T4NG2 Questions and Answers 2.14.pdf

Reference Question Answer

1.0 The scope states, “Moreover, IT services and related products covered under this contract shall be global in reach and the Contractors must be prepared to provide services and deliverables worldwide. Can the government confirm services OCONUS can be supported remotely?

That determination would be made at the Task Order level for the specific requirement at hand.

1.0 Under 1.0 Scope first paragraph, third line, "other Federal Agencies" do we have a list of these? No.

2.0 In reference to item number 40. Can you provide a copy or hyperlink to “VA Directive and Handbook 6513, “Secure External Connections,”

October 12, 2017” VA Directive 6513 / (https://www.va.gov/vapubs/index.cfm)

2.0 In reference to item number 46. Has the “VA Enterprise Technology Strategic Plan, February 28, 2014” been updated recently? A current description of VA OIT's Vision for digital transformation here: https://digital.va.gov/digital-transformation/?redirect=1

2.0 In reference to item number 78. Can you provide a copy or hyperlink to “VA Enterprise Cloud (VAEC) Technical Reference Guide, July 2018 version 1.3”

VAEC Technical Reference Architecture Guide.pdf (sharepoint.com)

3.11 "The Government reserves the right to validate the systems/software developers' process assertions and representations by conducting an evaluation by VA or a third party or appraisals of the Contractor's organization and Subcontractors using commonly accepted Industry/Government validation practices." It isn't made clear the methods or options being utilized for validation, nor the time needed or the intervals at which this might need to happen. What is asked of the contractor to produce to be compliant to these regulatory validations?

If/as needed, validation methods my include a review of the of the systems, processes and representations made, including validating certifications through the awarding entities.

3.11 We don’t believe ITIL 4 is a corporate certification, it is assigned only to individuals. Received. Thank you.

3.13 "Ensure that all hosting services pertaining to this contract are performed within the United States of America, including the storage of agency data, information, and records under the control of or in the possession of the Contractor pursuant to this contract" Does this prevent the agency from certain cloud-based server solutions, many of which possess locations globally? Will the agency look into providing a list it is eligible to use during such a request?

Cloud-based solutions in use by VA must adhere to this requirement. Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure are the current cloud services providers to VA.

3.13 Page 31, Section 3.13 a.: “Provide the CO, designated representative of the CO, and representatives of authorized Government offices, full and free physical and remote/logical access to the Contractor's (and Subcontractors') facilities, installations, operations documentation, databases, and personnel used for contract hosting services.” Can VA clarify “full and free” by adding at the end of the sentence “limited to the scope of T4NG2”?

The next sentence clarifies the extent of the access by stating, “This access shall be provided to the extent required to carry out audits, inspections, device scanning utilizing Government prescribed tools, investigations, or other reviews to ensure compliance with contractual requirements for IT and information security, and to safeguard against threats and hazards to the integrity, availability, and confidentiality of agency information in the possession or under the control of the Contractor (or Subcontractor)”

3.13 Page 32, Section 3.13 g.: “Ensure that all hosting services pertaining to this contract are performed within the United States of America, including the storage of agency data, information, and records under the control of or in the possession of the Contractor pursuant to this contract”. Does VA consider "hosting services" any contractor’s use of cloud "as a Service"(aaS) to perform services for the VA where inherited controls meet NIST/FISMA security requirements and controls (e.g., MS365, CI/CD pipeline(s), Data Storage, etc.)?

Yes. VA considers “hosting services” any contractor’s use of cloud “as a Service” to perform services for the VA where inherited controls meet NIST/FISMA security requirements and controls.

3.9 Page 30, Section 3.9: “The Contractor may support a Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) that is a flexible set of design principles used during the phases of systems development and integration which will be specified at the task order level. The deployed SOA-based architecture will be deployed on a secure, scalable, interoperable, and dynamic platform that has the end-to-end visibility and manageability from application services to the networking components level and that can be used within multiple domains.” Does VA require the Contractor provide continuing O&M on newly deployed SOAs, and if so, will the contractor be permitted to bid O&M resources on each respective SOA Task Orders?

Required SOA O&M will be described at the Task Order level.

4.10 Under 4.10 Training, is there any count or identification of amounts of Task Area training requirements? This is dependent on the VA's everchanging needs and will be defined at the task order level.

4.2 Under 4.2, is there a list or composite of the advanced software technologies that may be identified post-award? Section 4.3 addresses emerging technologies. The paragraph reads, “This functional area involves evaluating existing and emerging software technology products against the needs of current system development and support efforts, demonstrating specific technologies in the context of supported systems, and transitioning effective technology solutions into use.” And then describes the VA’s technology areas of focus.

4.5 Would the Government consider updating the PWS to move Independent Verification and Validation under a T&E and replace the first tier paragraph with change management? For a vendor to provide IV&V support, they inherently polarize themselves from being able to support other components of technology delivery; whereas, change management successfully underpins technology initiatives.

Independence is the vital aspect of performing IV&V activities.

Therefore the vendor performing the IV&V for a set of deliverables cannot be the producer of those same deliverables.

