CCN NG Medical Open Mic Session Response to Industry 4.3.2026.pdf

36C10G26R0003 0018 Question and Answers

ID

# Industry Questions VA Answers

Regarding the FAR clause 85221176 liquidated damages. There is a discrepancy between C and D List $37.50 per affected individual, which is what we typically see from VA. But D lists $50 per affected individual.

Please clarify.

To ensure clarity and avoid ambiguity in enforcement, the Government intends for the liquidated damages to be applied at the $37.50 per affected individual in both paragraphs. The $50 value in paragraph (d) is an error.

I want to call out an area of ambiguity for final clarification that relates to the submission requirements: the guidance for those companies bidding on one of the TOPRs or none of the TOPRs in terms of what's the guidance, there seemed to be several different answers in the Q&A. One indicates that no action is required until an IDIQ award is made for zero bid responses. Another provides an email address to send. Another says to include it in the cover letter. So the RFP says something but there are several different answers in the Q&As.

Once the IDIQ has been awarded, IAW Section B.5.3 of the IDIQ, an IDIQ contract holder may propose to any, all, or none of future TOPR issued under the multiple award IDIQ in accordance with the IDIQ contract’s ordering procedures. While Offerors are not required to submit a proposal for any future TOPR, Offerors are required, in accordance with Section B.5.1 Task Order Procedures, to submit a "no-bid" response if they will not propose to a TOPR. "No-bid" response must be submitted to the CO via email with a brief, yet specific, explanation.

I want to call out an area of ambiguity for final clarification that relates to the submission requirements: this is regarding the cover letter. There's one mention of a cover letter in the RFP, but there is also a requirement to bundle all the volumes into single files. So then what cover letter acceptable to the VA: one cover letter, one per volume, is it separated from the volumes, etc?

Cover letter, title page, Table of Contents, Table of Figures, List of Tables, organizational chart and glossary of abbreviations and acronyms do not count against page count limitations and shall be separated from the Volumes.

Reference: Section E.3 ADDENDUM to FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO

OFFERORS — COMMERICAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES, C.

Instructions, Conditions, and Notice to Offerors, e. Page Limitations.

I want to call out an area of ambiguity for final clarification that relates to the submission requirements: there is guidance to separate our emails and attempt to contain those emails with a single volume. It is a requirement to do that but then it allows an attempt. We can attempt to contain, but may not be able to do that as the volumes come together. It appears that some of them may be larger than the 10 megabytes so we want to clarify the allowance for splitting the volumes if necessary because of the size.

Each volume shall be submitted as a separate email; volumes exceeding 10 MB shall be split into clearly labeled, sequential emails—“attempt” has been removed to reflect a mandatory requirement.

One additional question on amendment 14/15. VA released the east region pricing template and it did include several hidden tabs. The inclusion of the hidden tabs were removed with amendment 13 pricing template and the recent Q&A reiterated that no hidden tab should be used so we just wanted to call that out and ask for clarification as VA publishes information in the next amendment.

No hidden tabs should be used and Attachment 3 for East has been updated.

Regarding section 11.4 of the PWS: It indicates that the contractor will process AD pays with the sequential suffix, and it also indicates that you have 12 months to process claims adjustments. But in Amendment 11 there was question 1008, which references under payments. Is it VA in Healthcare provided by providers if a provider makes a request for added pay? This question also refers to an administrative fee reimbursement, which CCN NG is not based upon per active Veteran, but rather per enrolled Veteran. And we just wanted to bring it to your attention that it's not reimbursing providers for healthcare that they've delivered but having added pay claim could have an impact on the network if we do not pay for these claims. And it is not an industry standard. While the industry standard would be that providers would be reimbursed for all healthcare that they've delivered to veterans, if they file a claim incorrectly and need to make an additional payment, we will accept those adjustments and so adjustments that come from the providers would be accepted there.

The Government clarifies that the burden is on the TPA to ensure that all corrected or adjusted claims are properly documented and supported. While providers and/or the TPA may submit corrections within the allowable timeframe, the TPA must review each submission to verify accuracy, completeness, and compliance with program requirements before determining payment. Additional reimbursement, while allowed depending on the facts of each claim, is not automatic; it must be fully justified based on the documentation provided.

