Attachment III - Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers - (FCC Responses).pdf

Question No. Solicitation Reference Offeror Question FCC Response

Attachment I - Section 4.2 (i,ii))

Will the awarded contractor be required to follow field domain rules currently in place in the fabric creation process (ie building_type_code for the non-BSL dataset) or is the FCC interested in more detailed classifications being proposed?

The awarded contractor will be required to follow field domain rules currently in place in the fabric creation process (ie building_type_code for the non-BSL dataset). To the extent an offeror can offer additional information, the government may consider in evaluating the offeror's proposal.

Attachment I - Section 4.2 (iv) The PWS states that “Fabric location IDs should be preserved across versions” (pg 7). This raises a number of questions about data produced by the previous vendor. Will the awarded vendor have full rights to use the location ids generated under the previous contract? And if so, will other fields such as “address_primary” and the longitude and latitude of the location id be available for the use of the new vendor?

The FCC (and its contractors) have sufficient data rights on location_ids, e.g., to create and update the Fabric. However, certain data, such as some “address_primary” and longitude and latitude are contractor's proprietary data. The new vendor cannot incorporate such data into the next Fabric. The new vendor shall provide their own data.

Attachment I - Section 4.2 (iv) If location ids and other fields from the fabric are to be maintained, how will this affect the use of more open licensing arrangements? Will the successor entity be bound by any of the license terms from work performed under the previous contract?

Location_ids are to be maintained across versions of the Fabric by the new vendor. We expect that identification may change between contracts and thus have requirements to ensure continuity at the start and conclusion of this contract. An offeror shall provide all required data elements associated with location_ids, with the data rights required in section 4.6 of the PWS.

Attachment I - Section 4.3.6 Is the agreed upon “transition-out plan” from the current fabric vendor available for review?

No. In any event, the government is not in a position to share contractor's proprietary information with other potential offerors.

RFP: 273FCC26R0001

Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers

RFP: 273FCC26R0001

Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers

Attachment I - Section 4.3.6 Is the FCC expecting to end the CostQuest Fabric contract without exercising Year 4 or Year 5? Specifically, does the FCC expect to keep the CostQuest contract in force for the duration of the winning contractor’s “transition-in” plan? Does the existing FCC contract with CostQuest compel CostQuest to cooperate fully with a new winning contract for the “transition-in” period? If not, how will FCC mediate disputes between CostQuest and a new winning contractor to avoid delays in the “transition-in” period?

The government will not share nonpublic information about the current contract. We expect to keep the CostQuest contract in force for the duration of the winning contractor’s “transition-in” period. During contract administration, the government will oversee transition and coordination between CostQuest and the new vendor. An offeror is responsible for proposing their crosswalk approach, including crosswalk methodologies and algorithms. FCC is open to approaches such as third-party implementing crosswalk mapping methodologies and algorithms provided by offeror.

Attachment I - Section 4.3.6 Is the FCC contract with CostQuest for Fabric data synchronized in any way with the NTIA contract with CostQuest for Fabric data? Specifically, could there be a situation where the winning contractor is delivering Fabric data to FCC while the NTIA continues to use CostQuest Fabric data? If so, please explain any obligations that would be borne by the winning contractor under such a scenario. For example, would the winning contractor need to provide a cross-walk table to match BSL IDs from the contractor’s version of the Fabric with the CostQuest fabric in use at NTIA to administer the BEAD Program? How would discrepancies between datasets (i.e. non-matching BSLs) be handled?

Any questions about other agencies' contracting or use of Fabric data outside the requirements of this RFP, including uses by NTIA for BEAD or other programs, should be directed to those agencies. This RFP addresses the FCC's requirements.

Attachment I - Section 4.6 Would the FCC permit a licensing plan that phases out licensed vendor data over time to allow for increasingly open access?

Yes. However, the proposal should detail how sources and methodologies will change over time to enable open access, while retaining data quality/accuracy, in the future. The proposal should also reflect any changes to cost over time as a result.

Attachment I - Section 4.6 The PWS states a strong preference for open access data, but licensing terms are not mentioned in the Evaluation section (52.212-2) of Attachment V. Will more open licensing terms be considered in the evaluation of proposals? If so, can the FCC provide insight into how this information may be factored into evaluation?

