36C26026Q1017 0001.docx

36C26026Q1017 0001

5. PROJECT NUMBER (if applicable)

CODE

7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NUMBER

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED

PAGE OF PAGES

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED

BPA NO.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

FACILITY CODE

CODE

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

E. IMPORTANT:

is extended,

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning __________ copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(REV. 11/2016)

is required to sign this document and return ___________ copies to the issuing office.

is not, A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

15C. DATE SIGNED

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER

Contractor

16C. DATE SIGNED

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

STANDARD FORM 30

PREVIOUS EDITION NOT USABLE

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.243 (Type or print) (Type or print) (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (If other than Item 6) (Specify type of modification and authority) (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

(If required)

(SEE ITEM 11)

(SEE ITEM 13)

(X)

CHECK

ONE

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

10-13-2026

648-27-2-5104-0008

None 36C260 Network Contracting Office 20

ATTN: V4CONT

1601 E. Fourth Plain Blvd Bldg.17, Suite B428 Vancouver WA 98661

36C260 Network Contracting Office 20

ATTN: V4CONT

1601 E. Fourth Plain Blvd Bldg.17, Suite B428 Vancouver WA 98661 To all Offerors/Bidders

36C26026Q1017 09-28-2026

X

** HOUR & DATE for Receipt of Offers is EXTENDED to: 11-03-2026 5pm PST

One(1)

1. The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate Questions and Answers received in response to the solicitation.

2. See continuation page below for all Questions and Answers.

3. See Attached Revised Request for Quote (RFQ) changes are made in yellow or lined out.

4. Quote deadline changed to 11/03/2026 5pm PST.

5. There are no other changes as a result of this amendment.

CONTINUATION PAGE

Questions and Answers

1. Block 20 accepts questions until "5:00pm EST" on 10/05/2026 and Block 8 sets quotes due at 5pm PDT on 10-13-2026. Please confirm that the question deadline is 5:00 pm Eastern Daylight Time on October 5, 2026 and that the quote deadline is 5:00 pm Pacific Daylight Time on October 13, 2026.

Confirmed the question deadline was due back at 5pm on 10-05-2026. This quote deadline has been extended to 11-03-2026 at 5pm PST.

2. Will the Government post every question and its answer in an amendment on SAM.gov, so that all interested parties receive the same answers, and on what date? If the answers are posted fewer than five business days before October 13, 2026, will the Government extend the response date?

The Government plans on answering as many questions as we can through an amendment and will also extend the closing date for this Request for Quote.

3. The Description and SF 1449 Block 10 state a 100% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business set-aside, while the SET-ASIDE cell of the VA's General Information table is blank. Please confirm the set-aside is a total SDVOSB set-aside under VAAR 852.219-73, that NAICS 541519 applies with the $34 million size standard, and that certification in the SBA Veteran Small Business Certification database at the time of quote and at award meets the eligibility requirement.

Yes. The Description section states the RFQ “is set as set‑aside for Service‑Disabled Veteran Owned Small business (SDVOSB)… NAICS 541519… business size of $34 Million…,” and the schedule lists VAAR 852.219‑73 and VAAR 852.219‑75 (certificate of compliance). SBA veteran certification is the referenced eligibility basis under VAAR 852.219‑73/‑75.

4. B.3 prices each software package on an annual basis, and SOW 18.1 requires invoicing annually at the beginning of the period. However, B.1 specifies invoicing “in arrears” upon delivery and acceptance, and 6.1 requires system acceptance before invoicing. Please confirm that the contractor may invoice the full base-year annual price upon initial system acceptance and commencement of subscription coverage, and each option-year annual price at the beginning of that option period, without waiting until completion of the annual performance period. Please amend B.1 to reconcile these provisions. If annual beginning-of-period invoicing is not intended, please specify the authorized interim billing schedule.

SOW ‘Invoice and payment’ says “submit invoices annually at beginning of the period,” and SOW 6.1 requires the system to pass acceptance testing prior to invoicing. Reading these together, the annual invoice at the beginning of the period is allowed only after acceptance testing is passed.

5. The SOW refers to "the VA Environmental Management Services (EMS) Unified Platform Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) system", and Sources Sought 36C260-27-AP-0398 (August 2026) described subscription maintenance for the Environmental Management Operations Efficiency Dashboard, also called the Unified Platform. Is this RFQ a follow-on to that subscription? If so, please provide the incumbent contractor name, the incumbent contract number, its period of performance, and the current contract value or annual value.

