21R0135 Questions and Answers- Round 2.pdf

# Reference Question Answer

H.9.2 Organizational Conflict of Interest Special Clause

If a subcontractor to a prime contractor is currently doing work at DoS and there is the potential for an OCI, would you entertain an OCI mitigation plan allowing the subcontractor to firewall affected employees to work on this effort?

Section K includes an Organizational Conflict of Interest Certification and Disclosure provision. In cases where there is the potential of an OCI, an offeror is required to provide a disclosure statement as part of its proposal. Item “b” of the certification specifies the information that must be included in the disclosure statement to include relevant facts on how the, “…organizational structure and/or management systems limit its knowledge of possible organizational conflicts of interest relating to other divisions or sections of the organization and how that structure or system would avoid or mitigate such organizational conflict.” The Government will then determine whether the conflict can be avoided or otherwise resolved. If it cannot be resolved or avoided, the prospective Contractor may not be eligible for award.

See Section H.9 for additional pertinent clauses on the topic of Organizational Conflict of Interest.

G.1.2 Contracting Officer’s Representative

Are Teaming Agreements required to be submitted as part of the solicitation and do they need prior CO approval?

Teaming agreements must be identified, however the submission of Corporate Charter, By‐Laws, or Joint Venture or Partnership Agreement are only required for Joint Ventures performing as a single entity. Offerors will be evaluated based on the criteria as set forth in the solicitation.

Attachment 5 - DOS Value Engineering Policy

How are the additional requirements are evaluated?

Attachment 5 provides the DOS Value Engineering Program Reference Guide. It will help vendors to understand the Department’s policy and guidelines related to Value Engineering.

L.14.4.2 Factor 8: Business Management Plan, Section C

Sections L.14.2.1.2 and L.14.3.6 state that the government allows for the use of private sector projects to meet the Corporate Experience and Past Performance requirements. Section L.14.4.2 states that “Organizations that wish to rely upon the experience or financial resources of any other legally related entity or organization, including parent companies, subsidiaries, or other related firms, must do so by way of a JV or a “de facto” JV.”

Some offerors have existing corporate arrangements (e.g., an intercompany agreement (ICA)) that make a joint venture (JV) unnecessary. Will the Government please confirm that as an alternative to a JV, an Offeror may utilize an ICA to incorporate the experience or resources of a legally related company and describe in its proposal how the ICA will be used to provide the related company’s experience and/or resources?

The solicitation states that organizations that wish to rely upon the experience or financial resources of any other legally related entity or organization, including parent companies, subsidiaries, or other related firms, must do so by way of a JV or a “de facto” JV. In cases of a “de facto” JV where no formal joint venture agreement is in place, the parties must agree, in writing, to be jointly and severally liable for performance of any contract awarded. For a “de facto” JV, provide the signed written agreement. Identify the parties’ intended roles in the Project. Additionally, Section L of the solicitation identifies instances when the prime may present information for its major subcontractors as part of its proposal response. These are the only opportunities in which an organization rely on the experience or financial resources of others.

December Questions and Answers file – question #34

How will potential future support to other offices, other than OBO and DS, be evaluated for relevance to the core of ILMS and to safeguard the ILMS contract to becoming a "contract of convenience" to reach a vendor without competition, given the plan to award to a single vendor?

The Contracting Officer will review the area of support to determine whether it falls within the general scope of the original contract in terms of type and amount of work, period of performance, and manner of performance.

Will the industry day slides be provided to industry?

Yes, they were posted on SAM.gov on 02/25/2022. Will the presentation slide deck be sent out to the attendees?

What are the SB participation levels stated on the assumption slide? When will those participation levels be posted? Will they be a % of total service hours?

Small Business Participation Commitment Plan will require a documented commitment that least 20% of Total Contract Value will be performed by small businesses. There is no further breakout or requirement for socioeconomic categories. 20% could go to any and all entities designated as "Small" in DSBS.sba.gov

Please clarify the amount set aside for SB on this contract. If ILMS is worth $1m than 20% or $200k must go to SB. Of that 20% it needs to be divided as stated in the subcontracting plan, eg 3% to SDVOSB or $3,000.