Yes, more open licensing terms will be considered in the evaluation of proposals. See Attachment II, page 13: The FCC will evaluate the extent to which the Offeror’s proposed data usage rights meet or exceed the Government’s requirements set forth in PWS Section 4.6, with preference given to data rights more closely aligned to the most-preferred rights described in the PWS.

Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers

Attachment I - Section 6 The PWS does not explicitly state the period of performance. Can the FCC provide a timeline of when all deliverables will be expected including the initial delivery of the fabric, the start of challenge support and other related activities, etc?

The specific dates for the contract will depend on the award timeline. As noted in §6 of the PWS (and in §1 of Attachment II), the period of performance will be for one year with up to four option years from the award. Similarly, the deliverable schedule in §10 of the PWS is tied to the contract award date. Note though Fabric biannual releases are in June and December.

Attachment II - Vol 5 Under the described “best value” contract award, what are the weights or percentages of scoring that will be applied to factors described?

See Attachment II, page 11 "The following non-price factors, when combined, are significantly more important than price and will be used in a two (2) step evaluation approach to evaluate offers and are listed in descending order of importance" and the table listed on that page.

Attachment IV The pricing sheet does not have a space to add any licensing costs that the project might incur. Where would those be captured?

Please use Pricing Sheet, "Pricing Detail - All CLINs," line 37, "Fabric Data Usage Rights Cost" for licensing cost.

Attachment IV Are the proposed labor categories and hours for evaluation purposes only?

Will the Firm Fixed Price remain unchanged regardless of actual hours expended?

Yes. And Yes.

Attachment I, PWS, Section 4.3.5, Fabric challenge technical support (provide support to challengers), page 9

Can the Government clarify: 1) Will this Fabric challenge support provided to the ISP, state, Tribal and local governments be made directly between the challenger and the Fabric vendor, or would the FCC or other FCC contractors manage requests and provide triaged challenge support to Fabric vendor (e.g., Fabric Vendor provides level 2 support, FCC or other FCC contractors provide initial support)?

We expect that entities seeking support will come both through the FCC and directly to the vendor. As such, the vendor should be able to manage and track requests. Questions that relate to FCC decisions (or to programs outside tied to the Fabric dataset) should be referred back to the FCC.

Attachment I, PWS, Section 4.3.6, Transition Support, page

Section 4.3.6 states that a draft Transition-Out Plan must be submitted with the proposal, while the Deliverables table in Section 10 indicates submission no later than 90 days prior to contract end. Please clarify whether a draft Transition-Out Plan is required as part of the proposal submission.

A draft Transition-Out Plan is required as part of the proposal submission. The final version is due no later than 90 days prior to contract end.

Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers

Attachment I, PWS, Section 4.6, Data Usage Rights, pages 15-17

If a party under 4.6.1.2 or 4.6.1.3 would like to use the licensed data to run a new broadband funding program or allow parties in 4.6.1.2 to use the Licensed Data to participate in a new program, receive new awards, or fulfill compliance requirements associated with the funding, a) is this use to be permitted under the Data Usage Rights described in 4.6.1.2 and 4.6.1.3, and

b) are the cost associated with supporting this use to be covered by the fees awarded by this RFP?

Rights required under 4.6.1.2 are limited to 47 U.S.C. §1704 to create and update the Broadband Funding Map; 47 U.S.C. §641 et seq to establish the Broadband Data Collection; and as required by Universal Service Fund programs. Rights required under 4.6.1.3 are limited to 47 U.S.C.

§1704 to create and update the Broadband Funding Map; and 47 U.S.C.

§641 et seq to establish the Broadband Data Collection. Uses to administer additional programs not required by those statutes are not part of this RFP.

Attachment I, PWS, Section 4.6.2, Tier 2: Preferred Data Usage Rights, page 18

The last sentence of the second sub-bullet reads as “The subset of locations may be limited to locations determined by the Commission to lack broadband availability for the purposes of each respective program.”

Does “each respective program” refer to only FCC administered programs? If no, what programs does it refer to?