RFQ 36C26026Q1017 is a new requirement

6. Please confirm that this RFQ is open to any Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) SaaS product meeting all SOW requirements and is not limited to the product currently in use.

Yes. SOW 11.1: “Government will accept only a Commercial Off‑The‑Shelf (COTS) SaaS… Systems requiring development, customization or modifications… will not be accepted.”

7. Does this requirement permit replacement of the existing “Unified Platform” with another COTS SaaS platform meeting all SOW requirements, or is it limited to renewal and support of the existing platform?

Replacement is permitted so long as the proposed COTS SaaS meets all SOW requirements; the RFQ does not limit quotes to the existing platform.

8. If this requirement is limited to the existing “Unified Platform,” please identify the required product and clarify whether it is available to multiple offerors through authorized reseller or teaming arrangements, or is available exclusively from its publisher.

The RFQ does not name a specific product nor impose reseller authorization constraints.

9. If this requirement is limited to the existing “Unified Platform,” must offerors submit written authorization from the proposed software publisher to furnish its subscription, maintenance, and technical support? If so, when must that authorization be provided?

No such requirement in the statement of work.

10. The line items are for the VA Portland Health Care System, while SOW 17.1 and 17.3 call for local, regional (VISN) and national access, reports and data aggregation, and the introduction refers to all stations of the VA Northwest Health Network. Is the priced scope limited to the Portland VA Medical Center and its sites? If other facilities are included, please list them.

Place of Performance is Portland VA Medical Center. The SOW references local, regional (VISN), and national access/reporting, and “unlimited… site licenses… for VISN and National auditing access.

11. SOW 11.1 requires the software to be delivered and fully operational at contract award, SOW 2.1 starts base year coverage at the Go Live date, Block 20 sets the base period as 01/01/2027 through 12/31/2027, the test plan is due 5 days after award and the kickoff within 10 days presents the fully deployed system. What is the anticipated award date? Is a period allowed between award and Go Live for configuration, the record load, acceptance testing and training, and how long is it? If Go Live falls after 01/01/2027, does the base year run twelve months from Go Live?

Issue date: 09‑28‑2026. Base period listed as 01/01/2027–12/31/2027. SOW 2.1 states coverage “shall not begin until the ‘Go Live’ date,” and SOW 11.1 says software “delivered and fully operational at contract award.” The RFQ does not specify an award date nor a configuration window; acceptance testing must occur and be passed before invoicing. The RFQ does not expressly state whether the base year shifts to 12 months from Go‑Live if Go‑Live trails 1/1/2027.

12. SOW 2.1 states the Government may exercise the option for additional licenses for additional modules. Which modules are part of the base requirement and which are optional? Should optional modules and additional licenses be priced in the quote, and in which line item?

Optional Modules and additional licenses should not be priced in the quote, if they are needed, a mutually agreed upon contract modification will be issued to address that situation.

13. Except for the classroom training expressly required on-site under SOW 13.1, may all other training, including web-based instruction, refresher training, and remedial instruction, be delivered remotely using Government-approved web conferencing?

Yes. SOW 13.1 requires on‑site classroom training and also requires web‑based training prior to Go‑Live. Other refresher/remedial training may be web‑based “at Contractor’s option,” coordinated with the POC.

14. Other than the expressly required on-site classroom training, are any implementation, configuration, data migration, testing, or support activities required to be performed at Government facilities? If so, please identify those activities and locations.

The Place of Performance says tasks performed at Contractor facilities while training is at Government facilities. The RFQ does not require other activities to be onsite.

15. The contractor is to help load up to two years of EMS records supplied by the Government. Where do those records reside today: in the system now in use, in local files, or both? Is the incumbent funded and required to provide knowledge transfer and a documented data export during the transition, and who extracts the records from the current system?

The SOW states the Government provides data, vendor not responsible for missing data; it does not specify current system location or extraction roles.

16. To price the record load, please state the approximate volume (number of records, number of files and total size), the formats in use, and whether the Government or the contractor cleans and maps the data. Do the records contain personally identifiable information, protected health information or other VA sensitive information?

Formats are listed (Word documents, spreadsheets, electronic forms); volumes, roles for cleaning/mapping, and whether PII/PHI is included are not specified. Unable to respond to this question beyond formats.