Is this correct?

There is no 'set-aside' on the contract; the contract is unrestricted / full & open. Small Business Participation Commitment Plan (SBPCP) requires that small businesses receive at least 20% of total contract value either as a prime, or through subcontracts, JVs, or other business arrangements.

Subcontracting Plan, as defined by FAR 19.704 requires that small businesses are awarded a certain percentage of all subcontracted dollars, For FY2022, the Department of State subcontracting requirements are:

Small Business = 42% Small Disadvantaged Business = 5% Women Owned Small Business = 5% Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business = 3% HUBZone Business = 3%

Hypothetical: $1,000,000 award.

SBPCP = 20% of $1,000,000 = $200,000 to small biz.

Subcontracting plan = depends on the TOTAL amount the prime subcontracts out. If prime decides to subcontract a total of $200,000, then the subcontracting percentages (42,5,5,3,3, respectively) are based on that $200,000. Which means that the subcontracting plan will outperform the overall small business requirement, because 100% of the subcontracted dollars are spent with small business. If on the other hand, the prime decides to subcontract out a total of $450,000 - $200,000 of which is with small business, then the Subcontracting plan calculations must be based on the $450,000.

9 How does A/LM plan on procuring new solutions like RPA and Fleet Management?

This would depend on the solution. If the solution should be in-house development, it would be part of this IDIQ contract, and the solution would be developed by the awardee. If the solution is provided by a vendor that has a product that State Department is purchasing, either on premise or in the cloud, that would be addressed in a separate RFP and separate resulting contract. A majority of software purchases would be procured under separate solicitations outside of this IDIQ.

10 What is the timeline for procuring the new Fleet Management solution?

This is part of the budget process, so we don’t have a timeline yet.

The process would be to submit our budget for it and obtain funding, then move forward.

11 Will the future modernization of procurement and contracts be limited to the Ariba Platform?

Not necessarily. The Department is considering Ariba on Demand, as well as other alternatives.

12 N/A

Can you explain why single award is most advantageous over multi-award? With a large set of scope requirements and some areas which seem to be an OCI, multi-award will spur more competition.

This decision was not a random or arbitrary decision. A lot of thought went into the structure of this procurement, and into the decision on single vs multiple award. This is a complex and highly integrated system. A single service provider was determined the best approach after considering impact and risks associated with alternate paths. The Department will not consider a multiple award approach for this procurement.

Will you consider a multi-award approach? That may address the concerns from industry over the incumbent having an overwhelming advantage on this bid.

Any chance there is an opportunity to reconsider making this a multi-award ID/IQ? It is pretty evident from the Q&A that there are concerns how the future procurement maps a bit too much to the incumbent.

What new development platforms or emerging technologies is A/LM evaluating to support the 2030 vision?

While the Department has not made any decisions on specific development platforms and technologies that may be used to modernize the components of ILMS. We are continuously monitoring market trends and evaluating emerging technologies to identify solutions that could provide state of the art support to our operations and our customers. The Department is open to a variety of approaches, including low-code platforms with delivered applicable modules, COTS products, and GOTS products, as well as custom development alternatives. Specific details of the government’s alternatives analyses are procurement sensitive.

The government will inform industry if it makes any commitment to a specific solution during this solicitation that materially impacts contract deliverables.

The ILMS program also endeavors to incorporate emerging technologies into our existing platforms. To support the 2030 vision in the near-term the program would like to expand our use of RPA, expand our data analytics toolbox to include more data management tools and make our data more transparent and shareable, continue to explore embedding AI and machine learning capabilities, and expand use of OCR and AI. Long-term goals include exploring other emerging technologies such as IoT and Blockchain.

Would it be possible to get an attendees list for the Webinar? The Department posted on SAM.gov an updated list of interested parties. The Department will only post the information for vendors who have stated that they would like to be included on the list.

Will the list of attendees be sent out?

Is there anyone who would object to sharing their contact information from this webinar?

Will the list of industry attendees be provided along with the slidedeck presented today?