As stated, that bullet is tied to "creation and administration of Universal Service Fund programs regardless of the date the program was created."

Therefore "each respective program" refers to the FCC's USF programs.

Attachment II, Instruction to Offerors, Section 2.4.1, File Format, page 2

The Instructions to Offerors require Times New Roman 12-point font. Will the Government permit a smaller font size (e.g., 9pt or 10pt) for all text within figures, tables, charts, captions, and graphics, provided they remain legible?

The Government permits the use of Times New Roman, 10-point font for all text within figures, tables, charts, captions, and graphics, provided the text remains legible.

Attachment II, Instructions to Offerors, Section 6, VOLUME

III – TECHNICAL APPROACH [45

page limit], page 7

The instruction regarding Data Sources appears to have omitted language:

"...along with information about how often each underlying source is updated or refreshed, as well as [OMITTED]. The Offeror may provide..."

Please confirm the appropriate instruction.

The phrase ", as well as" is hereby deleted. Please see amendment.

Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers

Attachment II, Instructions to Offerors, Section 8, VOLUME V

– PRICE [No page limit], page 9

The instructions to offerors regarding pricing direct that an offeror's "LCAT mix/LOE should demonstrate the offeror's understanding of the requirements and their ability to effectively complete the activities in the PWS." In light of that instruction, does the FCC intend to assess the risk in an offeror's proposal demonstrated by a labor mix/level of effort and proposed fees that indicates a lack of understanding of the requirements?

The FCC will evaluate an offeror's LCAT mix/LOE to assess the offeror's understanding of the requirements and their ability to effectively complete the activities in the PWS. The FCC will evaluate whether the total evaluated price is fair and reasonable.

Attachment II, Instructions to Offerors, Section 8.2, Price Proposal, page 10

Please clarify that the only pricing and detail required for CLIN 0003 is to provide “Pricing for completing manual review of 1000 Broadband Serviceable Locations (BSLs) and completing address matching of 1000 addresses.”

The pricing sheet requires 50 batches/units of 1000 (i.e., 50,000 reviews and 50,000 addresses matches in total).

Does this RFP consolidate any requirements currently fulfilled via Contract number 1331L523C13500008 awarded by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) for broadband mapping data support? If so, could the FCC please elaborate on the anticipated relationship between these requirements?

Any questions about other agencies' contracting or use of Fabric data outside the requirements of this RFP, including uses by NTIA for BEAD or other programs, should be directed to those agencies. This RFP addresses the FCC's requirements.

If this RFP incorporates efforts from the NTIA contract and related licensing, are the costs related to these NTIA transition-out efforts included in this

RFP?

Any questions about other agencies' contracting or use of Fabric data outside the requirements of this RFP, including uses by NTIA for BEAD or other programs, should be directed to those agencies. This RFP addresses the FCC's requirements.

Attachment I 4.1 Within the Performance Work Statement, are offerors expected to propose a defined transition-in approach that assumes continuity of existing Fabric operations, or does the FCC anticipate that alternative transition approaches (e.g., phased assumption of responsibilities) are acceptable, provided service continuity and data integrity are maintained?

The FCC does not anticipate a substantial overlap in this contract and the existing contract. The transition-in plan should therefore assume a limited overlap in time, e.g., 30 to 60 days overlap.

Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers

Attachment II Evaluation Criteria

For evaluation purposes, can the FCC clarify whether greater emphasis will be placed on demonstrated historical performance at national scale, proposed quality assurance and verification methodology, or the technical approach to ongoing updates and challenge adjudication?

As described in Attachment II, the non-price factors are significantly more important than price, with Factors Relevant Experience, Technical Approach, and Data Usage Rights in descending order of importance.

Attachment I 4.3.2 The solicitation references support for FCC mapping, challenge processes, and coordination with federal broadband funding programs. Can the FCC clarify whether offerors may propose differing technical approaches to data governance, provenance, or integration, provided all statutory, regulatory, and program requirements are fully satisfied?

The offeror is free to propose their approaches that meet the requirements set forth in the PWS.

Attachment I 4.6 Is there an expected or contractual accuracy benchmark for initial vs steady-state Fabric releases?