17. The SOW sets 99.0% availability and Tier II help desk hours of 8:00 am to 6:00 pm Pacific, and notes delays beyond 2 business days in past performance records. Are response and resolution times by severity defined? If not, may the quoter propose its commercial service level agreement? How is uptime measured and reported, and is there a remedy for a missed month? What duration and staffing should the quoter assume for the 24/7 help desk during a national crisis?

The RFQ sets 99.0% availability, Tier II hours 8:00am–6:00pm PT M–F (excluding Federal holidays), and 24/7 during National Crisis per NRF Plan.

18. The introduction projects about 20 users, SOW 10.1 requires licenses for 10 initial users, and the Software Mapping section requires unlimited site licenses for facilities defined by the Government. How many named users and how many facilities should the firm fixed price cover in the base year and in each option year? Is the annual user true-up priced as a per-user unit price, and where in B.3 should the quoter enter it?

The SOW projects ~20 users, requires licenses for 10 initial users (10.1), and requires unlimited site licenses for facilities defined by the Government. The annual true‑up process (user list validation 60 days prior to period end) is described, but pricing mechanics for true‑up are not provided. Unable to respond to this question beyond those facts.

19. When will the Government provide the information needed for configuration, data migration, and acceptance testing, including the organizational structure and user permissions, existing EMS records, Government-defined forms/checklists/report requirements, and the test cases identified in SOW 6.1? Please identify which information will be available before award and the delivery schedule for any remaining information.

SOW 6.1 states Government will provide test cases for acceptance; other detailed delivery schedules for configuration inputs are not specified. Unable to respond to this question on timing for other artifacts.

20. Will contractor personnel require Government-issued credentials, VA network accounts, or facility-access approvals for remote performance or on-site training? If required, when will these be available?

The SOW states that the Government provides training rooms with computers and that the contractor should test access before class, all required VA accounts or facility access will be provided to awarded vendor. Please note that this requirement requires a Tier 1 Background.

21. The SOW requires disaster recovery, failover and remote rollover with backup of all software and data. Please specify the required recovery time objective (RTO), recovery point objective (RPO), and frequency for testing disaster recovery and failover capabilities, including the required timing and format for submitting test results to the Government.

The Emergency Operations section requires disaster recovery, failover, remote rollover, and backups, Contractors will need to work with VA Point of Contact to come up with time frame, for which the RTO & RPO shall be completed.

22. SOW 11.1 accepts a COTS SaaS system that can be configured and rejects systems requiring development, customization or modification, while SOW 17.4 and 17.5 require Government defined reports, inspection criteria, custom data forms and inspection checklists. Please confirm that building these forms, checklists, workflows and reports with the product's own configuration tools, with no change to the product's source code, is configuration and is acceptable.

Yes. The RFQ accepts configurable COTS SaaS and rejects development/customization/modifications to make the software operational. Building artifacts with configuration tools (no source‑code changes) aligns to “configurable” and is acceptable.

23. To meet the multi-factor and replay-resistant authentication requirement, must the system integrate with VA single sign-on and PIV, or may the product's own multi-factor authentication be used?

Which VA systems, if any, must the product interface with in the base year?

The RFQ requires MFA and replay‑resistant mechanisms and mentions ATO/eMASS and FedRAMP hosting but does not require SSO/PIV integration nor identify mandatory VA system interfaces in base year. Unable to respond to this question beyond required MFA characteristics.

24. Since travel and training are included in the firm-fixed price, please provide the total number of personnel requiring initial training at each Government location and the capacity of each training room, including the number of available computer workstations.

Since travel and training are included in the firm-fixed price, please confirm whether multiple classes required at a location due to room or workstation capacity may be scheduled on consecutive business days during a single contractor trip.

Numbers/capacity are not specified. SOW 13.1 says Government provides training rooms and the total trained depends on acquired licenses, and scheduling is coordinated with the POC. Consecutive‑day scheduling is not restricted in the SOW (subject to coordination). Specific counts: Unable to respond to this question.

25. SOW 16.1 requires a Periodic Progress Report but gives no frequency. How often is the report due, and is it required only through implementation or for the life of the order?

The Deliverable list includes “Periodic Progress Report,” but a specific frequency is not given; the Progress Report description reads as ongoing (“monitor performance… report any deviations”). Unable to respond to this question regarding mandated cadence or duration.

