ITSM RFI Questions and Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 21 KB Posted
- Attached to
- DA01--ERP (ITSM Follow on) (VA-26-00000769)
- Solicitation number
- 36C10B25Q0222
About this file
This document is a Request for Information (RFI) for an Information Technology Service Management (ITSM) Enterprise License Agreement from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The VA is seeking a new ITSM tool to replace their current ServiceNow solution, with a preference for a FedRAMP High-authorized solution that can support 600,000 system users and 25,000 fulfiller licenses. The VA is open to both Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) and on-premise solutions, provided the on-premise option demonstrates cost benefits and meets technical requirements.
Key details include the VA's current environment of 25 ServiceNow instances (7 specific-purpose, 18 dynamic), a medium to high process maturity level, and a desire to return to out-of-the-box functionality with reduced customization. The RFI's purpose is to identify potential sources and maximize competition, with the solicitation timeline extended to April 3, 2025, at 10:00 AM EST. The VA emphasizes the importance of a smooth migration strategy that avoids downtime and data loss, and is particularly interested in solutions that can consistently deliver services to veterans, staff, and the VA's mission.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 36C10B25Q0222_1.docx | DOCX document | |
| 36C10B25Q0222 0001.docx | DOCX document | |
| AMD 001 RFI ITSM Tool 3.26.25.pdf | ||
| RFI ITSM Tool 3.18.25.pdf | ||
| Attachment A.pdf | ||
| 36C10B25Q0222.docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Question | Response | Green = Answered |
| RFQ Description: Request for Information Information Technology Service Management Tool New Solution |
Question Title: Number of Users Question: Please confirm the number of users who will be accessing/logging into/using the tool. NTE 600,000
RFQ Description: Request for Information Information Technology Service Management Tool New Solution Question Title: SaaS Question: Is the VA looking for a SaaS solution or would an on-premise solution be accepted?
| VA is looking for an ITSM Enterprise solution that is equivalent to the current VA solution ServiceNow. However, an on prem solution can also be proposed as long as the solution meets the technical requirements (storage, RAM, CPU, etc) and details are provided on how the on prem solution will save the Government money compared to a SaaS. |
| RFQ Description: Request for Information Information Technology Service Management Tool New Solution |
Question Title: Fedramp
| Question: Hello. Will you review responses for alternate solutions that meet the requirements but are Fedramp Moderate? Thank You | No, all solutions for the enterprise ITSM tool must have Fedramp high before the VA could purchase. | ||
| 1. | The RFI specifies deployment requirements on CA-managed infrastructure. Could the VA clarify whether this refers to a Controlled Availability (CA) environment? | ||
| a. | If so, what specific constraints or conditions apply? | Please see updated bullet. This bullet intended to say VA rather than CA. | |
| 2. | What role does DOGE play in this procurement, and how does it impact deployment, competition, or solution compliance? | The Government cannot provide a response to this question at this time. | |
| 3. | How will the VA use a best-value approach that factors in past vendor performance, particularly instances where previous solutions failed to meet promised capabilities? | ||
| a. | How will the VA assess and weigh such negative past performance in the evaluation process? | Acquisition strategy is still being determined at this time. The purpose of this RFI is to identify all potential souces to allow for maximized competition. | |
| 4. | How will the VA define functional requirements in a way that avoids unintentional favoritism toward the incumbent vendor? | ||
| a. | What measures will be taken to ensure a level playing field for all competitors? | This RFI is to assist the Government in defining its functional requirements and determine what is currently available from industry. | |
| 5. | How will the VA allow flexibility in how vendors meet functional requirements, acknowledging that different solutions may achieve the same objectives through varying methods? | The VA will consider any alternatives with the priority being on delivering consistent services to the VA, Veterans, staff and mission. The VA migrated off other tools to ServiceNow so a migration to another tool is possible however we would request a strategy to do that because our environment is extremely complex and we can not afford down time and loss of data. So a migration to a new tool or tools without creating a lot of technical debt on the platform(s) is very important. | |
| 6. | To what extent will the VA ensure that procurement is not structured in a way that inherently favors the incumbent vendor’s features and functions? | ||
| a. | If the acquisition is intended to be brand-name or sole-source, how will this be clearly communicated to vendors upfront? | The intention of this RFI is to identify all sources and maximize competition. | |
| 7. | To ensure a fully competitive field, would the VA consider utilizing multiple GWAC vehicles instead of limiting this procurement to SEWP, which may restrict fair and open competition? | Acquisition strategy is still being determined at this time. The purpose of this RFI is to identify all potential souces to allow for maximized competition. | |
| 8. | When will the VA provide details on the currently deployed products, including their specific deployment environments (e.g., on-premises VA infrastructure, ServiceNow SaaS, CA-managed infrastructure, etc.)? | The PDF file shows deployed products. We have given details on the number of users (600k) and we currently leverage ServiceNow SaaS but would be open to a different solution and even on prem at a VA site as long as we have requirements and the cost benefit outlined. | |
| 9. | What is the total number of users in the system who are assigned to and actively utilizing the fulfiller role? This includes employees responsible for creating, editing, or deleting records within the system. | We have 600k of System users and we want 25,000 fulfiller licenses | |
| 10. | For what purposes are the 18 non-production ServiceNow instances that are considered ‘dynamic and used as needed’? | "We have a total of 25 ServiceNow environments. Seven of these are designated for specific purposes: 2 Production and 5 Sub Production environments. The remaining environments are dynamic and utilized as needed." |
Out of 18 - 2 Prod are not being utilized and 16 SubProd are utilized for Upgrades, Pilots, Plugin analysis, Upgrade backups, Proof of concepts
| 11. | How many individuals are serving HR requests? ServiceNow requires licenses for all employees, but other solutions only require licensing for individuals working HR requests. | We do not have the HR module deployed from ServiceNow at the VA in our instance. We have 600k users and 25k fulfillers. |
| 12. | The ITSM tool must provide the VA with real-time license utilization tracking via a dashboard or other means. Could the VA clarify whether this requirement pertains to monitoring internal ITSM license usage or tracking third-party application licenses? | Today its tracking ServiceNow licenses we use so we can see how much of what we are paying for is in use. |
| 13. | How would the VA assess the maturity level of their current processes for the deployed modules? Please categorize the maturity level as low, medium, or high. | ServiceNow has been deployed at the VA for roughly 7 years and we have went from Kingston all the way to Xanadu. We are medium to high if we had to assign a maturity level with a desire to get back to out of the box and move away from some of the customization . |
| 14. | "Recognizing that the current timeline is very short, would the VA be able to provide responses to bidder questions by Monday, 3/24. If not, would the VA consider extending the proposal due date to April 3rd? | Addtitional time will be provided. Due date updated to 4.3.25 10:00 AM EST. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .