Question and Answers Amendment 0005.docx

36C10B24R0004 Amendment 0005: Questions and Responses

1. Section 6.6. Government Furnished Property states that an estimate of 2 Laptops (GFE) are only required by this effort. However, section 5.22 Key Personnel has 7 labor categories required. Additionally, the PWS states that the work will be performed primarily and the Contractor facilities. In our opinion this effort would require several more resources that would require GFEs to perform this work. Does the government anticipate increasing the GFE count for this opportunity, or is it the governments intent for the majority of the work to be performed through the Citrix Access Gateway (CAG) via Personally Owned Equipment (POE) and/or and Other Equipment (OE)?

Response: VA anticipates GFE will only be used by the vendor team to test solution access, navigation, communication, etc. from inside the VA firewall with standard VA desktop settings. All other activities can be managed using vendor-provided technology. Access to VA resources (e.g., network, data) will be enabled on vendor devices using VA-approved solutions.

2. Past Performance, Volume II. Currently it states the minimum value is $10,000,000.00 Would the government consider a minimum of $8M rather than 10M?

Response: Minimum total value for previous contract awards has been reduced to $5M. Reference PWS E.14 Proposal Submission Instructions, Volume Two - Past Performance.

3. Section B. CLIN 2004AA & 2005AC, pg. 39; CLIN 3004AA & 3005AC, pg. 45;CLIN 4004AA & 4005AC, pg. 50 Five Enterprise-Wide Instances" For OY2, 3, and 4, the enterprise-wide instances are listed in the pricing schedule in both the hosting section and the licensing section. Can the government remove the duplication from the licensing section to align with the pricing in the BY and OY1 (enterprise-wide instances are only in the hosting section; 0006AD and 10004AA).

Response: Updates made within Amendment 0005 to update the CLINs.

4. Section B.4, pg. 52: CLINS 4006, 4006AA-AC. Should CLINs 4006AA-AC be changed to NSP, and CLIN 4006 be changed to 12/monthly to align with pricing for OY1, 2, and 3? If the government does not make this change, can you define the number of integrations per OY?

Response: Updates made within Amendment 0005 to update the CLINs.

5. Section B.4 CLIN 5001-9001, pg. 53+ Optional task license expansions. Would the government consider aligning the optional tasks to a specific contract year for vendors to provide a more accurate price as opposed to the license being exercised anytime across a five year span?

Response: No.

6. 3.0, pg. 63. The Contractor shall deliver only a Commercial off the Shelf (COTS) solution as Software as a Service (SaaS) and a cloud hosting environment in which the SaaS is hosted. Is the use of the word only in this statement limited to the SaaS? Meaning that use of middleware is an acceptable solution for the System Integration requirements?

Response: Yes, middleware to support an integrated solution is acceptable.

7. 5.4.2.1, pg. 81. The current solution supports over 600,000 active users with historical records that would need to be assessed and potentially migrated. Can the government confirm only active user data will be transferred as part of the data migration? If inactive user data would need to be transferred can the government identify the number of records for inactive users?

Response: Inactive user historical data may need to be imported in the future should the users return to service in VA. VA anticipates this to be supported in normal operations once the solution is implemented.

8. 5.4.2.1, pg. 81. Only user record volumes identified/addressed. Can the government identify the number of historical user records to be migrated, to include course enrollments, completions, learning plans, external completions? Can the government identify volume of additional data to be migrated, to include number of courses, evaluation data, assessment data, etc.?

Response: The anticipated volume of data to be migrated should be measured in terabytes (TBs), as VA currently has more than 650,000 active users, 110,000 active courses, and 20 years of learning history that could be migrated. Final determination of the volume of data will be established as part of the Data Migration Plan developed via this contract IAW PWS section 5.2.4.1.

9. 5.4.2.1, pg. 81. During the Base Period of the contract the Contractor shall detail how de-identified data received from the VA will be cleansed and normalized of Personally Identifiable Information (PII). Can the government identify what PII data is resident and will need to be de-identified prior to SME Testing?

Response: Per VA's current solution's Privacy Impact Assessment, the PII in VA records includes: Name, SSN, DOB, VA and Personal Email Address, Work Phone and Personal Phone number, SECID (Unique 10-digit value used for Single Sign-On Integration SSOi)), Person Identifier (EDR Unique identifier), Employee Number (HR Smart Unique identifier), Windows Log On (Active Directory User ID), E-Profile Identifier (certificate/License#) (Clinical Unique Identifier), TMS User Identifier (TMS ID Unique Identifier)

10. 5.4.2, pg. 81-82. Data migration across the BY and OY. Does the government have an estimate of the amount or size of the data to be migrated across the BY, OY1, and OY2? Are the data sets expected to be the same across the BY and OY but increased in volume based on the phased approach to full implementation? Or is the government expecting a full data migration each year from the current TMS?

Response: The data migration volume is anticipated to increase progressively across the Base Year, Option Year 1, and Option Year 2 phases. While the core datasets will remain consistent, we expect a substantial growth in data volume as we move through the phases toward implementation.