4.6 Under 4.6, for voice and video systems services - are these aggressively used currently or is this a progressive requirement moving forward? As a Multiple Agency Award Contract, the contract needs to accommodate varying levels of demand for these services. This will be further defined at the task order level.

6 The Draft RFP states under section 6.0, “The position sensitivity risk designation [LOW, MODERATE, and HIGH] and associated level of background investigation [Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 4] for each Task Order PWS task shall be designated accordingly, as identified within Section

4.6 of the TO PWS.” The question is will the government identify those title positions and the security levels required for each position? Will those current security level requirements fluctuate based on heightened or lessened?

Position sensitivity is based on the access a role may have to types of sensitive information, rather than the on the title of the position.

And the requirements can vary per Task Order.

6.5 To maximize participation among awardees, we recommend including a facility security clearance as a scored element in Attachment 015. Received and considered. Thank you.

6.5 "The Contractor should anticipate potentially providing personnel with the security clearances up to the Top Secret level or Position Sensitivity of High/Tier 4 as required by the Task Order. Contractors must have the appropriate clearances for proposal purposes at the Task Order level."

Is that to be anticipated before task orders are given, or is there a period of time permitted for securing that level of clearance as TOs are released, or rather, as they are won? Should the contractor approach the TOs anticipating getting the clearances before they win a TO, or as they win the TO? Ss 6.7 does not account for this in its text, as it refers only to security and awareness training, but not acquiring clearances.

Clearances shall be obtained at the Task Order level as award is made.

7.3 Complex technical approaches are not off-the-shelf solutions and typically require solid, well-thought solutions. Would the government consider extending the response times for these applicable task orders past the current anticipated timeframe after receipt of the RTEP?

Requests to extend Task Order response times can be considered.

3.6.4 There are references to both ServiceNow and Remedy. Are there multiple IT Service Management Systems? A variety of systems and methods are used to manage IT services through the VA. At present, ServiceNow is the primary system used for VA Enterprise Service Management.

3.8.1 The Draft PWS states “ In association with the framework, the Contractor shall comply with OIT Technical Reference Model (VA TRM) and consider the VA Enterprise Technology Strategic Plan. Based on the increased rate of innovation (technical and processes), can the VA add additional information in this section on changes to the Product List for supporting OIT?

The VA TRM maintains the current list of approved IT products:

Home Page (va.gov)

3.8.3 Has the VA started migrating to IPV6 in any capacity yet? Migration to IPV6 is in progress.

3.8.6 Page 28, Section 3.8.6: “Additional frameworks may be specified in individual task orders.” Can the VA describe any additional frameworks currently under consideration by the VA coincident with the base period of this contract?

No. The statement acknowledges that a Task Order may require an alternative framework.

3.8.8 “The Contractor shall ensure that any new IT solution discontinues the use of SSN as the Primary Identifier to replace the SSN with the Integrated Control Number (ICN)” – Can the government confirm this is for newly developed IT solutions and not for those IT solutions that have been in place, but a license is being renewed or leveraged by another entity within the VA?

The Consolidated Appropriations Act (CAA) 2018, enacted March 23, 2018, mandates VA to discontinue using SSNs to identify individuals in all VA information systems as the Primary Identifier.

The requirement to discontinue use of the SSN as the primary identifier is for newly developed IT solutions and may also be required for legacy systems.

4.1.3 Page 33, Section 4.1.3 Requirements Development and Analysis Support: Will any OCI created by requirements development support be announced as part of the TOs when they are released?

Generally speaking, requirements development at the Task Order level does not include contractor personnel. The Government may advise Offerors at the Task Order level if there are known potential OCI's created by the requirement.

4.1.4 Can you provide a list of the most recent technical refreshes across the enterprise? Any technical refreshes associated with any particular requirement will be defined at the Task Order level.

4.1.6 Page 35, Section 4.1.6: “The Contractor may be required to provide subject matter expertise to coach, mentor and/or consult with Government Program Managers to plan and execute the processes prescribed by industry and government best practices consistent with organizational policies and procedures as specified in individual Task Orders.” Can the VA add the following provision to the beginning of this sentence, "While decision making rests solely with the Government, the Contractor may be required to…"?

The revision has been made.

4.1.9 Under 4.1.9, is there a current list of development toolkits for offeror review? The list of VA OIT approved IT tools can be found on the TRM site:

Home Page (va.gov)

4.2.12 For 4.2.12, is there a count of prior year technical documentation requirements and/or a projection? Obtaining a count of specific requirements isn’t feasible.

4.2.13 In reference to…” The migration of current systems and corresponding data to a common and enforced architecture within the VA Network is the goal” Can you provide a list of current systems that are currently or scheduled to be migrated on or about the transition-in time frame?

Current systems and their migration requirements associated with any particular requirement will be defined at the Task Order level.

4.2.2 Under 4.2.2, is there a count on the number of assessments that are conducted annually under severable task areas? This information will be provided to the extent possible in the Task Order level requirements.