26. SOW 17.4 requires a single tenant deployment model and the Technology Requirements ask for the ability to run on a virtual server hosted on the Government network, while the requirement is for a SaaS system on FedRAMP approved infrastructure. Is a dedicated, logically isolated instance for VA in the vendor's cloud acceptable as single tenant?

Is deployment on the VA network required at any point, or only the ability to do so?

The RFQ requires a single tenant deployment model and that the system have the ability to run on a virtual server hosted on the Government network; it also requires SaaS hosted on FedRAMP‑approved infrastructure. A dedicated, logically isolated cloud instance is consistent with single‑tenant language, and deployment on VA network is not required—only the ability is specified.

27. The Technology Requirements call for a FedRAMP ID number and hosting on FedRAMP approved infrastructure.

Must the SaaS product hold a FedRAMP authorization at quote submission, or will the Government accept a product listed in the FedRAMP Marketplace with an assigned FedRAMP ID, for example a FedRAMP High Ready product or one in process under FedRAMP 20x, hosted on FedRAMP High authorized infrastructure?

Which FIPS 199 impact level applies, and what authorization boundary does the Government expect the FedRAMP package to cover: the SaaS application, the hosting infrastructure, or both?

The RFQ states “Have a FedRAMP id number” and hosted using FedRAMP‑approved infrastructure, and” be registered on eMASS with current and approved VA ATO.” It does not say if FedRAMP “Ready” or “In Process” is acceptable, nor specify FIPS 199 impact level or required authorization boundary. Unable to respond to this question beyond those stated requirements.

28. Section 11.1 anticipates configuration of an existing COTS SaaS product, while §6.1 requires an acceptance test plan within five days after award and the Technical Kickoff Meeting occurs within ten days after award. Please confirm that the operational-at-award requirement refers to the existing COTS product’s functionality and availability, with Government-specific configuration, data migration, and acceptance testing performed after award in accordance with a Government-approved implementation schedule.

The Technology Requirements require the EMS system to be registered in eMASS with a current approved VA ATO but do not specify when authorization must be completed. May authorization of the proposed Government-specific deployment be completed after award and before operational use?

The SOW says the software must be delivered and fully operational at contract award and calls for an Acceptance Test Plan within 5 days and Technical Kickoff within 10 days. It also requires ATO current and approved, but does not detail ATO timing beyond that phrase. The reading supports COTS availability at award with Government‑specific configuration, data migration, and testing post‑award per the plan.

29. The Technology Requirements cite NIST 800-53 Rev. 3, which has been superseded. Please confirm that NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 at the applicable baseline is the standard the Government will apply.

The RFQ explicitly cites NIST 800‑53 Rev.3. It does not mention Rev.5. Unable to respond to this question regarding a change to Rev.5.

30. To establish the scope of the all-inclusive firm-fixed price, please identify which security assessment and VA ATO activities, VA identity-service integrations, and scanning or continuous monitoring tools will be Government-furnished, and which the contractor must provide and price.

The Government will provide the scanning barcodes, and the contractor shall provide services for scanning or continuous monitoring tools. Government will purchase and install scanning barcodes therefore the contractor should not include this in their pricing.

31. E.2, Part II—Price, requires unit and extended prices for CLINs 0001 through 4001. Please clarify whether the Government also requires supporting data other than certified cost or pricing data with the quote. If so, please identify the required detail and format, including any breakdown of subscription/license charges, implementation, training/travel, ongoing support, or labor categories and hours.

C.6 identifies a System Support Specialist under FAR 52.222-42. Please clarify which SOW duties this position is intended to perform, including whether those duties involve routine user assistance and account administration, software configuration, or technical troubleshooting requiring specialized IT expertise.

Part II instructs offerors to insert unit and extended prices for CLINs 0001–4001; the RFQ does not require additional supporting data beyond the SF1449 and the parts listed. Contractor is responsible for identifying relevant positions for the effort and ensuring pricing meets requirements of the Service Contract Act and this request for quote clauses and provisions.

32. Please identify the personnel vetting and access requirements applicable to contractor staff supporting the SaaS system or handling VA data, including any Public Trust/background investigation level, security clearance, U.S. citizenship restriction, and required VA privacy or security training beyond the records-management training already specified.