11. 5.4.5.3, pg. 87. There shall be approximately three (3) classes held both in-person and virtually. In order to accurately price travel, the PWS states there are approximately three classes held in-person. Are these included in estimated six travel sessions identified in 4.3 (page 64)? If not, please define the location and duration for accurate travel estimation, or provide a not to exceed travel budget.

Response: The three in person classes mentioned in section 5.4.5.3 are not included within the six travel sessions outlined in section 4.3. These classes are considered part of systems training, specifically for Train-the-Trainer purposes. The exact location and duration for these sessions are TBD. Travel budget should be based on number of administrators to be trained stated in section 5.4.5.3.

12. 5.4.5.3, pg. 87. VA SME Training Instance: The Contractor shall provide a training instance sufficient to meet the requirements of the SME phase of implementation in which the training is to be delivered. The Contractor shall ensure that all training instance data is de-identified to not require a VA Authority to Operate (ATO) for the instance. Can the government clarify is this an additional instance or one of the 5 instances requested in PWS Section 5.6 (Page 91/92)? If this is an additional instance, please provide additional details to price appropriately. If this is one of the defined 5 instances, please advise which instance is intended to be used to fulfill this need.

Response: No, this is not an additional instance. Contractor should utilize one of the five instances listed in section 6.0 to meet this task. The specific instance of this task might best fit under the Customer Testing instance.

13. 5.6, pg. 91/92: #10: VA requires hosting of five (5) instances (Customer Testing, Sandbox, Train, Pre-production, and a Production instances) along with associated support services to manage the hosting environment, hardware, and application. It is understood that the volume of data required to be maintained in each instance increases overtime, therefore increasing cost to the government, especially considering the number of instances requested is more than the industry average. Can the government identify the storage requirements in use today for each instance requested? Would the government consider an approach that can meet the requirements using less than 5 instances to provide best value and price?

Response: The anticipated volume of data to be migrated to the ELMS production instance should be measured in terabytes (TBs), as VA currently has more than 650,000 active users, 110,000 active courses, and 20 years of learning history that could be migrated. Final determination of the volume of data will be established as part of the Data Migration Plan developed via this contract IAW PWS section 5.2.4.1. VA acknowledges the volume of data within each instance is likely to grow over time. Conceivably, the Customer Testing instance would require a much-less-than-complete data set, as its purpose would be to act more as a proof-of-concept instance IAW PWS Section 5.6. VA encourages offerors to explore innovative solutions such as data compression or other means to optimize resources and meet the government's needs.

14. 5.7, pg. 97: License Cost identifies an "up to" number. Each identified license count shows an "up to" value. In order for the Government to benefit from maximum cost savings and license rate discounts, what is the minimum number of licenses for each count identified? For example: The contractor shall provide a minimum of 1,000 Full Access Licenses and Maintenance and up to 2,000 Full Access Licenses and Maintenance (BY). The contractor shall provide a minimum of 400,000 Full Access Licenses and Maintenance and up to 500,000 Full Access Licenses and Maintenance (OY3-4).

Response: VA has provided the estimated licensing requirements for each phase. The government plans to address future growth as needed with the optional tasks in sections 5.17 to 5.21.

15. 5.7.1, pg. 98: The Contractor shall provide up to 1,000 individual or enterprise virtual classroom licenses and Maintenance of those licenses during the base period of the contract for SME testing. To provide more accurate pricing, can the government define this population into two groups: learners and instructors/admins for all virtual classroom license requirements?

Response: Offerors’ proposals should reflect their best offer and, if needed, industry standards for instructor-to-learner ratios. VA’s “licensing” requirements define the number of users/learners that would need to access the classrooms to attend sessions. VA does not have an estimate of the number of instructors that would be required in any of the contract years.

16. 5.16.1.6, pg. 118: The Contractor shall provide an ELMS with the capability for library management to include: creating, maintain, and share libraries. Can the government identify the content types and volume required for the migration effort to create these libraries? Can the types of content (video, assessment, SCORM, etc.) be included by count?

Response: VA currently has roughly 3,500 web-based courses (content type varies) that would need to be hosted IAW PWS Section 5.16.1.5. PWS Section 5.16.1.6 speaks to a capability to manage the metadata behind how VA can make available/visible all content listed in (not necessarily hosted by) ELMS.

17. "5.16.2.4 & 5.16.2.5, pg. 119: 5.16.2.4 The Contractor shall provide an ELMS that has the capability to allow users to self-enroll and create profiles and learner accounts. 5.16.2.5 The Contractor shall provide an ELMS with the capability for ELMS managers to add new learners (to include temporary learner accounts for seasonal employees) directly in the ELMS both individually and in large batches that can accommodate all users on the system, limit access to learner records based on assigned permissions, and control which attributes of a learner’s record can be edited by learners and supervisors. The ELMS shall have the capability for authorized ELMS managers to be notified when a new learner account is self-created. The ELMS shall allow new users immediate access to automatically assigned mandatory training and accounts. These shall remain fenced until administrative action to place in an organizational hierarchy. The requirements in this section do not meet FedRAMP Moderate access control security requirements which advises "Types of accounts that organizations may wish to prohibit due to increased risk include shared, group, emergency, anonymous, temporary, and guest accounts." Can the government advise how these are managed today to meet security requirements in a FedRAMP Moderate state?

