatform.gov) as well as the FGDC website (https://www.fgdc.gov/initiatives/geospatial-platform)

Question 45: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, Section B.1, pages 2 of 5, What is the current architecture of the portal and services to be maintained and migrated

a) The first requirement describes maintenance of the existing “Geoplatform portal and related services infrastructure”, as described in footnote 1 on Page 2. This footnote description, however, appears to reference the architecture as it existed in July 2012. It is our understanding that the Geoplatform portal and related services infrastructure is inaccurate as currently described, as it has significantly evolved based on the millions of dollars worth of custom software development work invested over the last 4-5 years through the current contractor.

b) Can you describe in detail the current platform infrastructure and all related services, providing architecture diagrams and descriptions of the technology stacks currently required to deploy each (including the % use of each coding language used in any custom-code) provided by each application or service? It is near impossible to estimate and line up resources accurately in good faith to maintain an existing suite of systems, applications and services that are not described.

i) Does FGDC Service Checker part of the system require maintenance? Is this meant to remain a service offered to any third party, or a service specifically for items registered in the Geoplatform Registry Portal?

ii) Is the Marketplace intended to remain a search query on the data.gov search application , or is it intended to be a search query on the core geoplatform.gov search application; or intended to become a separate application that requires development or maintenance?

c) Release Custom Applications as Open Source code: It is our understanding that the current contractor has developed a lot of custom code. Ideally, this code would be provided as open source code, openly available for inspection through Github, given its development through federal government funding and GSA guidance on Code.gov. An accurate level of effort estimation and a commitment to maintain security compliance for custom applications are difficult to make without prior inspection. Currently, only some components are available for inspection.

i) Can any non-open source custom code created to provide services be made available in Github for inspection?

Answer 45a: Publicly available source code for Geoplatform is available for review at: https://github.com/geoplatform Answer 45b: Publicly available source code for Geoplatform is available for review at: https://github.com/geoplatform Answer 45b(i):

FGDC Service Checker will remain a 3rd party service Answer 45b(ii): The future requirements for Marketplace are yet to be determined. Vendors should document their assumptions and suggest the most efficient and effective solution to meet the business requirements of the Marketplace.

Answer 45c: Publicly available source code for Geoplatform is available for review at: https://github.com/geoplatform Answer 45c(i): Publicly available source code for Geoplatform is available for review at: https://github.com/geoplatform

Question 46: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support.

Data.gov:

a) Does the Data.gov Search application require maintenance? What is the usage of this application? What is the relationship between the Data.gov Search application and the core Geoplatform.gov Search application? What is the purpose of maintaining both search applications?

b) What guidance has OMB and/or GSA provided FGDC on the forward-looking relationship of the data.gov catalog and the geoplatform.gov metadata catalog in the implementation of the Open Data Act? Is there ongoing discussion about this relationship?

Answer 46a: Yes, the Data.gov search application requires maintenance. This application is used to discover geospatial resources published through data.gov. Appropriate users can import results from data.gov into the GeoPlatform environment for access and use. The GeoPlatform.gov search application allows users to search all resources available as assets in the GeoPlatform.

Answer 46b:

The Federal Lead POC will identifying requirements in supporting the shared service of the Geospatial Platform.

Question 47: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support. ArcGIS and Geoplatform Portal – What components of the ArcGIS platform are currently deployed and utilized as part of the Geoplatform Portal and related services?

Answer 47: Vendor will be required to operate and maintain ArcGIS Online for Organizations as stated in Section 3.4 of the RFP. Additional requirements related to ArcGIS are identified in Task Order 1 requirements and deliverables section A and B for ArcGIS services to support the GeoPlatform and agency specific requirements.

Question 48: 140G0119R0018 - sections B through M, Section C.3(e), pages 10 - 11 of 74. Security Support: According to example work Section C.3.4(e). According to Section C.3. “All services provided, and products delivered must comply with the Government security, Section 508 and FISMA requirement at the moderate level.” In addition, Task Order 1 “the contractor may be required to support a FISMA Moderate cloud-based hosting environment for an entire platform, for selected applications, or for storage and retrieval of data and other content.”

Can you please list which current systems and applications intended to be maintained are currently within a FISMA moderate certification boundary?

Answer 48: Geoplatform as a system would maintain FISMA moderate accreditation. Vendors would be expected to implement necessary security procedures, business processes, monitoring, and evidence collection and reporting in order to maintain this accreditation.