There are two different standards around claims processing timeliness.

There's one spot where it indicates that the contractor shall reimburse all claims 100% within 30 days. But also, in PWS 11.1 it does indicate that the contractor shall have less than 1% defending inventory. Over 45 days, but in the PRS P03.1 it indicates an AQL of greater than 90 per 98% of adjudicated claims within 30 days. So those two seem to conflict with one another. So, we're looking for that clarification. Is the standard 100% of claims paid in 30 days or is it 98% paid within 30 days?

The requirement stating that the contractor shall reimburse claims within 30 days reflects the Government’s expectation for timely claims processing. The Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) metric (P03.1), which establishes an Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) of 98% of adjudicated claims within 30 days, represents the performance standard against which contractor performance will be measured for purposes such as surveillance and any associated remedies.

The requirement in PWS 11.1 regarding less than 1% pending inventory over 45 days is a backlog management metric, intended to ensure that aged claims are minimized and do not accumulate. The 98% within 30 days standard is the enforceable performance threshold under the PRS, while the 100% within 30 days language reflects the overall performance objective. The requirements related to claims exceeding 45 days provide an additional control to ensure timely resolution of outliers.

Around the cancellation ceilings: there is a transition out CLIN X012 which is required to be priced in the base period OY2 and oy3 as well as OY4 and oy5. But in addition, in the TOPR RFP, section B3.8, it refers to a 12% and a 10% cancellation ceiling. What is the relationship between the cancellation ceiling and the transition out CLIN? Are they to be paid separately?

CLIN X012, Transition Out:

VA will pay the Contractor for transition-out and residual service tasks, including retroactive processing of referrals and claims adjudication, transition of open referrals, provision of an inventory of assets, facilitating knowledge transfer, removal of Government-furnished information, and customer service transition.

This CLIN will be paid as a fixed price upon VA initiation of the transition-out period. Transition-out services shall be excluded from CLIN X008, Administrative Services.

CLIN X012 is a separately priced, performance-based requirement applicable to contract completion, expiration, or termination. Cancellation ceilings, as defined in applicable TOPRs, are distinct and apply only under specified cancellation scenarios. Cancellation ceilings shall not include costs associated with transition-out services under CLIN X012, and no duplication of costs is permitted.

In question 4 here I've got it's a subcontracting question, so just wanting to clarify that the subcontracting goals for both the IDIQ and the TOPR are a percentage of subcontract dollars, which is very standard for a small business. The clarification comes about because there is a reference to a percentage of contract dollars as opposed to subcontract dollars.

Additionally, there is an exclusion for supplies and under services contracts, supplies such as computer equipment and other supplies, are a key component for the contractor to provide small businesses with opportunities. I was unclear why we would want to have an exclusion there.

IAW RFP Factor 2: VETERANS’ INVOLVEMENT/ SUBCONTRACTING PLAN; Small Business Exception to Subcontracting Plan: "Offerors designated as small businesses may submit a subcontracting plan to demonstrate small business participation”. In lieu of submitting a subcontracting plan, and in addition to its Representations and Certifications, a small business Offeror shall make an affirmative statement of its small business status, identify the specific small business category(ies), and describe any teaming arrangements the Offeror intends to use in support of the Offeror’s proposal.

10 If one is bidding solely on the IDIQ and neither of the TOPRs, is the deadline extended for that as well?

Yes, the submission deadline for both the Medical IDIQ and TOPRs is extended to April 17, as posted in the Amendment 0016 on 3/30.

If VA could release the amendment prior to Friday, that would give offers the full two weeks to actually assess and address any changes versus if you release the amendment on Friday and you give a two week extension that would decrease the time because offerors are taking kind of the last couple of days to finalize their submissions and then submit.

VA issued Amendment 0016 to extend the submission deadline for the Medical IDIQ and TOPRs to April 17 on 3/30. Further amendments will be issued if revisions are required. Any future amendments will released as soon as practicable.

The IDIQ does not require Attachment 5, the past performance reference template, at least in the solicitation. However, answers to questions 847 and 848 state that attachment 5 is required for IDIQ factor 1 and for the TOPRs factor 2.

Attachment 5 PPQ is not required for the IDIQ. It is required for the TOPRs for Past Performance evaluation.