4.2.5 "The Contractor shall provide support to the VA’s current cloud computing environment, Cloud computing services/cloud deployment models, and emerging cloud computing solution requirements." In order to write to our capability to do so, will offerors be informed of the current configuration, or perhaps the base solution? It would better inform offerors in their ability to mention potential solutions and better provide a competent response in a support statement during their proposal.

Requirements for specific solutions will be provided at the Task Order level.

4.2.8 "The Contractor shall provide services related to analysis, design, evaluation, implementation, and testing of interactive and wearable computing systems for human use to include, but is not limited to telehealth, natural language processing, and Section 508 compliance." This comes across vaguely enough to refer to anything, and vague enough to be very difficult for any small-to-medium IT company to confidently make a robust offer about. Can the language be a bit more specific to make it so the technology the agency is looking to have services and support for can be better understood?

The basic contract PWS is intentionally broad in scope to cover ever-changing requirements VA may have at the Task Order level.

4.2.8 Under 4.2.8, is there a strong service portfolio of Human-Computer Interaction through wearable computing systems and natural language processing currently, or is this an emergent requirement?

As a Multiple Agency Award Contract, the contract must accommodate varying levels of demand for these services. Specific requirements shall be addressed at the Task Order level.

4.6.2.3 On average, how many daily voice/video calls are scheduled? Pertinent information regarding the number of daily voice/video calls will be provided at the Task Order level.

4.6.2.3 Under 4.6.2.3, regarding web-based collaborative training and "other" solutions, are there examples of "other" solutions; and is there an idea of the amount of web-based training currently and projections for the future?

As a Multiple Agency Award Contract, the contract must accommodate the variety of collaboration tools that are in use at various agencies. The amount of web-based training varies among agencies, departments, professional roles, etc.

4.8.11 Aside from cloud service provider locations, how many data centers are currently utilized by the VA? 265

4.8.11 Does the VA manage it's own data centers? Yes

4.8.11 Page 45, Section 4.8.11 Data Center Administration, 2nd paragraph: "Physical operations and maintenance may include data center cleaning".

Does this refer to janitorial services or something else? What other physical facility maintenance tasks does this refer to?

This does not refer to janitorial services. Data center cleaning refers to either above floor or beneath sub-floor (or both) cleaning within a space housing IT Systems. Data center cleaning can significantly impact the sophisticated equipment/systems that occupy the area and all cleaning activities must be done and monitored by certified personnel. Triple filtration micro-stat vacuums must be utilized to perform all cleaning. Above floor cleaning should consist of cabinet and surface cleaning utilizing only disposable dust wipes. ITCs and RDCs currently have Data Center Cleaning contracts in place that lay out specific tasks needing to be accomplished along with technical details of equipment being utilized to accomplish the task. These contracts may be provided upon request in order to clearly articulate the task further if necessary.

4.8.6 Under 4.8.6, is there access to the historical utilization patterns and volume and forecasts; what are the emerging requirements?

4.8.7 Under 4.8.7, help desk is there a specific program that is currently used by all or majority of IT Help Desk Task Order requirements? As a Multiple Agency Award Contract, the contract must accommodate the variety of Help Desk tools that are in use at various agencies. The VA National Service Desk currently uses ServiceNow as its primary workflow management tool.

4.8.8 How many hardware assets are currently being managed by the asset management team?

4.9.2 Under 4.9.2, for logical security, is there an idea of the extent and frequency of training and the numbers of training services?

4.9.6 Section 4.9.6 (Cyber Business Intelligence) is missing the associated scope definition. Please clarify the scope for Cyber Business Intelligence. Please see the final PWS.

7.3.2 How will the government determine what Task Orders will be set aside, and will all socio-economic categories be considered? Individual Task Orders acquisition strategy will be a result of Market Research.

7.3.2.B-6 "When both the Prime and/or Subcontractor bid the Program Manager and/or Project Director, labor categories, detailed rationale shall be provided. " Can this be disambiguated? It isn't made clear in the language.

Suggestion received and considered. Thank you.

7.3.6.2 The government indicates for FFP contracts, “Labor shall further be broken out by labor categories, labor rates, and hours. The Contractor shall also include identification of Prime or Subcontractor for all labor proposed. Include a total of all labor hours proposed by period of performance and optional task.” Traditionally FFP requirements do not include cost build-up details and hold performance to identified SLAs. Please confirm if the draft RFP statement is accurate or if the intent of the government is to follow a different approach (i.e., labor categories, hours, SLAs).

This statement is accurate. FFP proposals at the Task Order level are required to include these details.

A5.0.4 "Contractor shall limit access to the minimum number of personnel necessary for contract performance for all information considered sensitive or proprietary in nature. If the Contractor is uncertain of the sensitivity of any information obtained during the performance this contract, the Contractor has a responsibility to ask the VA Contracting Officer." Would this order be issued when the TO is won or when a project plan is developed, or could it occur as a Project Work Plan is begun, with people at the site?

It is unclear what this question is referring to.

Addendum A2.0, page

"The applications, supplies, and services furnished under this contract must comply with VA Enterprise Architecture (EA), available at http://www.ea.oit.va.gov/index.asp in force at the time of issuance of this contract." Does this have a grace period so incoming contractors can verify any preinstalled equipment complies so that the transition-in allows the new contractors to verify what they're transitioning into?