The FCC will evaluate the quality of offeror's proposed Fabric, in accordance with the criteria set forth in Attachment II. See e.g., Attachment II, page 13, bullet point #4.

Attachment II 3.2 What will be the timeline for Step II part of the RFP? Depending on the number of proposals for Step II, the government anticipates 4-6 months.

Can the FCC clarify the contractor’s role versus FCC staff’s role in receiving, analyzing, escalating, and making final determinations on Fabric classifications and challenges?

Fabric challenges need to be resolved according to the FCC's instructions, but the precise methodology could depend on, for example, underlying data that the vendor has access to or the vendor's ability to conduct different analyses. The FCC will work with the vendor to establish a methodology that meets the FCC's requirements and that the vendor can deliver, with the final determination made by the FCC.

Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers

The new vendor will be expected to maintain the existing location IDs. Does that also extend to the Existing Attribute Schema? Can the Location ID's be sunset in favor or new IDs in a future release?

Location_ids are to be maintained across versions of the Fabric by the new vendor. We expect that identification may change between contracts and thus have requirements to ensure continuity at the start and conclusion of this contract. To the extent an offeror can offer additional information and/or data elements, the government may consider in evaluating the offeror's proposal. At this point, the government do not see a need to sunset the current Location ID's.

The RFP includes support for NTIA, USAC and other related federal organizations; are there any state broadband or other organization outside of government that are covered by this license?

Other Federal agencies are required to be able to obtain a license under §4.6.1.3 of the PWS. States and ISPs are required to be able to obtain a license under §4.6.1.2 of the PWS. In both cases, the Offeror must allow licensees to use the data for filings related to the Broadband Data Collection and Broadband Funding map (and for ISPs to be able to file data required by Universal Service Fund programs). Other uses beyond §4.6 of the PWS are not required by the RFP.

Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers

If there are any sub-contractors or data vendors that the current fabric needs to include going forward, can you provide a list of these entities?

An offeror is responsible for providing the data required by §4.2 of the PWS and for describing their data sources in their proposal. Please note also the PWS requires the vendor to use specific data sources in certain circumstances. See, for example, Section 4.1 of the PWS (about incorporating authoritative government data); Section 4.3.2 (regarding process improvements); and Section 4.4 (optional activities to incorporate new data sources).

Regarding entities that can access the Fabric, please see PWS 4.6.1. For example, for PWS 4.6.1.1., "the Contractor shall grant to the FCC, including its contractors (e.g., third-party contractors) and any program administrators (e.g., the Universal Service Administration Company)... " For example, the entities able to access the Fabric under the FCC's license include the Universal Service Administration Corporation, the Broadband Data Collection developer, and various contractors related to the FCC's IT operations.

Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers

RFP calls for support of all licensees during Transition In period. Can you confirm this only relates to the new go forward fabric and not the previous version of the fabric? I.e any challenged locations will be wrapped up before new vendor takes over.

The new vendor is responsible for supporting all licensees of the new Fabric and for questions related to the transition. To the extent that there are any unresolved challenges (e.g., those that are submitted during the transition-in period), we anticipate that the new vendor will evaluate those challenges for potential inclusion in the initial Fabric delivery or the next version, in a process agreed by the FCC.

Can you provide a count of challenges that were submitted by a consumer vs the ISPs? Either as a count or percentage of the total.

The FCC has published Fabric challenge data on the National Broadband Map website. See https://broadbandmap.fcc.gov/data-download/challenge-data and the BDC Public Data API Specifications on that page.

Will the new vendor be bound by anything in the current vendors Transition Out plan that would materially impact them financially?

The FCC assumes that the current vendor and the new vendor will cooperate with the FCC and each other reasonably. The FCC (and its contractors) have sufficient data rights on location_ids, e.g., to create and maintain the Fabric. However, certain data, such as some “address_primary” and longitude and latitude are contractor's proprietary data. The new vendor cannot incorporate such data into the next Fabric. The new vendor shall provide their own data. An offeror is responsible for proposing their crosswalk approach, including crosswalk methodologies and algorithms. FCC is open to approaches such as third-party implementing crosswalk mapping methodologies and algorithms provided by offeror.