Question 49: 140G0119R0018 - sections B through M, Section C.3, pages 9 - 14 of 74. Support and Usage. In order to estimate technology support of a system, usage metrics are needed intended.

a) Service Level agreements: Is a service level agreement required for each application or system? Are they different or combined? If yes, can you provide an example SLA? If no, what level of service is expected agreement

b) Scope and volume of support tickets: How many support requests are there on a weekly basis? What kinds of requests?

c) Users, use cases and activities:

i) Who uses geoplatform.gov? What kinds of users use the platform for what purposes?

ii) Which use cases are currently served by the existing applications (geoplatform search, object editor, data.gov search, map viewer, map manager, ArcGIS online)?

iii) How many unique active monthly users are there (or average monthly uses over last 6 months)? Can you provide any standard web analytics regarding each the different applications/services - # of unique users, # of pageviews per month over the last 12 months?

iv) How does the number of monthly users of the Geoplatform ArcGIS Online and related Hub sites (e.g. HIFLD Open) compare to that of the Geoplatform.gov search page or other Wordpress Community Pages?

v) What is the agency onboarding process?

Answer 49a: There is a system level SLA for operation of geoplatform.gov and agency specific applications hosted by GeoPlatform.

Answer 49b: Approximately 3-5 support tickets per day are submitted. These are generally routine regarding account access, application use, and enhancement requests.

Answer 49c(i): Please see https://www.fgdc.gov/initiatives/geospatial-platform Answer 49c(ii): Example use cases can be found in a series of video tutorials available here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMCNwMDgTQxB-yC5xy20dtEoXCRfG3M63 and in online documentation here:

https://www.geoplatform.gov/help/apps/ Answer 49c(iii): The GeoPlatform recently transitioned to Matomo to provide usage analytics. You can find the latest usage report for the past 3 months here: https://www.fgdc.gov/initiatives/geospatial-platform/stats/geoplatformstatsjune42019.pdf.

Answer 49c(iv): The two are not related.

Answer 49c(v): Vendors requiring GFE will need to complete the 9-0356, DOI – Access, OPM-306, and IT Rules of Behavior forms prior to receiving credentials. Vendors with GFE will also be required to complete all necessary annual IT compliance training.

Question 50: 140G0119R0018 - sections B through M, Section C.3(e), pages 10 - 11 of 74. Support for cloud hosting environment (C.3.4(e)) and the FGDC GeoCloud program?

a) What is the FGDC GeoCloud program? Re: Task Order 1 B.8(1). – The latest documentation on FGDC.gov on this Sandbox initiative is from 2012. In what way is this still an active program of the FGDC, and what current deployments from FGDC member agencies does FGDC support?

b) Does this refer to the same DOI Cloud, not managed by FGDC, where Geoplatform is currently hosted, as noted in the RFP “Objectives” section (“GeoPlatform is hosted on AWS through a task order on the DOI FCHS contract”)?

i) If yes, what is the relationship between the contractors performing cloud platform support services in the FCHS contract and this Task Order?

ii) Whom or what governance or decision-making process determines which contract would be utilized to establish and support “agency Platform portal instances”?

(1) Task Order 1 B.8. “Operate the portal and related service infrastructure in a government-provided Cloud environment. The Cloud will host the core Platform portal, agency Platform portal instances, and hosted geospatial Platform as a Service (PaaS) service instances, managed by the GeoCloud project, running ArcGIS Server or OpenGeo Server Suite.”

Answer 50a: The FGDC GeoCloud project migrated to the GeoPlatform GeoCloud environment.

Answer 50b: The GeoPlatform is hosted on AWS through a task order on the “DOI FCHS contract”.

Answer 50b(i): The Federal POC serves as the liaison between the teams and will coordinate work amongst the task.

Answer 50b(ii): The vendor will coordinate with the Federal Lead POC on all decision-making activities concerning the GeoPlatform.

Question 51: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, Section B.2, pages 2 of 5. Migration to new Cloud Environment: The Objective section notes that the existing DOI Cloud environment is AWS, and the Scope of work section includes “Potentially migrating the GeoPlatform from one commercial cloud vendor to another.” Task Order 1 also says the vendor should “Port and deploy the existing Platform environment at GSA into the Cloud environment procured through the Department of the Interior? Should we understand these requirements to mean the vendor may be porting existing applications from AWS to a newly contracted cloud hosting vendor, or is this also a reference error from the previous RFP in 2013?

Answer 51: Yes, the vendor “may” be required to port the GeoPlatform from AWS to another environment during the life of the Task Order. The decision to port will be driven by changes in technology over the life of the project.

Question 52: 140G0119R0018 - sections B through M, Section L.18, Factor G – Price, page 69 of 74. Would the Government please provide an excel template for the price worksheet and requested cost breakdown of the burdened loaded labor rates?