The RFQ includes Records Management training requirements for contractor staff; it does not specify Public Trust/clearance/citizenship or other VA privacy/security training. There is only a need for a Tier 1 background.

33. Does any restriction applicable to this RFQ extend to AI-assisted tools used solely in the vendor’s commercial development and maintenance of the existing COTS product, outside VA systems and without processing VA information? If so, please identify the applicable policy or contract requirement.

What VA approval or disclosure requirements apply to AI-enabled features within the proposed SaaS product that process VA information?

Unable to respond to this question. (No AI policy language appears.)

34. B.3 shows a quantity of 1.00 YR for line item 0001 and 0.00 YR for option line items 1001, 2001, 3001 and 4001. Please confirm that each option line item is to be priced at a quantity of 1.00 YR and revise the Price/Cost Schedule accordingly.

This has been corrected on the price cost schedule quantity in for 1 YR for option line items.

35. C.3 sets automobile liability limits and, in paragraph (d), requires evidence of general liability insurance with no exclusionary clause for asbestos.

Automobile liability: C.3 specifies automobile liability coverage. Does this requirement apply to contractor travel for on-site training when contract performance otherwise occurs remotely and involves no transportation of Government personnel or property?

Asbestos exclusion: C.3(d) requires evidence of general liability insurance without an asbestos exclusion. Please confirm whether this condition applies to this SaaS requirement, which involves software, support and training rather than asbestos-related work.

Insurance requirement are not required and the RFQ has been updated to reflect this.

36. C.9, VAAR 852.219-75(a)(1)(i), permits exclusion of certain other direct costs under 13 CFR 125.6 when they are not the principal purpose of the acquisition and small business concerns do not provide the service. For this procurement, must payments to a nonsimilarly situated SaaS publisher for the required annual subscription be included in the amount subject to the 50% limitation on subcontracting, or does the Government consider those subscription costs eligible for exclusion?

It does not appear SaaS in included in the other direct cost under 13 CFR 125.6. Therefore, limitations of subcontracting applies to this procurement.

37. E.2 names Tyrone Whalen as Contracting Officer, while the SF 1449 and the SAM.gov notice list Tyrone Whalen as Contract Specialist and Danielle Carrico as the secondary point of contact. Should quotes and any follow-up correspondence also be copied to danielle.carrico@va.gov?

Points of contact: copy Danielle Carrico along with Tyrone Whalen The RFQ lists Point of Contact: Contracting Specialist Tyrone Whalen, Tyrone.Whalen@va.gov.

38. Quotes are submitted by email with each part as a separate attachment and an email size limit of about 10 MB per email. Which file format does the Government require for each attachment (PDF for Parts I, III and IV, and Excel or PDF for Part II)? Is there a file naming convention or a required subject line? When a quote is sent over several emails, how should they be numbered, and will the Government confirm receipt of each?

For Parts I–IV, separate attachments are preferred, notes the ~10 MB email limit and that multiple emails may be sent. Formats, naming conventions, subject lines, numbering, etc are at the discretion of the Contractor. In general receipt confirmation is provided but not guaranteed.

39. E.2 does not specify page limits or formatting requirements for Part III (Technical) or Part IV (Past Performance). Please confirm that neither part is subject to a page limit or prescribed font, font size, spacing or margins. If limits apply, please identify them and explain whether covers, tables of contents, tables, charts and graphics count toward the page limits.

No page limits or formatting constraints are stated in E.2.

40. Does Part III require a separate paragraph-by-paragraph SOW compliance matrix in addition to responses to the ten technical questions?

Will product demonstrations be included in the evaluation? If so, please identify the format, scope and scheduling requirements.

Part III lists ten technical questions to address; a separate matrix or demos are not specified.

41. E.2 states that Parts I–III are required for further consideration, but also provides instructions for Part IV, and E.4 identifies Past Performance as Factor 2. Please confirm that Part IV must be submitted with the quote.

Part IV may be submitted if past performance information is available.

42. Part IV requires the square footage of the facility for each past performance reference. For software and IT services references, may quoters provide the number of supported users and sites, or other relevant measures of system scale, in place of facility square footage?

Yes, for software and IT service references, quoters may provide the number of supported users and sites in place for facility square footage.

43. Please confirm that quoters may submit relevant CPARS reports, together with the contract and reference information required by Part IV, without requiring a separate past performance questionnaire.