Will the Transition Out plan include support for the incumbent's commercial data licenses of the fabric? If so, can we get a list of the commercial customers or at least a count of how many will need to be supported in advance of the RFP due date?

The incumbent's commercial data licenses of the fabric are out of the scope of this requirement, thus not irrelevant to the Transition-Out plan.

Can you share how many times the current fabric provider has audited a license holder since the program launched?

The government takes the view that licensing audit approach is contractor's proprietary information.

Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers

Does the FCC anticipate using Fabric data directly to support audits or enforcement actions, and if so, are there specific data quality, documentation, or provenance expectations that offerors should consider in their proposed approach?

Yes, in accordance with the data rights that the offeror proposes, see PWS Section 4.6, the FCC may use Fabric data directly to support audits or enforcement actions. The FCC will evaluate the quality of offeror's proposed Fabric, in accordance with the criteria set forth in Attachment II. See e.g., Attachment II, page 13, bullet point #4.

Can you share if the CAI data will be provided by the FCC or State Governments as to provide continuity to current CAI locations?

Public information about the current data sources used to develop the Fabric are available in the Fabric Methods Manual, linked from https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/6789299021723-Key- Reference-Documents. The FCC has published Fabric challenge data, including those provided by the state governments, on the National Broadband Map website.

Does the FCC have baseline expectations for staffing readiness (e.g., minimum operational capacity or responsiveness) independent of challenge volume variability?

The FCC will evaluate how efficiently and effectively the Offeror’s technical approach, including staffing/LCAT mix/level of effort, addresses each of the requirements of the relevant PWS Sections.

Does the FCC anticipate periodic changes to Fabric challenge category or resolution codes, and are there existing expectations or best practices for managing version control and backward compatibility across Fabric releases?

While we do not have current plans to update the existing challenge categories or resolution codes, we are not able to say that they will remain unchanged over the length of the contract and option periods. To the extent an offeror proposes additional challenge categories or resolution codes, version control and backward compatibility, the government may consider in evaluating the offeror's proposal.

Beyond the required biannual Fabric releases, does the FCC anticipate requesting interim or ad hoc Fabric updates (e.g., targeted updates to support enforcement actions, or program needs), and if so, how would such updates be scoped and directed?

As stated in the PWS, there are two Fabric deliverables each year. We do not foresee any interim Fabric updates (absent the need to correct errors in Fabric releases).

Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric - Questions and Answers

During peak BDC filing and Fabric challenge windows, does the FCC anticipate any heightened operational support expectations (e.g., surge staffing, extended hours, or prioritization), or should offerors assume steady-state support levels year-round?

There is an inherent seasonality to the Fabric-production calendar (with deliveries twice per year); and the agency anticipates that the volume of challenges may vary greatly over time (due to that seasonality and the extent to which policies or programs draw renewed attention to the Fabric). The Offeror should determine the best way to ensure necessary levels of support to meet those requirements.

Does the FCC anticipate future enhancements to the Broadband Funding Map that may require additional Fabric attributes, identifiers, or schema changes beyond those currently specified?

At this time, the FCC does not anticipate additional overall changes to the Fabric attributes, identifiers, or schema to support the BFM or the BDC.

During transition-in, does the FCC anticipate facilitating access to incumbent contractor documentation, data schemas, and historical decision logic (to the extent available) to support continuity of Fabric development, challenge adjudication, and licensee support?

During contract administration, the government will oversee transition and coordination between CostQuest and the new vendor. Please note that certain proprietary data of the incumbent may not be available to the new vendor. An offeror is responsible for proposing their crosswalk approach, including crosswalk methodologies and algorithms. FCC is open to approaches such as third-party implementing crosswalk mapping methodologies and algorithms provided by offeror.

If a new vendor is awarded the contract, will the current vendor have any rights to continue to use, leverage or monetize the ISP contributed data it has collected so far?

Challenge data submitted by ISPs or others are publicly available.

Will the FCC consider a supplementary award to dual source the fabric? For this particular RFP requirement, the FCC will not consider a supplementary award to dual source the fabric.