In addition to publishing the contact information for attendees who opt-in to the information sharing, will DOS also provide a list of names of all companies that attended the industry day (without sharing contact information or PII)

15 Has Govt decided to move from PeopleSoft to ServiceNow, Ariba, etc

A decision has not been made on future platforms for PeopleSoft or Ariba. We are considering multiple alternatives. Moving Ariba to Ariba on Demand is a possible solution being considered, but State Department has not locked into that decision. Nor has the Department locked into a decision on Peoplesoft.

Are there Logistics Management solutions within DoS outside of the one provided by A Bureau? Is there a plan to integrate and provide LM capabilities department-wide as a shared service?

Yes – there are logistics management solutions outside of the A Bureau. ILMS is an enterprise solution, so it’s a shared service offered to all of Department of State. It is also offered to the overseas ICASS customers of the Department, allowing other agencies with overseas presence that opt into the services provided by the Department's consolidated overseas management platform and use ILMS to meet their logistics management needs. Additionally, there are some other logistics solutions that are independent of ILMS. In such cases with departmentalized logistics solutions, the Department is always looking for opportunities to integrate them into ILMS, should such opportunities present themselves. The Department has eliminated as many as 30 systems over the past years which were all disparate, in an effort to provide ILMS as a single shared solution.

That being said, the Department does not guarantee or commit to integrating all such solutions under one contract, or to integrating them all into ILMS.

Is vendor lock in with PeopleSoft, Ariba, etc. final or would A/LM consider modernization through re-platforming?

No. The Department is not locked into Peoplesoft or Ariba. As mentioned during the Industry Day event, the Department is also considering alternative platforms. The Department has not yet made a decision on a solution (or solutions), nor are we looking for offerors to propose any solutions. The Department will be working with the current program management team to identify alternatives, and the awardee will assist in any future effort involved with developing and implementing the selected solution(s).

18 Will GIS capabilities be part of ILMS?

The current ILMS platform has some basic GIS capabilities and it is possible the Department will incorporate more features to support future needs. Within the Department, DS ad OBO are using many more GIS features than ILMS requires.

We noticed some, but not all, of the questions we have previously submitted in July and November were answered in the December 2021 posting on SAM.gov.

Will our remaining questions be answered?

This list of questions and answers addresses both prior and recently received questions.

Shouldn't modernization, new application development, Lab as a Service, and introduction of new technologies be a major aspect of the solicitation?

No. This is a services contract. Modernization of ILMS modules occurs incrementally and continually, at a pace dictated by operational priorities and the availability of funds. Modernization decisions and implementations will be managed by the program office and supported by the ILMS contractor.

Aside from the opportunities to continue modernizing the ILMS technology set, what are some of the operational challenges that A/LM faces with the solutions today?

From a technical perspective, the increasing complexity of ILMS modules and supporting technologies can contribute to several operational challenges. With the increase in cyber security threats, A/LM must respond quickly to new security requirements and implementation of available patches. With the recent shift to increased telework, A/LM must ensure we are supporting the needs of the mobile diplomats and users. ILMS was on the forefront of the Department's shift to cloud and as a result, A/LM has had to forge the path for implementing this new platform solution at State and ensuring the ILMS solution operates correctly on the new platform.

While ILMS supports cross platform single sign on, establishing a Department wide access management solution has been challenging. The move to the cloud and zero trust policies will only exacerbate these challenges.From a functional perspective, the Department of State business processes and functional requirements of our global users are highly distinct, necessitating COTS products that are highly configurable and extendable.

Additionally, the unique needs of our global user base (see RFP for outlined complexities and challenges) require highly intuitive solutions.

22 Will there be any limitations on teaming, such as;

required past history of collaboration?

The Government will not require past collaboration, or similar limitations.

There was a lot of mention of cloud-based options for future state of ILMS. Does the program have a preferred cloud service provider and what data security level is required for ILMS?