Quoters may submit relevant CPARS reports together with contract and reference information, a separate past performance questionnaire is not required.

44. Please confirm that quoters may submit relevant past performance of a proposed teaming partner that will furnish and support the SaaS platform, where the quote identifies the partner’s responsibilities and level of participation, and that the Government will consider that past performance in evaluating the proposed team.

The Government may consider past performance of a subcontractor and or teaming partner.

45. E.4 identifies Technical, Past Performance and Price as evaluation factors. Please clarify their relative importance in the comparative evaluation.

Will the Government first determine technical acceptability against mandatory SOW requirements before comparing acceptable quotes, or evaluate technical compliance and comparative merit together under the Technical factor?

E.4 states a comparative evaluation among Factor 1 (Technical), Factor 2 (Past Performance), Factor 3 (Price) and allows selection of other‑than‑lowest price for added benefits. It does not provide numeric weights; it emphasizes best overall value balancing high technical capability, satisfactory past performance, and competitive price.

46. Will the Government publish consolidated questions and answers on SAM.gov, and when does it anticipate doing so?

The Government will post the questions and answers on SAM.gov on 10/13/2026.

47. Reviewing the Portland EMS software RFQ. Please clarify whether the base and option-year prices should cover the 10 initial users in section 10.1 or the approximately 20 users described in the SOW, and how additional users/modules should be priced.

As noted in Q18, 10 initial users (10.1) and ~20 projected users appear; unlimited site licenses are required. Pricing guidance for additional users/modules is not specified. Unable to respond to this question beyond those facts.

48. Please also reconcile section 18.3's annual invoicing at the beginning of the period with B.1's invoicing upon delivery and acceptance. For an existing licensed SaaS product, what acceptance milestone permits annual invoicing?

See Q4: Annual invoicing at beginning of period is permitted after the system passes acceptance testing (6.1).

49. User count. The background section of the SOW says approximately 20 users, §10.1 requires licenses for 10 initial users, and §11.1 calls for unlimited site and interface licenses. How many named users should we price in Base CLIN 0001, and how many in option CLINs 1001–4001?

The RFQ does not assign user counts to specific CLINs; CLINs cover the annual software package.

50. Facilities. §11.1 refers to "individual facilities defined by the Government." Which facilities are in scope, and is it limited to Portland VAMC or does it include other VAPORHCS sites?

Place of performance is Portland VAMC; the RFQ does not list additional facilities but allows unlimited site licenses for facilities defined by the Government. Unable to respond to this question beyond that.

51. Training. §13.1 requires an on-site instructor at each facility. How many facilities and how many trainees per facility should we plan for? Is web-based training acceptable in place of on-site for any location? Is initial training the only requirement, or is refresher training expected in the option years?

The Government estimates that the on-site instructor will be at two facilities (Portland & Vancouver). The Government estimates that there will be 60 trainees for Portland and 40 trainees for Vancouver. On-site training will be the preferred method of training. At this time refresher training is not a requirement but may be considered at a later date via a mutual agreed upon modification.

52. Timeline. The base year starts on the go-live date (§2.1), and the software must be fully operational at award (§11.1). What is the anticipated award date and the target go-live date? Is 1/1/2027 a firm start?

The base period is listed as 01/01/2027–12/31/2027, and coverage starts at Go‑Live per SOW 2.1.

53. Data migration. The SOW mentions loading up to two years of EMS records. Roughly how many records, and in what formats?

Specific number of records and formats are not available and will vary if applicable. VA anticipates that historical data may not be available and accepts initiating new.

54. Budget. Is there an available budget or price range you can share?

This information will not be released.

55. SOW Section 17 requires registration on eMASS with a current VA ATO and FedRAMP ID number at contract award. Will the VA allow a 90-day post-award window for final eMASS authority boundary registration, provided the underlying cloud infrastructure host possesses an active FedRAMP Moderate/High authorization at bid submission?

The RFQ requires eMASS registration with current approved VA ATO; timing relaxation is not addressed.

56. Section 10 specifies an initial base count of 10 administrative user licenses for Portland VAMC, while Section 11 notes "unlimited non-exclusive software and interface site licenses". Does the Government intend to evaluate pricing strictly on the 10 initial named users in Section B.3, or will additional module/user pricing tiers be evaluated for potential VISN-wide expansion?