Response: VA's use of the word "temporary" is intended to represent the need to be able to activate and inactivate profiles as seasonal employees on-board and off-board. The records themselves would be permanent. This should not conflict with the FedRAMP Moderate requirements.

18. 5.16.2.4, pg. 119: 5.16.2.4 The Contractor shall provide an ELMS that has the capability to allow users to self-enroll and create profiles and learner accounts. An ELMS that allows public users to self-enroll and create accounts without a source of authority has the potential to increase license cost for the government without warning. Are these requirements intended to validate against a source of authority for user creation? If so, can you define the source of authority.

Response: No. Since no source of authority exist for this process, the VA would establish a robust validation process to ensure that self-enrolled users are legitimate and authorized to access VA services. Illegitimate accounts would be terminated.

19. 5.16.3.1, pg. 122: 5.16.3.1 The Contractor shall provide an ELMS that supports accreditation needs spanning the requirements of the healthcare industry, the financial industry, Government, professional organizations, and VA-specific professions. Can the government provide a list of current accrediting authorities required at VA?

Response: VA currently manages 161 international, national, state, and local accrediting authorities spanning multiple industries. The list is not static and is subject to change.

20. 5.16.3.3, pg. 122: 5.16.3.3 The Contractor shall provide an ELMS that shall generate reports on all accredited activities recorded in the system. The accreditation reports shall be adjustable so users and administrators can choose the data within the system to generate reports according to the accreditation source, learner, supervisor, Government agency audiences and course. For capability compliance purposes, can the government provide a list of current accrediting authorities required to meet the requirement for generating reports according to the accreditation source?

Response: VA currently manages 161 international, national, state, and local accrediting authorities spanning multiple industries. The list is not static and is subject to change.

21. 5.16.3.6, pg. 123: 5.16.3.6 The Contractor shall provide an ELMS that supports the ability to integrate with external institutions to obtain accreditation and/or certification information automatically. For pricing purposes, please define how many additional integrations would be needed to fulfil this requirement? The external institutions do not appear to be listed in the PWS Section 5.10 Systems Integration.

Response: VA's required support for international, national, state, and local accrediting authorities spanning multiple industries. It's important to note that the list is not static and will change over time as industries change. We encourage offerors to explore innovative and cost saving integration solutions such as PARS and JA-PARS to manage multiple accreditations.

22. 5.22, pg. 132: Key Personnel, Program Manager: MA or MS requirements. Will the government consider years of experience in place of the Master's Degree requirement to increase all offerors' ability to propose highly qualified staff versus just staff with qualifications?

Response: No

23. 5.22, pg. 134: Key Personnel - Substitution of Personnel: Any personnel the Contractor offers as substitutes shall have the ability and qualifications, including educations and experience, equal to or better than the key personnel whose biography was submitted with the successful proposal. What, if anything, does the government require in the proposal regarding key personnel (resumes, bios, etc.)? If resumes or bios are required, what volume should they be included in and do they count toward the overall page count?

Response: Resumes are not required with proposal submission. Key Personnel will be handled post-award.

24. Section C.11, pg. 185; 5.22, pg.134: Key Personnel substitution conflict. The key personnel clause indicates the CO should be notified at least 30 days prior to making any personnel changes, but 5.22 (Substitution of Personnel) lists 15 calendar days. Can you please confirm the notification period?

Response: Reference Updated PWS, Section 5.22.

25. Section E.13, #4, pg. 222: Veterans Involvement - Non-SDVOSB/VOSB Offerors proposing to use SDVOSBs or VOSBs as subcontractors will receive some consideration under this evaluation Factor. Is there a threshold/percentage of workshare required to receive partial credit/consideration when a non-SDVOSB/VSOB offeror proposes a SDVOSB/VOSB as a subcontractor?

Response: No, there is no minimum threshold/percentage of workshare required to receive partial credit when a non-SDVOSB/VSOB offeror proposes a SDVOSB/VOSB as a subcontractor.

26. Section E.14, #2, pg. 225: Phase Two: Technical Sub-Factor Two. For planning purposes, can the government provide an estimated date for invitations and/or demonstration period?

Response: For planning purposes the Government currently anticipates that notifications/invitations will be provided to industry three weeks after proposal due date. This is subject to change at any time.

27. Section E.14, #3, pg. 229: All Offerors should propose using an estimated award date of September 30, 2024. Can the government clarify the estimated award date since this date falls before the RFP response is due?

Response: Updated. Reference Amendment 0005

28. Are all requirements under the PWS (including contractual terms) non-negotiable and must be accepted as is?

Response: Refer to Solicitation, E.14 Proposal Submission Instructions, paragraph 5 Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations. “Offerors are hereby advised that any Offeror-imposed terms and conditions and/or assumptions which deviate from the Government’s material terms and conditions established by the Solicitation, may render the Offeror’s proposal Unacceptable, and thus ineligible for award.

29. Page 60-62, Applicable Documents. There is an extensive number of documents to be reviewed, can these be reviewed at shortlist, or must they be agreed to at the time of submission?