The Department has multiple cloud platforms. Microsoft Azure is the Department’s enterprise platform, and the ILMS PeopleSoft and Ariba On-Premise modules are being migrated to the Department's Azure cloud platform. The Department also uses ServiceNow as its enterprise wide service management platform and the ILMS modules hosted on this platform reside there. There will likely be additional opportunities to use cloud-based platforms as the Department modernizes Procure-to-Pay and Fleet Management, should the Department choose other products that are cloud-service based. ILMS currently requires moderate level security for its cloud suite solutions.

Is the intent of the solicitation's capability areas to provide Dept-wide services only related to DOS logistics and supply chain systems? Or can capabilities such as tech mgmt and data mgmt be broadened depending on the need of the bureau?

All new requirements will be reviewed by the Contracting Officer, who will determine whether new requirements are within the scope of this particular IDIQ contract. Requirements have generally been logistics and supply chain related. However, this does not mean that data management is not related to logistics management and supply chains, with analytics being one example of data management stemming from logistics and supply chain activities (see IDIQ Section C.3.3). Each new activity will be reviewed at the time it presents itself.

Is there any chance that this requirement will be competed on the Department-wide EVOLVE IDIQ that is slated to be procured soon? No.

Is there a chance that Evolve will absorb ILMS?

26 How many TO's? One initially, more to follow.

What is your expected timeline for the RFP?

FY22 Q3 When is the final RFP estimated to drop? Apologies, I missed the response

28 Will this contract be awarded against an existing government vehicle or will it be an open market award? No. This will be issued on SAM.gov, for full-and-open competition.

To promote teaming and support the 20% SB utilization will the ILMS Acquisition team publish a list of SB firms interested in supporting ILMS?

The Department posted on SAM.gov an updated list of interested parties. The Department will only post the information for vendors who have stated that they would like to be included on the list.

30 How robust would be transition plan be? How long would be allowed for transition?

Every task order could potentially be different in terms of the amount of time allowed for transition, likely varying between 90- 180 days. The transition period for Task Order 001 will be 90 days, and the plan should be robust and in conformance with the instructions identified under Section G.5.1.

I thought the offeror was to propose the technology stack along with the services but you just said that technology would be purchased outside of this RFP?

Can you explain more?

The Government has not asked offerors to propose a technology stack. The Government only specifies what the current technology stack is, as well as information on plans to modernize and what the technology stack may be. It is not a requirement that offerors propose what they think the technology stack should be.

32 Is Asset/Location tracking part of ILMS

Overseas posts and domestic locations currently use bar codes and scanners to track assets. Assets are scanned at each touch point in the asset lifecycle receipt, during annual inventory, to disposal. We do not currently user RFID, GPS tags, telematics, or other technologies to track assets. The government is currently exploring the use of telematics for vehicle use and location monitoring. The government has also explored the use of RFID tags in the past, but security restrictions and lack of connectivity presented challenges. However, the government is always looking for ways that technology can improve business processes.

There was a grants management system ILMS component briefed in the original pre-solicitation industry day -- has that been removed from the opportunity?

A decision on the grants management system SAMS is still pending. The current thinking is that system ownership will be transitioned to a different office, but at this time it is still being supported under ILMS.

have you considered a COTS approach vs services to this procurement . this is stated in a few Executive orders and there are COTS platforms that can meet all functional requirements

Before the initial implementation of ILMS, the Government conducted a thorough business case analysis with an analysis of alternatives. The Department chose a best of breed alternative selecting the PeopleSoft ERP and Ariba COTS product.

Subsequently, the Department chose Chevin to meet it's fleet management needs. With each new functional requirement, A/LM conducts a business case and analysis of alternatives to identify the best solution for the Department. This approach has resulted in a hybrid of ERP/COTS, low-code, and custom developed modules.

Given the Department's complex and vast requirements, these continuous market assessments have shown that there is no one product that can meet all supply chain needs of the Department of State. The Department’s needs are simply too complex and too varied to be met by a single product. Therefore, a single COTS approach will not be considered. However, clearly the Department, in compliance with the executive order, always considers COTS alternatives and employs them when it is in the best interest of the government to do so.