E.4 allows consideration of responses that exceed minimums if they benefit the Government, but it does not specify evaluation of tiered VISN pricing.

57. SOW Section 17.4 specifies a single-tenant deployment model, whereas Section 17 requires NIST 800-145 SaaS compliance. Is a dedicated, logically isolated single-tenant cloud container operating within a multi-tenant FedRAMP Moderate cloud environment fully compliant with this requirement?

See Q26. The RFQ’s single‑tenant requirement is compatible with a dedicated, logically isolated instance within a FedRAMP cloud.

58. Section 4 states the Contractor must load up to 2 years of legacy EMS records across disparate formats (Word, Excel, electronic forms). Will the VA provide a standardized data dictionary/schema prior to the kickoff meeting, or should data normalization and schema mapping be estimated as part of Phase 1 implementation?

See question 53

59. For Joint Ventures submitting under the LIONFORGE SDVOSB prime entity, will the contracting office evaluate the relevant technical past performance and system capabilities of the non-veteran JV partner (Banetti) on a basis equal to that of the prime contractor?

See question 44.

60. Section 13.1 requires both on-site classroom instruction and web-based training. How many dedicated days of on-site instructor-led training are anticipated at the Portland VA Medical Center facility during the initial go-live phase?

SOW 13.1 says each class is approximately one day; number of classes depends on the number of users/licenses and scheduling agreed with the POC.

61. Section 17 mentions the option for the platform to run on a virtual server hosted on the Government network. Is the VA’s preference a pure COTS FedRAMP SaaS cloud environment, or does Portland VAMC require an on-premises/VAEC virtual machine deployment option?

The RFQ requires SaaS hosted on FedRAMP‑approved infrastructure and that the system have the ability to run on a virtual server hosted on the Government network; it does not state a preference between cloud vs. VA‑hosted VM beyond those capabilities.

62. Section B.1 lists invoicing "Upon Delivery and Acceptance" while Section 18 states "submit invoices annually at beginning of the period". Could the Contracting Officer clarify whether billing is structured as an annual software subscription prepayment or as post-acceptance milestone billing?

See Q4/Q48: Annual billing at the beginning of the period is allowed after the system passes acceptance.

63. How many square feet of building/facility space is the solution anticipated to cover?

No square footage is provided for the Portland VAMC scope.

64. Page 2 states that the RFQ is for Portland Medical Center, but the narrative on page 6 references the VA Northwest Health Network. Please confirm whether the scope of work is for the Portland Medical Center or the Network.

The RFQ subject and place of performance identify Portland VA Medical Center; the SOW describes goals for VA Northwest Health Network and local/regional/national access/reporting. A definitive pricing scope beyond Portland is not specified. The data should be accessible to report up to the VA Northwest Health Network.

65. Can you provide an estimate of the number of records included in the two years of EMS records?

Unable to respond to this question.

66. Is this requirement specifically for the System and Acceptance Plan and not actual testing of the system within five days of contract award?

SOW 6.1 requires submitting the plan within 5 days; testing and acceptance occur per that plan before invoicing. It does not require all testing to be completed within five days, only that the plan be submitted in that timeframe.

67. How much downtime will VA allow before system rollover is required?

No downtime.

68. Please provide the definition of a National Crisis or details around what constitutes as a National Crisis.

A national crisis is a severe social, economic, or political event that affects a large portion of a country and requires the coordinated resources, power, and action of a national government to resolve

69. This states 10 initial users; however, the opening paragraph in Section B.2 states approximately 20 users. How many users does VA anticipate in the system?

See Question 51.

70. How many distinct facilities does VA anticipate to require training?

Facilities are not enumerated; training is required “at each facility

71. Is the telephone support referenced in this section different than the Help Desk Support identified in Section 9.2?

The Software Maintenance and Technical Support section states any telephone support is at no additional cost and describes Tier II Help Desk hours. The RFQ does not define them as separate services; “telephone support” appears as a channel of support under maintenance/technical support.

72. The Technical Kickoff Meeting is within 10 days of contract award; however, the System and Acceptance Plan is due within 5 days of contract award. Will VA consider receiving the System and Acceptance Plan 5 days after the Technical Kickoff Meeting?

SOW 6.1 explicitly requires the plan to be submitted within 5 days after award; Technical Kickoff occurs within 10 days after award. The RFQ does not permit shifting the plan due date to 5 days after kickoff.