How long would that period for verification be? Further into the same subsection, "VA reserves the right to assess contract deliverables for EA compliance prior to acceptance," is not substantial enough to provide confidence that it has been verified prior to new contractors taking TOs or projects under the new T4NG2 vehicle.

Requirements of this nature will be defined at the Task Order level.

Attachment 001 If inflation continues to outpace the Government’s proposed escalation during the 10-year life of the contract, would the Government consider adjusting the YoY escalation for all prime awardees?

Recommendation received and considered. Thank you. The escalation rate shall be 3.41% over the life of the contract.

Attachment 001 Will the Offeror be penalized if pricing is not provided for all 175 LCATs? All LCATs must be priced. Failure to do so may result in the proposal being removed from award consideration.

Attachment 001 Will T4NG2 awardees be able to bid alternate fully burdened labor rates at the task order level for OCONUS-based hours? Yes.

Attachment 002 The submission requirement for the opportunity is Attachment #2 – some attachment numbers seemed to change between releases – just making certain.

VA will confirm correct Attachment numbers in the RFP at time of release.

Attachment 002 In cases where a person's education exceeds what is required for the labor category, would the Government consider adding language that education may be substituted for experience (e.g, Master's degree may be substituted for 2 years of experience where only a Bachelor's Degree is required)?

As it pertains to the basic contract, we do not intend to consider substitutes for experience at this time. At the Task Order level, substitutes may be considered if deemed necessary.

Attachment 002 Would the government consider adjusting the degree substitution requirements on LCATs? We have found on the current contract that these frequently present a significant barrier to bringing on talent without increasing the quality of talent. Would the government consider reducing the degree substitutions to 4 years for a BS/BA and 5 years for MS/MA or including alternatives for certifications?

As it pertains to the basic contract, we do not intend to consider substitutes for experience at this time. At the Task Order level, substitutes may be considered if deemed necessary.

Attachment 010 The forms ask for the company DUNS Number; these are no longer used. Recommend updating this field. Received and updated. Thank you.

Attachment 011 Cell C2 is not wide enough to fit our company name and the size cannot be edited. Please type directly in the cell and the cell will auto enlarge.

Attachment 011 There is no editable cell to answer the question pertaining to where data and records are housed and maintained. The Government will release an unprotected sheet with the next draft RFP.

Attachment 013 Human resource records are normally maintained in digital form on a computer/server rather than at a street address. Is the purpose of this request for the Headquarters or Regional office address of the Offeror or the address of the computer/server?

Headquarters or Regional office address.

Attachment 015 In the self scoring worksheet, column B, lines 22-25 in grey are described as coming from the prime contractor. However, the L.12.1 section does not reference the minimum number of required REPS. Is the government's intent to require a minimum number of required REPS from the Prime? Requiring four prime contracts heavily favors Joint Ventures with very large businesses as their mentors. SDVOSB participation will be negatively impacted if the scorecard remains as it is currently constructed. We therefore recommend that the government consider allowing the SDVOSBs prime to submit a minimum of two REPS (that are either prime or sub). We further recommend that in the case of a JV Prime, at least two REPS (again prime or sub) must come from the JV's small-business protege and limit the JV's mentor to a maximum of two REPS.

These recommendations will help to ensure competitive fairness for SDVOSB primes, while guaranteeing that the VA receives submissions from capable SDVOSB prime and JVs where the managing member has actual experience. Furthermore, limiting the mentor in a JV to two REPs shows the VA that the JVs have enough industry teaming relationships to support all of the needs of the VA.

The RFP has been adjusted to address some of these concerns.

Please refer to the updated draft RFP.

Attachment 015 The draft self-scoring worksheet appears to add the total of the small business participation percentages to an offeror’s total points. This may encourage offerors to propose unrealistic participation percentages as a means to gain an award. We recommend the Government cap the points associated with the small business participation commitment to be equivalent to the VA’s stated small business participation goals.

The Offeror's proposed small business percentages will become contract requirements after basic contract award. Failure to make a good faith effort to at least meet the proposed percentages will negatively impact the company's Past Performance score and may be grounds for removal from the contract via the off-ramp clause.

Attachment 015 We recommend including a DCAA-approved accounting system as a scored element in Attachment 015 Please see updated draft RFP.

Attachment 015 Suggestion: Remove Section L.12.8 requirements from the RFP and the worksheet. Suggestion received and considered. Thank you.

Attachment 015 Will scores be added for scoring purposes? Yes.

Attachment 015 "The first four projects must have been performed as a Prime Contractor. QA. Is the minimum requirement to have four prime contracts for the

Offeror to proceed? QB. If the Offeror only has two REPs performed as a Prime Contractor and six REPs as a subcontractor, can the Offeror submit the eight REPs with only two as Prime Contractor for scoring evaluation?

There have been updates to the draft RFP in this area. Please refer to the latest draft RFP.