Answer 52: No. This is to be created by the offeror and presented in Volume II.

Question 53: 140G0119R0018 - sections B through M, Section L.18, Factor G – Price, Item 4, page 69 of 74. Would the Government please confirm that a detailed cost buildup of offeror’s fully burdened labor rates (to show G&A, overhead, fringe benefits, etc.) is not required? If a full cost breakdown (to include G&A, overhead, fringe benefits, etc.) is not required, can the Government please clarify exactly what costs offerors should include in the requested cost buildup?

Answer 53: The solicitation clearly states that offerors are to provide a cost breakdown of their proposed burdened labor rates. The offerors are to show and provide a breakdown of the proposed burdened labor rates to include base hourly rate, G&A, overhead, fringe benefits, etc. It is the responsibility of the offeror to demonstrate and show how these burdened labor rates were formulated through the means of the cost breakdown. Failure to provide a cost breakdown of the proposed fixed burdened rates could result in the offeror being determined as non-conforming to solicitation instructions and could result in the offeror being automatically eliminated from the competition, further evaluation or consideration for award.

Question 54: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. What are the current issues with the search results in the current system?

Answer 54: The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 55: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. What’s the process for populating the system with content?

Answer 55: Content for the system is derived from the requirements of the stakeholder community. Those requirements become activities and efforts for deployment. Many of the current communities are the result of the work occurring in the Portfolio Management work identified in Task Order 2.

Question 56: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. What’s the process for classifying content?

Answer 56: Content classification will align with geospatial and content data standards. As written, the question is not related to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 57: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. What is the underlying search technology?

Answer 57: Underlying search technology is Apache Lucene. See attached document (GeoPlatform Buildsheet) https://lucene.apache.org/

Question 58: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. How is relevancy calculated?

Answer 58: The government is unsure of what your intended question is pertaining to relevancy and is unable to provide a response. The question as written could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 59: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. How is similar content calculated?

Answer 59: The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 60: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. Does the user’s search history feed into search relevance?

Answer 60: If the question is to link what the user search history is to what is shown on the GeoPlatform, there no connection. Content on the Platform is derived by needs and requirements identified through coordination of stakeholders. The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 61: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. Does the type of user impact the order in which certain results are presented?

Answer 61: User type does not affect the results presented.

Question 62: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. What security protocols are in place for searchable content?

Answer 62: All services provided and products delivered must comply with the Government security, Section 508 and FISMA requirement at the moderate level. GeoPlatform.gov searchable content meet FISMA requirement at the moderate level.

Question 63: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. Are any fields restricted from being returned?

Answer 63: Information in “staging” and “development” environments are restricted. All content which if final (not in production mode) is publicly available. The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 64: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. What’s the data curation/validation process?

Answer 64: The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 65: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. What types of A/B testing is conducted on search results?

Answer 65: The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 66: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. Is non-geospatial data searchable in the system - if no, is making them spatially searchable a requirement?

Answer 66: At this time, only geospatial data as identified by Circular A16 is searchable. Not a requirement at time for non-geospatial data to be included in the GeoPlatform. The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 67: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. How are user misspellings handled?

Answer 67: Misspellings would be deemed errors. As there are a number of ways to conduct searches which are georeferenced through use of standards and metadata, users have alternate search methods. The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 68: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. How are content misspellings handled?

Answer 68 Misspellings would be deemed errors. As there are a number of ways to conduct searches which are georeferenced through use of standards and metadata, users have alternate search methods. The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 69: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. Does the system offer suggestions as the user types?

Answer 69: When registering, information is gathered about the user and provides access based on criteria identified in the registration. The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 70: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. How is dimabugation handled in the system?

Answer 70: The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 71: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. Does the system understand synonyms or is it exact match only?

Answer 71: The systems uses metadata fields for system searches. Content of metadata fields identified in the Metadata Standards. The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 72: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. Is content that is selected feed back to the relevancy calculation?

Answer 72: The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 73: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. Is there a test environment where relevancy can be tested?

Answer 73: The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 74: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. What’s considered a relevant result?

Answer 74: The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 75: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. Is the system populated strictly by pushing content to it, or does the system pull content as well?

Answer 75: The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable. To ensure a quality response to concern, please reference the specific requirement or deliverable of the task. A review of Geoplatform.gov may assist in answering your question.

Question 76: Attachment E - Task Order 1 PWS - Technical Support, General. What’s the expected search response time?

Answer 76: Search response is a qualitative measure which is dependent on the effectiveness of the search information content. The question posed could not be cross-walked to a specific requirement or deliverable.