Will there be a specific POC/ Contact information for inquiries about this particular opportunity (ILMS)? I'm sure there will be a lot of questions going forward.

blackce@state.gov

Will we be provided point of contact information (such as Christina) to send an email to allow our contact information to be released?

Email for Ms. Christina Black, please?

36 Will the recording be made available? No.

Is the government looking for approaches that reduce costs? For example, is the government only interested in COTS platform services which can be costly from an ongoing licensing and subscription standpoint? How important is sustainment?

The Government is always looking for opportunities to reduce costs and will choose technical solutions (COTS, GOTS, low-code, custom developed, or other solutions) that are in the best interest of the Government. For example, State Department is looking at COTS, low-code, and 3GL custom development options for transitioning PeopleCode. However, this is independent of this solicitation and contract and will be a future activity.

If the IV&V is a separate contract when do you anticipate that RFP coming out?

The IV&V contract is a separate contract. The purpose of the discussion within the SOW on IV&V is to ensure that the awardee of this contract understands that they will be expected to work with the IV&V contractor. Open communications and cooperation between the contractors is needed.

Can you cover IV&V again. I thought I heard you say that will be a separate contract effort. IV&V was in the PMO section of the SOW. Can you clarify government intent on IV&V Which firm(s) is/are the current ILMS IV&V vendor(s)?

What is the timing on the ILMS IV&V solicitation?

Are there planned industry communications (e.g., RFIs, Industry Days, etc.) for the ILMS IV&V procurement?

For vendors that can meet the requirements but are not the incumbent, can you consider a separate transition cost portion of the pricing so that it can be reviewed independently, and for feasibility only? removes some incumbent cost adv.

No. The Government will treat offerors equally.

40 Are IOT (Internet of things) capabilities being considered and if so how?

A/LM has taken a preliminary look at IOT technology for ILMS but has not given it further consideration as the Department overall must address technical and security considerations at the enterprise level before A/LM can leverage the technology. A/LM may consider IOT capabilities for ILMS as part of the longer term 2030 plan as near term priorities are addressed.

41 U.S. Code § 3307 States Preference for commercial products over custom development - why isn't State Department opening the responses to a single COTS platform for this platform .

This solicitation is for services to support and enhance the existing ILMS, not for technology solutions. The acquisition of new technology solutions (COTS and alternatives solutions) to modernize portions of ILMS are separate procurements and not relevant to this solicitation.

Enterprise systems (known as investments) must be reported externally (and published publicly for transparency) through the OMB 300 process, known as capital planning and investment control (CPIC). OMB's budget guidance requires an analysis of alternatives for every business case. The Department conducts an analysis of alternatives when a new technology is being considered. However, as previously stated, the acquisition of new technology is not part of this procurement.

42 Why are you putting out slides about technology needs if that's not part of this acquisition?

The referenced information is designed to provide the offeror with an understanding of the environment and the direction that the Department of State is planning to go with the ILMS program and system. The expectation is that the additional background information will help offerors to better understand the Department’s intended direction with this program and will lead to more thoughtful proposal responses.

Can you describe your approach to user experience?

Do you anticipate UX /requirements? For example, How often do you expect the contractor to interact with end users?

The Department prioritizes UX for new development in ILMS and the awardee will be working with end users to develop new UX screens. In terms of how often the awardee will interact with end users, this will depend on specific projects and individual roles of contractors. For new development, though, the interaction is expected to be quite significant. The awardee will hold stakeholder meetings where design sessions will be carried out with end users.

44 Can you describe how your approach complies with 41 USC 2307 modular contracting for IT?

We believe the Questioner meant to reference 41 U.S. Code § 2308, which our response here speaks to. Modular contracting is a contracting technique that uses of one or more contracts to acquire information technology systems in successive, interoperable increments. The identified code promotes the use of such practices.

Offerors need to understand that ILMS is an existing system, and the Department does not plan to replace it as a whole. As funding becomes available, the Department intends to incrementally transition some modules that are using outdated technologies, by using an agile development methodology. Through this awarded contract, the contractor will assist the Department in maintaining its logistics system, as well as the incorporation of new modules and retiring of outdated technologies. However, this contract is for service and support, not the procurement of the related technology.