Attachment 015 Currently industry certifications are maximized at 60 points. That represents approximately 1% of the available points. In order to attract more mature companies that have made the investment in tools and processes, would VA consider increasing the points?

All points in the draft are notional at this time. Final point structure will be outlined in the RFP.

Attachment 015 Does the government intend to directly correlate small business participation and separately Veteran Participation Commitment percentages directly into the score for those categories (e.g., 25% Veteran Employment = 25 points)?

All points in the draft are notional at this time. Final point structure will be outlined in the RFP.

Attachment 015 For a hybrid contract that includes T&M and FFP, will the Government allow that REP to count for the extra 30 points as a T&M contract? All points in the draft are notional at this time. Final point structure will be outlined in the RFP.

Attachment 015 For rows 22-25, is there special significance for the gray coloring of the 4 indicated REP entries (1-4)? Are these reserved for submission examples by the Prime (Offeror) or can these be from any member of the Offeror’s subcontracting team?

There have been updates to the draft RFP in this area. Please refer to the latest draft RFP.

Attachment 015 For the purposes of the IDIQ solicitation (not individual task orders), will the government be placing any restrictions on an offeror’s ability to simultaneously submit proposals as a prospective T4NG2 prime and T4NG2 subcontractors on one or more other prime's bid teams? If so, will they be allowed to re-use the same REPs from their prime proposal as a subcontractor teaming member on another prospective prime’s bid team, or will REPs be exclusive to one team / prime / proposal etc.?

The RFP has been adjusted to address some of these concerns.

Please refer to the updated draft RFP.

Attachment 015 If a Joint Venture is being used for teaming, can all 10 of the relevant projects come from any of teaming partners that comprise the JV? Yes.

Attachment 015 If a subcontractor is allowed to team with multiple prospective primes for the IDIQ solicitation, will the government place any restrictions on whether the same subcontractor REP may be re-submitted across multiple bids (e.g. Company A teams as a subcontractor on Prime Offeror B and Prime Offeror C’s IDIQ bid – can Company A submit the same REP experience as a sub on both Prime B and Prime C’s proposals, or will REPs be exclusive to a single proposal?)

There have been updates to the draft RFP in this area. Please refer to the latest draft RFP.

Attachment 015 In Attachment 15, Section L.12.1, is Relevant Experience submitted by the offeror but performed by a subcontractor to the offeror where the subcontractor was the prime contractor for the experience cited allowed to select the Yes (as Prime) from the pulldown menu?

There have been updates to the draft RFP in this area. Please refer to the latest draft RFP.

Attachment 015 In Section 12.7 of the self scoring worksheet, the instructions state, "SELECT APPLICABLE PROJECTS ONLY ONCE." However, there are 11 different prioritized functional areas but only 10 REPs available to choose from. Is the government intending that one selection MUST be NOT

APPLICABLE?

It is noted that there are 11 functional areas and only 10 available REPs. This is the Government's intent.

Attachment 015 Is the bidder allowed to select the same Sub-Functional Area for multiple, if not all, cited REPs? Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 It is respectfully requested that the Government consider adding a separate scoring line item in Attachment 015 to provide additional points for

Joint Venture Offerors who already have a previous relationship (e.g., Joint Ventures whose members have demonstrated experience working together and which were not specifically formed for T4NG2 pursuit).

Your suggestion is received and considered. Thank you.

Attachment 015 Please clarify what is meant within Attachment 015, T4NG2 Self Scoring Worksheet, Rows 16-18 titled “Document” in column B? Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 Please confirm that REPs can come from a subcontracted partner that has documented Subcontractor Letter(s) of Commitment for this bid. Yes, REPs can come from subcontracted partners provided that a Subcontractor Letter of Commitment, to include the fully executed Contractor Teaming Arrangement, are provided.

Attachment 015 Please confirm that Subcontractor Letter(s) of Commitment require exclusivity to one prime offeror for both pre-award and post-award participation on T4NG2.

The same subcontractor may team with multiple prime Offerors.

Attachment 015 Regarding scoring for L.12.10, are offerors expected to select only the highest value applicable for each project, similar to L.12.3? The Government does not understand this question. Scoring for L.12.10 pertains to overall certifications not related to a specific

REP.

Attachment 015 Rows 49 – 88 in Attachment 015, the T4NG2 Self Scoring Worksheet do not automatically add the score if the offeror answers, “Yes,” which would require offerors to manually add the score. Having to perform this manual task contradicts the language in Section L 10.3 b.vi stating, "The score within Columns D and E will auto-calculate according to the responses within Column C. The offeror shall not manipulate any formulas or data within Columns D and E.” Please update Attachment 015 to auto-calculate the score within Columns D and E

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 Self Scoring Worksheet, L.12.5, Rows 95-107:Entering inputs into L.12.5's corresponding section in Attachment 015 gives an "N/A" in the points section. Was this the intent?

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 Self Scoring Worksheet, L.12.7, Rows 121-134:

The points in Worksheet do not appear to match the same order as listed in the DRFP. Please confirm whether this is the intended correlation:

Line 123: 4.2 Systems/Software Engineering Line 124: 4.1 Program Management, Strategy...