Response: VA does not understand what is meant by "Can these be reviewed at shortlist." The applicable documents apply to the requirement even if just referenced. There is no requirement that Offerors must agree to any at time of submission; however, awardee will be responsible for adhering to all applicable documents during contract execution.

30. Price Sschedule. Are all contract line items (ie. 002AB, 002AE, 004AG, 0004AH, etc) mandatory as part of the scope? Or can these be changed/negotiated to reflect our standard implementation process?

Response: The line items are a mandatory part of the scope and shall not be changed, however the Volume Three "Price.xlsx" document submission may be used to reflect your standard implementation process pricing methodology. This should align with the Schedule B pricing but have more information which will reflect your process.

31. Section C – Contract Clauses (Page 162+). Are these negotiable?

Response: No, they are not.

32. Volume 1. Is there the ability to deliver the services in accordance with our standard implementation and support policies? With over 2,600 clients we have a highly efficient and refined implementation process. Or do all of your standards/management plans/implementation processes have to be agreed to as-is?

Response: Any proposal must be IAW with the PWS and Solicitation only.

33. Volume 2 – Past Performance. Do all references NEED to be federal contracts (with a min. total value of $10,000,000) or can other clients be used as well? If we are not able to supply three federal contracts, does this eliminate us from participating in your RFP?

Response: Reference PWS E.14 Proposal Submission Instructions, Volume Two - Past Performance. A change to this will not be considered. Reference PWS E.13 Basis for Award, C. Evaluation Approach, 2. Past Performance Evaluation Approach.

34. Is the Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire from references mandatory?

Response: No. Reference PWS E.13 Basis for Award, C. Evaluation Approach, 2. Past Performance Evaluation Approach

35. Volume 4. Is veteran involvement mandatory?

Response: Reference PWS E.14 Proposal Submission Instructions, Volume Four – Veterans Involvement

36. Volume 5. It says to list any proposed terms and conditions ...but then it also says that if we provide our terms and conditions, it may render the proposal unacceptable. Can you please advise if providing our T&Cs and objections will result in disqualification for all RFP documentation?

Response: Refer to Solicitation, E.14 Proposal Submission Instructions, paragraph 5 Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations. “Offerors are hereby advised that any Offeror-imposed terms and conditions and/or assumptions which deviate from the Government’s material terms and conditions established by the Solicitation, may render the Offeror’s proposal Unacceptable, and thus ineligible for award.

37. What are your business drivers, pain points, and/or compelling reasons for considering a change of platform to meet your talent management initiatives?

Response: This information will not be provided.

38. Will Optional Services and associated pricing be considered in your evaluation or should these items be included in the overall solution and pricing?

Response: The solicitation does not have a way to evaluate optional services above the stated requirements. All items should be included for comprehensive pricing in accordance with the Section B.4 Price Schedule.

39. Will you consider extending the due date for proposal responses to October 18, 2024 to allow vendors sufficient time for a comprehensive response given that Amendment 2 release date only allows for 2 weeks to build the full response?

Response: Refer to Amendment 004 for amended proposal submission date/time.

40. Page 229, 4. VOLUME FOUR – VETERANS INVOLVEMENT - (1) For SDVOSBs/VOSBs: In order to receive credit under this Factor, an Offeror shall submit a statement of compliance that it qualifies as a SDVOSB or VOSB in accordance with VAAR 852.215-70, Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned and Veteran-Owned Small Business Evaluation Factors (DEVIATION). How much priority/credit will be given for offerors responding with parties that are SDVOSB/VOSB certified?

Response: The Government will review and consider any proposal that includes SDVOSB/VOSB subcontractor participation when the Offeror is a non SDVOSB/VOSB. There is no threshold or percentage for this purpose however.

41. Third-Party Content Integration (5.16.1.2). What third-party content providers or external systems does the VA currently use that need to be integrated into the ELMS, and what are the specific content standards that must be supported (e.g., SCORM, xAPI)?

Response: Section 5.10.1.1 provides a limited list of current integrations. The list of integrations in this section is not an exhaustive list of all VA integrations. Offerors are encourage to conduct an assessment based on this list to determine the content standard used by these systems such as SCORM, xAPI, or other industry formats.

42. Social Learning (5.16.5.1-5.16.5.8). How critical are social learning features like threaded discussions, real-time video, or document sharing, and do these need to be configurable for specific groups of users?

Response: VA's Social Learning requirements are spelled out in PWS section 5.16.5. VA expects access to all ELMS features to be configurable.

43. Mentoring Program Management (5.16.5.5-5.16.5.8). Are there any specific mentoring program structures currently in use at the VA that need to be mirrored in the ELMS, and are there any customization requirements around participant matching and feedback?"

Response: Offerors should be prepared to support a flexible ELMS system that can accommodate various mentoring program structures. The proposal should meet the requirements IAW PWS (5.16.5.5-5.16.5.8).

44. Virtual Classroom Requirements (5.16.6.1-5.16.6.8). Does the VA currently use any third-party virtual classroom tools, and are there any specific requirements for managing large-scale learning events, such as those with up to 3,000 attendees? If so, which ones? If not, do you have a preference between Microsoft Teams or Zoom?