Is the DoS concerned about Geofencing and related technologies such as GPS Spoofing detection as it relates to logistics?

This is not something the Department has in place at this time. It’s possible, though, that this is something that might be investigated in the future. However, ILMS is not responsible for securing perimeters. Perhaps this technology would be useful with fleet and telematics.

Is State happy with the ILMS incumbent?

While the Department has stated that the incumbent's performance has been satisfactory, the Government is in no way biased toward a particular vendor to include the incumbent.

Competition is a core tenet of government contracting, and this solicitation is consistent with that principle. Not only does the Government want a competitive environment, but we expect one.

The Government anticipates that there will be numerous qualified vendors that choose to propose on this procurement.

You’ve shared that A/LM is very happy with the incumbent’s performance on this program. Would you please share what you like and don’t like that the incumbent is doing?

By stating that you are completely satisfied with the incumbent, can you say why you believe any other company should spend their B&P dollars to bid against the incumbent for this solicitation?

A solicitation that is too heavily aligned to an incumbent advantage discourages bidders and may yield no competition for this procurement It’s important for the Department to know that industry has traditionally stayed away from ILMS given how close the former PM was with the incumbent (basically made it seem like she always wired it for Accenture)

Can you explain more on how offerors can demonstrate understanding with ILMS if ILMS is a combination of systems put together by the incumbent? Seems this requirement favors the current prime.

As mentioned on a number of occasions, what the Department is interested in is assessing an offeror’s understanding of similar supply chain and logistics modules, and there is no expectation that an offeror will need to have direct ILMS experience to be competitive. Additionally, and to clarify, it was not the incumbent that determined the systems and products that comprise the ILMS Integrated Suite. The systems and products selected were based on the Government’s requirements.

The Government is responsible for determining the ILMS solution and roadmap, not contractors. The Government was very careful in crafting the solicitation so that an offeror is required only to demonstrate knowledge of supply chain and logistics systems similar in size, scope and complexity to ILMS, without having to demonstrate experience specific to ILMS. The solicitation also includes a number of business scenarios that allow an offeror to demonstrate its knowledge of logistics and supply chain operations, to include supporting systems that were not specific to ILMS. The scenarios were written in general terms, not specific to ILMS. If any scenario makes a reference to ILMS, it is still written as a hypothetical scenario that any vendor should be able to address.

48 Were there any POAM exceptions during the last audit of the system? This information is security sensitive and will not be released.

Can you share the COTS analysis you did that ruled out a COTS approach as we have reviewed these requirements and believe a COTS platform can meet the platform needs. Can we meet with someone to have a discussion on this

See response to questions 21 and 49. This RFP is for services, not technical solutions. The requested analysis is not relevant to this

RFP.

you just stated that you want offerors to understand the environment and so you are sharing your technology slides, but isn't this counter to your earlier statement about not needing to know the environment, but the focus is on the tools?

The Government has emphasized that offerors do not need to have direct hands-on experience with the ILMS system. However, this does not imply that an offeror does not benefit from an understanding of the background that has been provided by the Government during the pre-solicitation virtual event, live industry day event, and in the body of the solicitation itself. The background is being provided to ensure that there is as level of a playing field as possible. The background provided is considered pertinent in that an offeror should understand it, even if it’s not an aspect that an offeror will be proposing on.

During the Industry day held Wednesday February 23rd, 2022, the Government stated that “Any offeror with an EVMS that has been certified by an internal or external organization will be considered a strength.” Can the Government please further define “internal organization” and “external organization” in this context?

As identified under Section H.23, the Contractor is required to certify that it uses a Project Control Systems and Earned Value Management System (EVMS) system consistent with the most current guidelines contained in ANSI-STD 748. Under Section L.14.3.3.3, the Department speaks to this certification, and asks that offerors identify if its EVMS has been certified by an internal or external entity. An internal organization is an internal oversight office within the Offeror's organization. An external entity is an independent third party or a government oversight entity like

DCMA.