Line 125: 4.8 O&M Line 126: 4.9 Cyber Security Line 127: 4.6 Enterprise Network Line 128: 4.3 SW Technology Demonstration...

Line 129: 4.4 T&E Line 130: 4.7 Enterprise Management Framework Line 131: 4.5 IV&V Line 132: 4.10 Training Line 133: 4.11 IT Facilities

If the above is correct, will the Government consider re-ordering the spreadsheet to match the order of Functional Areas listed in DRFP L.12.7

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 Self-scoring worksheet – Row 21, column B states “The first four projects must have been performed as the Prime Contractor.” Does this mean that teaming partner qualifications cannot be included in REPS 1-4?

Updates have been made in this area. Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 The formula for the overall calculation is password-protected. It appears that the total points is a summation of all the sections. Please confirm that the individual sections are not weighted.

The total points is a summation of all points assigned.

Attachment 015 The instructions for this section states "Do the submitted REPs under L.12.1 demonstrate experience in the prioritized Sub-Functional areas?

Use the dropdown list to select the applicable REP Identifier in Column C. SELECT APPLICABLE PROJECTS ONLY ONCE. Select Not Applicable if no REPs apply." and list rows for 12 Prioritized Sub-Functional Areas.

However, the Draft RFP Section L.12.9 only lists 10 Prioritized Sub-Functional Areas. What are the 11th and 12th Prioritized Sub-Functional Areas?

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 This section indicates that a Prioritized Functional Area may be selected more than once. For programs that have multiple Main Functional Areas that may have equal weight in a proposal, how will the government determine the validity of a bidder’s claim regarding to which Main Functional Area a contract belongs?

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 To reduce risk of execution to the Government post award, would the Government consider awarding points for instances where the Prime and sub partner (or JV members) display a history of collaboration and performance on a REP? This could be achieved through either 50 points per REP, or a total of 150 points is awarded if at least 6 REPs involve team members. This could be substantiated through subcontract and invoicing documentation for example

Your suggestion is received and will be considered. Thank you.

Attachment 015 What is the rationale for having the same scoring system for evaluating the UNR and SDVOSB bids? Please refer to the Step One and Step Two approach to satisfying the reserve awards. Once the reserve is satisfied, it is the Government's intent to utilize the same scoring system for remaining spots on the contract.

Attachment 015 Why does the proposed scoring system used to evaluate SDVOSB’s award the maximum number of points for contract values higher than the allowable size standard for a small business.

The contract values to be used in the scoring spreadsheet take into account VA's experience and historical data in conducting business with SDVOSBs.

Attachment 015 Will the Government consider adding an Organizational Risk Assessment criteria for Joint Venture offerors, as seen in recent GSA procurements, wherein additional credit (i.e., points) is given to Joint Ventures where the Joint Venture itself and/or the Joint Venture members have previously performed in the same business arrangement? Business arrangement is defined as meeting any of the following criteria: 1) A joint venture has previously performed on a contract or order; 2) All members of a joint venture have previously performed together on a contract or order as a joint venture; or 3) All members of a joint venture have previously performed together on a contract or order with one member as the prime contractor and the other member(s) as a subcontractor.

Your suggestion is received and will be considered. Thank you.

Attachment 015 Will the Government consider adding/increasing points awarded for REP references within the Dept. of VA specifically? For example, each REP within the VA receives an additional 50 points.

Your suggestion is received and will be considered. Thank you.

Attachment 015 Will the Government please correct the sum error for cells E29-E88, E91-E94, and E166-E172? Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 We request further clarification and/or refinement of the draft Self Scoring Spreadsheet before finalization. For instance: A) the Relevant

Experience Project Values selection option ranges seem to differ from option to option and exclude lower ranges, such as $3M, etc. B) Some scoring sections are difficult to understand, for instance, the difference between L.12.5 and L.12.7; C) the CMMI section awards points only for the single highest level applicable, while the ISO section facilitates multiple entries, would it be better to award 30 points if a company has any of the three ISO certifications.

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 Would the government consider allowing the small business prime offeror to claim points from their small business subcontractors for certification such as CMMI and ISO?

Prime Offerors may utilize experience/certifications from proposed subcontractors.

Attachment 015 Would the government consider separate self-scoring sections for CMMI SVC and CMMI DEV so that Prime Contractors with certifications in both areas can receive appropriate credit?

Your suggestion has been considered. Thank you.

Attachment 015 Comment: The Project values indicated are high for small businesses, especially when 10 REPs are being measured. Suggestion: Modify the ranges to be from $2M - $5M, $5M $10M, and greater than $10M.

Your suggestion was received and will be considered. Thank you.

Attachment 015 In analyzing the subfunction areas, it appears that some are coded in the worksheet at 50 and 60 yet they are not named priority subfunction areas. This inconsistency hampers partnership pursuit. Q: Will the Government please address this and confirm that submission date will be at least 6 weeks from date of issuance?

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 In the scoring worksheet, L.12.1, the dropdown options are: as Prime, as Subcontractor, or No. Please provide additional guidance—“as Sub” does this mean the Offeror’s subcontractor who was either the Prime or Sub on the REP? What does “No” mean?