Response: VA currently uses multiple virtual classroom tools across the Department. The goal of ELMS is to provide a centralized, enterprise solution with virtual classroom capabilities IAW PWS section 5.16.6.

45. Competency and Skills Management (5.16.7.1-5.16.7.7). Can you provide more details on how competency and skills data is currently structured within the VA, and what reporting capabilities are required to track progress and proficiency?

Response: VA's competency and skills needs are spelled out in (5.16.7.1-5.16.7.7, 5.16.8.1-15.16.10.3). VA expects all ELMS features to be configurable to their needs.

46. Reporting and Analytics (5.16.4.4-5.16.4.7). What kind of real-time data and analytics are most critical for VA administrators, and are there any custom reporting features that must be included in the system?

Response: VA has over 250 standard and custom reports being used. Reporting requirements for ELMS may focus on any important aspect of talent development and will be commensurate with the capabilities of ELMS.

47. Accreditation and Certification Management (5.16.3.1-5.16.3.14). Can you elaborate on the accreditation and certification requirements, especially in relation to requirement #5.16.3.6 integration with external accrediting bodies and the need to capture in-progress and completion of these certifications? Please specify which accreditation systems/bodies you need to integrate with and if it's real-time progress or daily status?

Response: VA's requires support for international, national, state, and local accrediting authorities spanning multiple industries. It's important to note that the list is not static and is subject to change. VA encourages offerors to explore innovative and cost saving integration solutions such as PARS and JA-PARS to manage multiple accreditations.

48. Mobile Access (5.16.2.15). How prevalent is the use of mobile devices for accessing learning content among VA learners, and are there specific capabilities (e.g., virtual classrooms, assessments) that must be optimized for mobile use?

Response: VA cannot estimate the number of users accessing learning via a mobile device at this time. VA seeks a solution that offers access to ELMS via Mobile App IAW PWS Sections 5.16.1.1, 5.16.2.1, 5.16.2.10, 5.16.2.15, and 5.16.6.5 at a minimum.

49. Customization of Learning Programs (5.16.2.21-5.16.2.26). Are there any specific requirements for how learning programs are customized and assigned, particularly in terms of hierarchical access and competency-based assignment?

Response: VA's learning program needs are spelled out in (5.16.2.21-5.16.2.26). VA expects all ELMS features to be configurable to their needs.

50. Integration with VA Systems (5.10.1.1). What challenges can you highlight or custom configurations or development has been needed to integrate VA's current LMS with the systems listed in this section or others you need to integrate with the new LMS?

Response: VA seeks a flexible set of tools that will support the transfer of data between and/or successful integration with multiple other solutions. The security of the data is paramount. Access to all of the data necessary to meet the integration requirements is also a key factor.

51. Can you please provide an extension to the clarification question deadline?

Response: An extension will not be provided for the clarification question deadline.

52. Are you able to provide an extension to the submission deadline (ideally a few weeks)? As this is an extensive RFP, we want to ensure we have plenty of time to provide a thorough response to your requirements, contact references, etc.

Response: Refer to latest Amendment 0005 for amended proposal submission date/time.

53. 1. FEDRAMP timeline for compliance is typically 24 months. Would you allow us 24 months from securing award to becoming FedRAMP compliant?

Response: Following contract award, the VA's Digital Transformation Center (DTC) will provide comprehensive guidance to contractors throughout the FEDRAMP and ATO process. Deliverable timelines have been vetted by the DTC and have been established based on the DTC’s current timetable.

54. Past Performance Volume II. Currently it states the minimum value is $10,000,000.00 Would you be willing to wave this requirement.

Response: Minimum total value for previous contract awards has been reduced to $5M. Reference PWS E.14 Proposal Submission Instructions, Volume Two - Past Performance.

55. The last several versions of this opportunity have been SDVOSB set-aside. This one is not listed as that on BETA SAM. Just confirming that this is not a SDVOSB set-aside, and that was not a BETA SAM mistake.

Response: This solicitation is not an SDVOSB set-aside.

56. Looking for clarification on the statement on page 220: “Proposals which merely restate the requirement or state that the requirement will be met, without providing supporting rationale, are not sufficient.” If our proposal gives a detailed explanation of how we will provide the services listed- especially the ones on pages 225-227 that are red-lined- are we allowed to state for some clauses that we meet and exceed the requirements, or do you need a detailed answer for each and every clause?

Response: PP. 225-227 "VOLUME ONE – TECHNICAL SUB-FACTOR ONE" lists the discriminators that VA will use to evaluate the understanding offerors have of VA requirements and the quality of their approach.

57. Is the VA replacing any aspect of their human resources/human capital management system with this project? Or is this for staff education only?

Response: The ELMS program is focused only on the requirements identified in the PWS.

58. Will the successful vendor be expected to transfer historical data (existing users, course completions, etc.) from the existing system(s) at any point during the period of performance? If so, when would this work occur? Approximately how many lines of data would the vendor be handling? (Any additional detail you can provide to assist in scoping and cost estimation would be appreciated.)