We have a technical question related to the number of pages within the submission: should the page numbers begin on the cover letter, the table of contents or the actual submission response?

As stated in the solicitation, e. Page Limitations: Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. The cover letter, title page, Table of Contents, Table of Figures, List of Tables, organizational chart and glossary of abbreviations and acronyms do not count against page count limitations. However, be advised that all information contained within any Table of Contents and/or glossary of abbreviations or acronyms submitted with an Offeror’s response will not be evaluated by the Government.

Under Amendment 7, a new pricing table was provided, and it covers the base period plus four years, yet the IDIQ total period performance is 10 years. We're assuming that the VA determined that that was the only pricing it needed. Raising that because it caused some questions about the pricing lasting for a shorter period.

The IDIQ pricing table has been updated to reflect the 10-year POP.

In several place in the IDIQ, it says you can conduct operations in the United States. However, there is an area where it says that operations should be in the continental United States, the lower 48. In question 131 of your responses you had said there was a specific question that was asked about territory operations India, Pakistan, but that question was followed, however the IDIQ did not. It said to follow the law, follow the law and the FAR. We need clarification if we can conduct operations in the United States to include all its territories or if operations are only allowed.

The Government clarifies that for purposes of this solicitation, that United States includes the 50 states and U.S. territories.

In the questions and answer period, VA stated that the government reserves the right to award two contractors that can receive that can achieve FedRAMP high in 90 to 120 days after award. Offers that are bidding on this contract would not have all their applications into a FedRAMP Environment pre-award unless they made an investment to do so beforehand, which would be a significant cost. Would like to get clarification on why it was answered in such a way, because it's it appears to be a non-competitive statement because you would already have to be operating in the in the environment and have all of your apps already in that FedRAMP environment to achieve FedRAMP high within 90 to 120 days after award.

For TOPR 0001 and TOPR 0002, VA requires Contractor to achieve moderate FedRAMP at proposal submission and VA requires the Contractor to achieve and maintain high FedRAMP at the start of Health Care Delivery (HCD) and for the duration of the task order. This requirement must apply to any and all interfaces or data repositories maintaining or displaying health care PHI, PII, or financial information, due to the importance of protecting our Veterans' data.

Not sure if the government is intending on releasing a tentative award date for the IDIQ itself.

And then also, if there's any idea when future TOPRs may be released, or if VA would be planning on potentially publishing like a future acquisition or future TOPR list sometime in the future.

The Government does not intend to provide a tentative IDIQ award date at this time due to multiple ongoing factors influencing the procurement schedule. The release of future TOPRs will be driven by program needs and priorities.

The Government does not currently plan to publish a forecast or schedule of future TOPRs but will take industry's feedback into consideration for future planning discussions.

We just had a question about the subcontracting goals in the IDIQ. You have a list of both prime contracting goals and subcontracting goals, and we've asked a few questions about this and we're trying to get clarity.

We assume that you want the offer to address the subcontracting goals to meet or exceed them. However, we're unclear about inclusion of Prime contracting goals. So, if you could perhaps clarify that in the next amendment: are you asking for both from the offeror, and how could an offer?

Offerors are expected to address and demonstrate how they will meet or exceed the subcontracting goals as part of their subcontracting plan. Prime contracting goals focus on the Government’s direct awards to small businesses. The prime contracting goals reflect overall Government small business objectives. IAW RFP Factor 2: VETERANS’ INVOLVEMENT/ SUBCONTRACTING PLAN; Small Business Exception to Subcontracting Plan: "Offerors designated as small businesses may submit a subcontracting plan to demonstrate small business participation”. In lieu of submitting a subcontracting plan, and in addition to its Representations and Certifications, a small business Offeror shall make an affirmative statement of its small business status, identify the specific small business category(ies), and describe any teaming arrangements the Offeror intends to use in support of the Offeror’s proposal.

TOPR requirements allow for an org chart to be submitted as an attachment outside of the page count for the technical evaluation. As you all are going through and making other considerations, I wonder if there could be a consideration for adding the option for a concept of operations or an OPS graphic to be submitted as an attachment outside of the page count along with the org chart so you know recognizing that it might be helpful for you all to get that org chart and understand how the different individuals will connect with the with the network, but it might also be helpful for you all to get kind of a 1-sheet to understand how different systems, how the VA and different processes connect with the network as well.