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 Please clarify the definition of the work performed "As the Prime Contractor." Must the Offeror have four or more prime contracts, or can the Offeror leverage prime contracts from their team? By allowing Offerors to leverage contracts from the team, this expands the competition for small businesses

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 Please clarify the difference in L.12.7 scoring to L.12.5 scoring. This appears duplicative intent. L.12.5 considers only main functional areas whereas L.12.7 considers those main functional areas that VA considers prioritized.

Attachment 015 Q1: Does VA expect the first 4 REPS (as indicated on the scoring sheet’s Section L.12.1) to come from the Prime Bidder submitting the T4NG2 response, or are these four REPS for any partner/subcontractor who performed this work as a Prime Contractor?

Q2: Also, in the self scoring sheet, four REPs are highlighted; what does the highlighting reflect or mean?

Q3: In the self scoring worksheet, what is the intent of stating “as the prime contractor”?

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 Regarding self scoring worksheet, if “N/A” is the response – do offerors leave blank or select “No”? Please select "N/A" or "No" depending on the correct response.

Attachment 015 Scoring under Section L.13.4, Small Business Participation Commitment allows for a maximum score of 500 points based on a 500% possible input. Since this is a percentage shouldn’t the scoring be limited to 100 points based on a maximum of 100% Small Business participation for each Offeror?

Each of the proposed Small Business Participation Commitment goals can go up to 100%; therefore, the spreadsheet is correct as is.

Attachment 015 The drop-downs in column C are missing Main Functional Areas 4.9 through 4.11. Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015 This Attachment is specifically named. However, in L.10.2 Proposal Files Table, this document is referred to T4NG2 Self Scoring Worksheet/

Document Verification. Then, in L.10.6.3. Proposed Subcontractors Q: It is not clear how Attachment 015 is related to L 10 6 3 Please clarify

Thank you. Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 015, L.12.1 Attachment 015, cell B21 states “(The first four projects must have been performed as the Prime Contractor)” However, Section L.12.1 doesn’t specify that the first four contracts must have been performed as the Prime Contractor.

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 017 Can you post the missing T4NG2 attachments (i.e. Attachment 017, REP Template)? Thank you. Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 017 Are we submitting an Attachment 017 in addition to the FPDS, SOW, PWS, etc.? In other words, do we submit both documents for each reference?

Please refer to instructions within the REP template in the updated draft.

Attachment 017 Does Part I of Attachment 017, REP Template, require a signature if the FPDS includes all of the required information. Please refer to instructions within the REP template in the updated draft.

Attachment 017 and 018 Can the government please release another Draft RFP with actual point values and includes Attachments 017 and 018 so that teaming considerations can be finalized?

Please refer to the updated draft. Also, please note that final point structures will not be released until release of the final RFP.

Attachment 018 This section references Attachment 018, Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire; this was not included in the draft RFP. Please provide this. For industry review and comment.

Please refer to the updated draft.

Attachment 022 Contractor Teaming Arrangements section references Attachment 022, can the Government give offerors an idea what information will be captured in Attachment 022 is since it is not included in the Draft Documents?

Please refer to the updated draft.

B Section B.1 Governing Law: As Federal law and regulation including, without limitation, the Contract Disputes Act (41 U.S.C. § 7101 et seq.), the Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S.C. § 1341 et seq.), the Competition in Contracting Act (41 U.S.C. § 3301 et seq.), the Prompt Payment Act (31 U.S.C. § 3901 et seq.), Contracts for Data Processing or Maintenance (38 USC § 5725), and FAR clauses 52.212-4, 52.227-14, 52.227-19 shall supersede, control, and render ineffective any inconsistent, conflicting, or duplicative provision in any commercial license agreement, will the Government be consider removing the requirement for the data rights to be included in each license Agreement as these Federal laws and regulations take precedence?

Specific data right requirements will be identified at the task order level.

B To bid as a Prime contractor or either as a Lead or Sub under a CTA, must a contractor have a cost reimbursable system? There is not a requirement for the Offeror to have a DCAA-approved cost accounting system.

B.3 For clarification, can the Government please confirm that, as stated in Draft RFP Section B.3, proposal submissions will not require or include submission of Section B price schedule?

VA confirms proposal submissions does not require or include submission of Section B price schedule.

B.3 CLIN 0004 indicates Contractor's Progress, Status and Management Report are to be provided Monthly. However, Section 1.1.1 Contractor’s Progress, Status and Management Report reflects "The Contractor shall submit a quarterly Contractor’s Progress, Status, and Management Report for each Task Order awarded. Please confirm CLIN 0004 should reflect "Quarterly Status Report" in lieu of "Monthly Status Report."

Please refer to the updated draft. The Contractor’s Progress, Status, and Management Report is due Quarterly.

C Section 7.3.2 C: Task Execution Plan - #3 "The following shall be addressed only for FFP tasks" states that "Labor shall further be broken out by labor categories, labor rates, and hours. The Contractor shall also include identification of Prime or Subcontractor for all labor proposed. Include a total of all labor hours proposed by period of performance and optional task" - this is the FFP section for FFP tasks which should not require Labor categories and rates and hours. Could the Government please remove this requirement for FFP Tasks?