Response: Yes, data migration from the current VA solution to ELMS is a contract requirement IAW PWS Sections 5.4.2.1 and 5.15. The anticipated volume of data to be migrated should be measured in terabytes (TBs), as VA currently has more than 650,000 active users, 110,000 active courses, and 20 years of learning history that could be migrated.

59. Will the successful vendor be expected to upload the VA’s existing course content at any point during the period of performance? If so, when would this work occur? Approximately how many courses would need to be transferred? (Any additional detail you can provide to assist in scoping and cost estimation would be appreciated.).

Response: VA has 110,000 active course listings. VA expects to have that number of listings or more when fully implementing ELMS. The metadata defining those and the associated capabilities will need to be migrated, VA currently hosts 3,500 courses worth of web-based content files. The VA has a requirement to implement and deploy the solution in phases IAW PWS 5.1.

60. For 5.2.1 Contractor Project Management Plan (CPMP) due thirty (30) DAC award and 5.2.2 Risk Management Plan (RMP) due thirty (30) DAC award. Are we allowed to create our own or do you have templates to follow or is there an existing version you would like to have followed?

Response: Templates used must be approved by the VA PM and COR.

61. 5.6.1, #9 , pg. 95; Deliverable 5.6.1.D, pg. 96. The Contractor shall complete a 3PAO Security Assessment Report (SAR) within 90 calendar days after the SSP is accepted by VA. (If Data Security Categorization is High Impact, this will be due 113 calendar days after the SSP is accepted by VA.) D. 3PAO Security Assessment Report (SAR) due Ninety (90) calendar days after contract award. A 3PAO cannot perform the security assessment on a FedRAMP system for a VA agency ATO until the system is properly configured in the FedRAMP Pre-Production environment. Once the assessment is complete, the 3PAO can generate a Security Assessment Report (SAR). If a pre-production system, that the 3PAO must assess, is not required to be deployed until 30 days after ACA of OY1, how can a 3PAO SAR be delivered by Day 90 ACA of the Base Year?

Response: Following contract award, the VA's Digital Transformation Center (DTC) will provide comprehensive guidance to contractors throughout the FEDRAMP and ATO process. Deliverable timelines have been vetted by the DTC and have been established based on the DTC’s current timetable.

62. Section E.14, #5, pg. 228 (5) Customer/Client Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire. The instructions state that the Government customer/client prepared questionnaire response should be sent directly to the VA contract specialist and contracting officer and NOT back to the offeror. How will this section be evaluated if the questionnaire is not received by VA as the offeror will have no knowledge of response submission?

Response: If a questionnaire is not received and it will be unable to be evaluated for that past performance contract then the Government will review additional sources to include CPARS. If no past performance information is available for that particular referenced contract, then that referenced Past performance contract may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably for Past Performance IAW Solicitation E.13 Basis for Award, C. Evaluation Approach, 2. Past Performance Evaluation Approach.

63. Section E.14, #5, pg. 228 (5) Customer/Client Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire. If the offeror supports a client utilizing CPARS for past performance records, will Government consider a CPARS review in place of the questionnaire?

Response: Offerors are cautioned that the Government will review available past performance data available in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). The Government reserves the right to obtain past performance information from any available source and may contact customers other than those identified by the Offeror when evaluating past performance IAW Solicitation, E.13 Basis for Award, C. Evaluation Approach, 2. Past Performance Evaluation Approach

64. Would the Government consider a one-week extension for proposal submission?

Response: Refer to Amendment 0005 for amended proposal submission date/time.

65. 5.7.1 - Virtual Classroom Licensing. Would the Government please confirm if Microsoft Teams will be the only platform used for ELMS virtual classroom learning or will there be others?

Response: IAW PWS, Section 5.16.6, the contractor shall provide an ELMS that can manage interactions between participants. The VA does not endorse one tool over another; however, MS TEAMs and WebEx are some of the collaboration tools currently used in the Department. Please note this is not an exhaustive list.

66. Does the Government plan to use an existing contract for the ELMS or would we need to provide a separate application in order for the administrative license needed for the vILT integration?

Response: IAW PWS, Section 5.7.1, the contractor shall provide an enterprise-wide Virtual Classroom that offers a comprehensive suite of collaborative features. The VA's licensing needs are detailed in the section.

67. What format is the competency and skills model stored in?

Response: Competency and job family/job role libraries will be available in CSV or Excel format.

68. How many levels of positions has the competency and skills model been mapped to?

Response: Across several VA organizations, competencies and skills have been mapped to many job roles using the standard OPM job series classifications (e.g., 2210, 0201, 0343, 6010, and others). Currently, VA has not implemented any cross-cutting competency models for all VA employees (e.g., core or leadership). Moving forward, VA expects to implement core, leadership, and job-specific/technical competencies at all levels of the organization.

69. Have the learning objects been associated to competency and skills with levels of development?

Response: Yes, learning items from our learning libraries are mapped to competencies and proficiency levels using several rating scales. Those mapped items and ratings are available for users to search by competency, compare with assessment gap results, and add them to development goals in order to help close competency gaps.

70. How many systems are used for maintaining user information (e.g. credentials, licensing, certifications, mentor assignments, HR data)? Will all of these systems need to be separate real-time integration calls?

Response: IAW PWS, Section 5.10.1.1, the contractor shall develop, maintain, and deploy all current and new system integrations using industry standard tools. The list of integrations in this section includes third party systems and internal systems but is not an exhaustive list of all VA integrations.

71. What are the data points used for succession planning? Where are they currently stored?

Response: Succession data points are provided through primarily through integrations with HR Smart and Education Data Repository, IAW PWS 5.10.1.1.

72. Are the learning objects aligned to accreditation requirements with applicable CEU values, evaluations or certificates of completion?

Response: The accreditation requirements are aligned to the objectives of the program and would be vetted through front end analysis by accreditation experts prior to the learning event. Accredited CEU can be applied for virtual event if they meet the pre-approved modality.

73. Will the Government share the current reports with a description? Do you have gaps in reporting, and if so, what are they?

Response: This information will not be provided.

74. 5.6.1 - Assessment, Authorization, and Continuous Monitoring. Will the Government confirm that they will be the direct licensee of the software and end user agreement?

Response: To ensure a comprehensive assessment, authorization, and continuous monitoring process, the VA will pursue a FEDRAMP and VA ATO to establish the VA as the direct licensee of the software.

75. What is the definition of a full, limited and "temporary learning accounts for seasonal employees" and can the Government provide a use case example of each?

Response: Full and limited licensing needs are detailed in PWS section 5.7. Seasonal employees will require limited licensing.

76. B.4 - Price Schedule & 5.7.1 - Virtual Classroom Licensing. Please explain the quantity difference between the user counts for the system license accounts and virtual classroom licensing accounts needed. We noted in OY3 and OY4 there are less Virtual Classroom licenses needed (300k) than the total Full/Limited System licenses requested (850k).

Response: VA has provided the estimated licensing requirements for each phase. The government plans to address future growth as needed with the optional tasks in sections 5.17 to 5.21. .

77. 5.16.1.1-5.16.1.4 – Management. For existing content that is not mobile ready, will contractors be expected to provide a solution for mobile-responsive user content?

Response: IAW PWS Section 5.16.1 contractors are expected to provide an ELMS solution that is capable of configuring online content for download and access via mobile devices. To include existing content.

78. 5.16.1.2 - Third-Party Content Integration. What third-party content providers or external systems does the VA currently use that need to be integrated into the ELMS?

Response: IAW PWS, Section 5.10.1.1, the contractor shall develop, maintain, and deploy all current and new system integrations using industry standard tools. The list of integrations in this section includes third party systems and internal systems but is not an exhaustive list of all VA integrations.

79. 5.16.1.2 - Third-Party Content Integration. What are the specific content standards that must be supported (e.g., SCORM, xAPI)?

Response: Section 5.10.1.1 provides a limited list of current integrations. The list of integrations in this section is not an exhaustive list of all VA integrations. Offerors are encourage to conduct an assessment based on this list to determine the content standard used by these systems such as SCORM, xAPI, or other industry formats.

80. Social Learning (5.16.5.1-5.16.5.8). What features of social learning (e.g. threaded discussions, real-time video, or document sharing) need to be configured? Do different user groups require different features?

Response: The government's social learning requirements are detailed in section 5.16.5 of the PWS. Offerors are encouraged to not only meet these requirements but also propose additional industry-leading features that can enhance the social learning experience.

81. 5.16.5.5-5.16.5.8 - Mentoring Program Management. Does a system exist to track mentors and mentees and how often is that data expected to be updated in the ELMS system?

Response: VA requires a system to automate the matching of mentors and mentees based on a wide variety of parameters, fields, and preferences. Most mentoring programs manually manage mentoring participants using Excel spreadsheets. Data should be updated every time there's a change.

82. 5.16.7.1-5.16.7.7 - Competency and Skills Management. What reporting capabilities are required to track progress and proficiency?

Response: The government's reporting and competency requirements are detailed in section 5.16.4 and 5.16.7 of the PWS. Offerors are encouraged to not only meet these requirements but also propose additional industry-leading features that can enhance proficiency tracking.

83. 5.16.4.4-5.16.4.7 - Reporting and Analytics. What kind of real-time data and analytics are most critical for VA administrators, and are there any custom reporting features that must be included in the system?

Response: The Government's reporting requirements are detailed in section 5.16.4 of the PWS. This includes the need for real-time reporting capabilities and the ability to generate custom and ad-hoc reports using features such as drag and drop. Offerors are encouraged to not only meet these requirements but also propose innovative reporting features that go beyond industry standard.

84. 5.16.3.1-5.16.3.14 - Accreditation and Certification Management. Can you elaborate on the accreditation and certification requirements, especially in relation to integration with external accrediting bodies and the need for historical data storage for up to seven years?

Response: Refer to PWS section 5.16.3 for the government's detailed accreditation needs.

85. 5.16.3.9-5.16.3.14 - Evaluation and Certification. Would the Government list the specific evaluation models or accreditation bodies (such as PARS or CME) that the ELMS must be configured to meet, and do these need different evaluation branches based on accrediting body requirements?

Response: VA currently manages 161 international, national, state, and local accrediting authorities spanning multiple industries. The list is not static and will change over time as industries change.