The offeror may submit a formal ConOp in its proposal if it believes doing so will help demonstrate its capabilities; however, any such submission will count toward the page limit.

One question is on the subcontracting plan: if you're only bidding on the IDIQ for Batch 2, how? What is the method that you want bidders to used to give you our small subcontracted dollars: are these ranges? What is the total contract value we should be basing our determinations on if we're not pricing?

To the cleanser TOPR East and TOPR West, it's unclear if the SDVOSB's must have the prime NAICS code at the time of submission or if the SDVOSB's only if they're priming need to hold that NAICS code. Because without task orders or associated scope for batch 2 responders, how do you determine which NAICS are appropriate, which NAICS are going to be subcontracted out if you don't know the specific role that each of your SDVOSBs are going to play at this point. Is there flexibility around that, I think as currently written all SDVOSBS must hold the next 524114. And it's my understanding that a lot of SDVOSB's won't hold that next, so if there's flexibility to determine NAICS codes at the time of like at the task order level.

To provide clarity, for small businesses, the small business may submit a subcontracting plan; however, in lieu of submitting a subcontracting plan, and in addition to its Representations and Certifications, a small business Offeror shall make an affirmative statement of its small business status, identify the specific small business category(ies), and describe any teaming arrangements the Offeror intends to use in support of the Offeror’s proposal. The primary NAICS requirement applies to the prime Offeror only; subcontractors, including SDVOSBs, are not required to hold the IDIQ NAICS, and final NAICS alignment may be determined at the task order level.

Please clarify the base year and option period and the way that the table is presented. It's shown as year 1, year 2, year 3, and year 4 (which should have been option year 1).

The ordering periods are structured as follows for the IDIQ:

• Base Period: Three (3) years

• Option Period I: Two (2) years

• Option Period II: Two (2) years

• Option Period III: Two (2) years

• Option Period IV: One (1) year

Table 3: Price Volume Table has been updated.

I think with the new amendment there was a little bit of confusion regarding what we should be removed in the sub-K plan. VA mentioned to remove the supplier names, but the conformed RFP still shows that the company name is required.

The Government cannot identify where in the RFP that company names are required in their submission for the purposes of a subcontracting plan. Plans shall be in accordance with FAR 19.206 (FAR Overhaul).

We believe there is a an opportunity for the this program to align with some similar programs around a FedRAMP moderate requirement and still have the information adequately protected, but avoid significant cost and effort around the effort associated with cloud service providers getting to FedRAMP high.

The determination to require FedRAMP High is based on the Government’s assessment of the sensitivity of the information, risk environment, and mission requirements associated with this program. The services contemplated under this effort involve the handling, processing, and/or storage of data that requires a high level of security in accordance with federal information security standards and VA-specific requirements.

FedRAMP requirements have been updated and provided via Amendment 0018.

There was a recent amendment that addressed the CLIN X003 for the vaccine pricing. There was some language there that referenced the product fee. That's term that's not defined in this solicitation. And from what we can see, there's nothing in the CMS methodology that references a product fee. The clean instructions say to that three is only for the administration and processing of the vaccine, but ingredient costs are to be included in CLIN X001. The bottom line is there is still some ambiguity around this CLIN and just would recommend if there are CMS regulations and methodology that are applying here, we would I think industry would appreciate clarity on specifically what of that methodology is, and particularly the components where the component should be covered?

Rather, that is the ingredient cost itself, or whether it's a dispensing fee or professional service fee from the pharmacies or an actual admin fee from the contractor or subcontractor.

I think the additional volume that could be provided around pharmacy, specifically NDC level data will help offer worse price out the clinics and seven portions of their bid. So just as with the extension that's been announced, any effort that the VA can do to provide more granular detail in the pharmacy? We believe it will help the VA in this program getting higher quality offers.

CLIN X003 covers vaccine administration/dispensing only; vaccine ingredient costs shall be included in CLIN X001. Medicare methodology applies to the administration component only, and “product fee” is not a separate CLIN X003 element. The Government does not plan to provide additional pharmacy data at this time. Please refer to Attachment Pa.