The language is correct. VA requires this information for FFP tasks.

C 7.3.2 Has the Government received updated guidance from OMB regarding implementation of Executive Order 14042? If not, we would recommend removal of this section in accordance with OMB guidance issued on October 19, 2022 which provides interim guidance to remove the clause implementing requirements of Executive Order 14042

Your suggestion is received and considered. Thank you.

C.4.2.8 Does Human-Computer Interaction cover Human-Centered Design roles (e.g., UX Research, UX/UI Design, etc.)? Yes. HCI and UI/UX overlap. HCI was the forerunner of UX.

C.6.2 6.2 Can non-US citizens work in the VA environment if they hold an H-1B visa? What are the requirements for foreign personnel? Task Order level requirements will dictate whether or not this is permitted.

CFR 13 C.F.R. § 125.8(e) states: “When evaluating the capabilities, past performance, experience, business systems and certifications of an entity submitting an offer for a contract set aside or reserved for small business as a joint venture established pursuant to this section, a procuring activity must consider work done and qualifications held individually by each partner to the joint venture as well as any work done by the joint venture itself previously. A procuring activity may not require the protégé firm to individually meet the same evaluation or responsibility criteria as that required of other offerors generally. The partners to the joint venture in the aggregate must demonstrate the past performance, experience, business systems and certifications necessary to perform the contract.”

Please re-submit and frame this as a question.

CFR 13 C.F.R. 125.8(b) applies only to joint ventures between a mentor and a protégé. Please confirm that a joint venture between an SDVOSB and a small business would need to comply with 13 C.F.R. § 128.402.

Confirmed.

CFR Since the SBA assumed CVE’s verification responsibilities on 1 January 2023 and since the SBA’s recently published final rule (Fed. Register Vol.

87 #228, Nov. 29, 2022) regarding the new procedures indicates that JVs will no longer be certified/verified by CVE, please confirm that Small Business JVs that are created under 13 CFR 125.8 (all small or under the SBA’s Mentor-Protégé Program) will only need to comply with SBA’s rules at 13 CFR 128.402...specifically, that so long as the Managing Member of the JV is a current verified SDVOSB/VOSB, the JV is considered verified/certified (provided all requirements listed in the regulation are also met).

As long as the JV is registered in VetCert and the managing partner is registered as an SDVOSB, then the JV itself is also considered an

SDVOSB.

FAR Solicitation Section I.8, 52.217-9, Option to Extend the Term of the Contract (page 101), paragraph (c), states that “[t]he total duration (ordering period) of this contract, including the exercise of any options under this clause, shall not exceed 120 months” (emphasis added).

Should not this instead say 126 months?

A five year base period plus a five year option period equals a (potential) 10 year period. 10 years times 12 months is a total of 120 months.

FAR Please confirm that the contracting officer will comply with FAR 22.1007, which provides that the contracting officer shall obtain wage determinations for services contracts for each new solicitation where the place of performance is known.

Please confirm that the contracting officer will comply with FAR 22.1009-4, which sets forth the procedures to be followed where all possible places of performance cannot be identified.

Wage determinations associated with the SCA will be handled IAW H-10 of the solicitation and resultant contract.

FAR Section I.1 references 52.219-9 Alt II. However, Section L.15 references FAR 52.219-9 (no Alt.). Which version of the FAR clause is to be used? FAR 52.219-9 Alt II.

FAR As it is not specifically referenced in the draft RFP, is it the government’s intent to support FAR 52.207-6 and 13 C.F.R. 125.2? Yes

G, H and I Footer page numbering between pages 85 and 118 is in error; states "Page 121 of 147." Thank you. Footers will be updated/corrected in subsequent releases.

G, Item 4 In order to avoid protests and conform with intent of the SBA’s All Small Mentor Protégé program, will the government please confirm that past performance submitted by either JV member under a qualified SBA mentor-protégé relationship will be considered equally for evaluation purposes?

Confirmed.

G, Item 4 Section G, item #4: In order for the government to achieve confidence that bidders meet the Service disable requirements, will the government consider using CVE for verifications purposes?

Verification is now done by SBA.

G.3 Per Section G.3, can the Government please reconsider the potential use of a third party to have access to prime contractors' proprietary systems and/or data? Submitted data is intended solely for Government evaluation purposes.

The Government reserves the right to use a third party to ensure post-award contract compliance.

General Would the government please define how contract novations will be processed? Novations will be processed IAW FAR 42.12 and VAAR 842.12.

General Please identify the parameters for and/or any restrictions on the participation of, or reliance upon, the experience, past performance, and/or certifications of affiliates, including corporate relationships, parents, subsidiaries, and sister companies.

The RFP has been adjusted to address this. Please refer to the updated draft RFP.

General Please confirm that Attachment 018, Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire, should be submitted only if no CPARs are available for the associated past performance.

Correct, the Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire, should be submitted only if no CPARs are available for the associated past performance.

General…