86. 5.16.2.21-5.16.2.26 - Customization of Learning Programs. Are there any specific requirements for how learning programs are customized and assigned, particularly in terms of hierarchical access and competency-based assignment?

Response: VA's learning program needs are spelled out in (5.16.2.21-5.16.2.26). VA expects all ELMS features to be configurable to their needs.

87. 5.16.1.2, 5.16.4.5 - Integration with VA Systems. What existing VA systems and third-party tools must the ELMS integrate with, and are there any challenges or specific configurations needed to ensure smooth data exchange?

Response: IAW PWS, Section 5.10.1.1, the contractor shall develop, maintain, and deploy all current and new system integrations using industry standard tools. The list of integrations in this section includes third party systems and internal systems, but is not an exhaustive list of all VA integrations.

88. How many learning objects are being migrated to the new ELMS? What are the types of learning objects and how many are there total within each type?

Response: The full data migration plan requirement is outlined in PWS, Section 5.4.2.1. The VA system of record for learning and employee development currently lists over 100,000 active “courses”. The Contractor shall provide a Data Migration Plan identifying any data to be migrated from the current ELMS to the new ELMS.

89. 36C10B24R0004 ELMS - Amendment 00002 – Posted. Can the Government provide the volume and types of data that will be migrated during the base year and each of the option years?

Response: The anticipated volume of data to be migrated should be measured in terabytes (TBs), as VA currently has more than 650,000 active users, 110,000 active courses, and 20 years of learning history that could be migrated. Final determination of the volume of data will be established as part of the Data Migration Plan developed via this contract IAW PWS section 5.2.4.1.

90. PWS Section 5.11.1. The “Readiness Assessment” describes three Change-related gap analyses. a. Does/would the government anticipate/require the contractor to implement accepted recommendations arising from any of these three assessment types as a deliverable under this section? Is this implied under Section 5.15.13.1?

Response: The government does not explicitly require contractors to implement all recommendations arising from the Readiness Assessment, but it is strongly encouraged as the identified gaps can significantly impact the success of the project. Any identified gaps or recommendation that would otherwise be a requirement of the PWS such as 508 would be required to be implemented.

91. Section B4: Price Schedule. Within section B4 price schedule, there is instruction that CLIN 4006 is NSP and 4006AA, 4006AB, and 4006AC are priced separately. This appears to be inconsistent with other CLIN periods (1006, 2006, & 3006). Will the government be releasing an updated Price Scheduling that updates this instruction?

Response: Updates made within Amendment 0005 to update the CLINs.

92. Section B4: Price Schedule. Are offerors able to add rows to the Price Section. For example, additional CLIN/Labor Category Description?

Response: No. Information may be included in an Offeror's narrative response.

93. 5.4.5 SYSTEM TRAINING. Is access to the training management systems being provided by the VA?

Response: IAW PWS Section 5.4.5 Contractor shall provide training delivery.

94. 6.1.2 FEDERAL IDENTITY, CREDENTIAL, AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT (FICAM). Please provide a working URL for accessing the VA Enterprise Technical Architecture (ETA)

Response: Reference Amendment 0005, bad URL has been replaced. “The Contractor shall ensure Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) product(s), software configuration and customization, and/or new software are Personal Identity Verification (PIV) card-enabled by accepting HSPD-12 PIV credentials using VA Enterprise Architecture (EA), VA Enterprise Architecture Home, and VA Identity and Access Management (IAM) approved enterprise design and integration patterns, https://www.oit.va.gov/library/recurring/edp/index.cfm.”

95. E.14, Section 2. Is there a deadline for the offeror's Government customers to submit the Customer/Client Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire?

Response: Reference PWS E.14 Proposal Submission Instructions, Volume Two - Past Performance

96. 5.22. Is the offeror required to identify and submit resumes for the listed Key Personnel positions? If resumes are required, do they count toward the Volume One - Technical Approach page count?

Response: Resumes are not required with proposal submission. Key Personnel will be handled post-award.

97. Volume III: Factor 4 - Price Proposal. May the offeror submit a separate price narrative (MS Word or .pdf) document to address any pricing assumptions or additional information regarding the proposed price?

Response: Please refer to submission instructions, the Volume Three submission requirement includes the "Price.xlsx" document which may be used to address pricing assumptions or additional information regarding the proposed price.

98. PWS, page 46, B.4 Price Schedule. On page 46, line 5 states, "3005AC Integration Requirements Specification Documents IAW Paragraph 5.10.1.1", however this is in section 3006. Can the government clarify that the 3005AC should be 3006AC?

Response: Updates made within Amendment 0005 to update the CLINs

99. Is the Government currently using a single or multiple Learning Management System (LMS) platforms, and what is/are they? Are multiple platforms to be migrated to a single Enterprise LMS?

Response: TMS is VA’s branding of the SAP SuccessFactors HXM Suite.

100. Appendix F, Past Performance Questionnaire. Would the Government be willing to accept a CPARS instead of the PPQ?

Response: Reference Amendment 0005 where this was updated. “Offerors are cautioned that the Government will review available past performance data available in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) Contractor…