My question is, if you're really looking for competition and you're really looking for people to get into this space that maybe do a great job in the commercial sector and bring all of that innovation that you're looking to provide, when you say FedRAMP, many of them look at this and it is just too high for a small company. And they may or may not be able to do it.

So, it seems that there should be either a larger window to be able to do it, that there's a little more clarification on what help might be provided to get there and how you do it federally doesn't exist in the commercial sector. You have HIPAA and other requirements and security so it truly eliminates a lot of the innovation that might come in and it puts a restriction on those that aren't familiar with it. So, my thought is I think that's an unrealistic window. My recommendation is that there's a little bit more of a understanding of either here's how we're going to help you so the people aren't afraid to jump in, here's what might be available for you, FedRAMP is not a requirement at the IDIQ level. For TORPs 0001 and 0002, the determination to require FedRAMP High is based on the Government’s assessment of the sensitivity of the information, risk environment, and mission requirements associated with this program. The services contemplated under this effort involve the handling, processing, and/or storage of data that requires a high level of security in accordance with federal information security standards and VA-specific requirements.

so they get a thought as to how that's going to happen, and then perhaps an offset, because if you're going to have a small piece as a sub or a small piece in this deal, but the cost to get a FedRAMP is twice the price of what you're going to get in for, it won't make a lot of sense for people.

To clarify for those that might be wondering as well for the IDIQ submission, is the FedRAMP requirement and timeline applicable for IDIQ or is that TOPR-related only?

FedRAMP requirements are applicable to TORPs 0001 and 0002 only, not at the IDIQ level.

We did ask for some clarification around the for the IDIQ package and the definitions of implementation. And there was guidance provided by the government that it's related to the healthcare delivery and then we would have to kind of go back to the PWS related to the health care delivery more around the TOPR 1 and TOPR 2. Just curious, is there any further guidance at the IDIQ level on the implementation? If you are looking from that perspective and I think for the program management IT integration, we have a better grasp. But implementation seems a little bit more abstract.

If along those three areas, government could provide further clarification either here or after would be helpful, or maybe adding it to the IDIQ PWS, you know there are about 16 or 17 functional areas, but those are related to the functional areas. How do they tie to specific higher areas that the government is looking for? Are they on the lines of implementation and integration and program management?

At the IDIQ level, the solicitation identifies the implementation as one of the activities that the contractor will be required to perform under subsequent task orders. The specific implementation requirements for each effort will be defined at the task-order level, consistent with the nature and scope of the individual requirement. Implementation details for TOPR 0001 and TOPR 0002 are included within their respective task orders. Future TOPRs will likewise include applicable implementation requirements, as appropriate.

As part of the evaluation, you listed several companies that would be participating along with MITRE and then I think it was page 91. Today you have a statement that offers personnel assisting in the proposal evaluation.

Are procurement officials will take action to preclude unauthorized use of disclosure or of a competing offers proprietary data. Do I interpret that to mean that bidders will also have personnel assisting in the evaluation?

Yes, VA will ensure we follow FAR 3.104 and FAR 9.505-4 to protect proposals, data, and proprietary information during this RFP process, through the acquisition lifecycle. VA will retain decision-making authority as we are being assisted by contractors but they hold no decision-making authority.

35 One more basic question on the 25 pages allotted, how is that being evaluated?

References narrative of no more than 25 pages will be evaluated as part of Factor 1: Technical Evaluation.

36 Please clarify what's included in the page number allotment. Does a cover page count? Does a table of contents count? or Transmittal letter..

Cover letter, title page, Table of Contents, Table of Figures, List of Tables, organizational chart and glossary of abbreviations and acronyms do not count against page count limitations and shall be separate from the Volumes.

Reference: Section E.3 ADDENDUM to FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO

OFFERORS — COMMERICAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES, C.

Instructions, Conditions, and Notice to Offerors, e. Page Limitations.

37 What led to the removal of the identified subcontractors and the subcontracting plan for the IDIQ?

A Subcontracting Plan is still being evaluated in accordance with factor 2 under E.3 ADDENDUM to FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS — COMMERICAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES. The items and names that should be included in the Subcontracting Plan are found in FAR Overhaul 19.206.

38 Do we need subcontractors? Do we not need subcontractors identified in the IDIQ process?

All large business Offerors shall include their Small Business Subcontracting Plan in their submission. The Government cannot advise whether an offeror needs subcontractors.

39 Please confirm that you'll be releasing a new, clean solicitation on Friday that incorporates all of the updated changes. A conformed copy of the RFPs will be released as updated.

Related to the pricing volume on the IDIQ, the page limit on that is 20 pages and the factor 3 is calling for the 10 year pricing on specific LCAT with some brief explanation. So my question is, is that number of pages required or are there things that we are missing that need to be elaborated?

Per the IDIQ, E.3 ADDENDUM to FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS — COMMERICAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES, C. Instructions, Conditions, and Notice to Offerors, "e. Page Limitations: Page limitations shall be treated as maximums."

What is your on ramp/ off ramp policy if you have one? So let's say in two years you have some amazing companies that come in that are they going to have to come in as Subs.

Is there going to be an on ramp methodology?

How do you see that playing out?

With AI and the changes in the ability to do everything from claims, to processing, to telehealth to you name it, there's going to be a lot of changes that happen in one year, three-year, five years, six years.

How do you anticipate or do you anticipate an on ramp process?

See RFP Section B.5.2 On-Ramping/Off-Ramping.

On Ramping: The Government may utilize an on-ramp to add contractors under any circumstances not limited to, revisiting the original pool of CCN IDIQ Offerors. Contracts awarded via the “on-ramp” process will share in, but not increase, the previously established IDIQ ceiling. The “on-ramping” process will not extend the IDIQ ordering period. Awardees will be added to the pool of contractors for future Task Orders competition.

Off-Ramping: The Government may off-ramp Contractors at any time during the contract for performance issues, responsiveness, or eligibility at its discretion.

42 Somewhat related to that will we have visibility into seeing like a mini forecast of TOPRs to be released?

The Government does not currently plan to publish a forecast or schedule of future TOPRs but has taken this into consideration for future discussions.

Just thinking about innovation in different aspects, what would help from the government? Maybe post contract award or somewhere along the lines, because we cannot see the future from here, like five years from now. How would it look? Or 10 years, seven years.

But what's the North star? You know, where are we headed? What are the key performance indicators? So I think those things would really help us to know with the journey is. When it's about reducing, you know Let's say fraud, waste and claim Or it's about increasing outcomes by X percentage, improving wait times, you know, providing a broader care delivery model. That would provide innovation for the veterans in the private sector, in the field of MRI, whatever. So I think for each of those task areas somewhere it would help us to understand what those parameters are, what those key performance indicators are, And that would really help us to align our innovation to deliver on those KPI's.

The RFP, associated TOPRs, and all relevant attachments provide extensive information regarding VA’s requirements and key performance indicators. The Government welcomes innovative approaches, and offerors are encouraged to present solutions that are both relevant and responsive to the stated evaluation factors.

Additionally, Per TOPR PWS: Within five (5) days of the contract award, the Contractor shall participate in a virtual Post Award Meeting to be led by the CO.

The VA will: Provide a comprehensive overview of the project’s administration processes and reporting protocols, including the frequency of reports, key performance indicators, and specific administrative responsibilities

Quick question related to the POCs for past performance and asking for direction on whether that should be the contracting officer for the overarching contract or the business owners can be provided instead.

It could be different based on the nature of how some contracts are set up.

It is acceptable to provide POCs that could either be the contracting officers for the overarching contracts or the business owners. Offerors should consider the nature of each contract and who can best represent the performance and relationship aspect of that contract.

46 Please clarify if the evaluators are actually going to be reaching out to the POC's or if it is this just confirm that we have a POC to reach out to.

According to E.1 ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS— COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES, Factor 2: Past Performance, the Government may choose to contact the POCs you provide, but it is not a requirement.

Long term, will there be an Architecture Road map or graphic that shows all the systems in use? What systems are government systems? Knowing what the incumbents are using how that might change or evolve over time. If there's any direction the VA could give in the thinking of around consolidation, centralizing, that would be helpful on the systems side of things.

The Government does not intend to provide a comprehensive architecture roadmap or system diagram detailing all systems, interfaces, or the delineation between Government and contractor systems. Due to various factors that continue to influence the technical and programmatic environment, such materials cannot be furnished at this stage.