693JJ326R000012 Questions and Government Responses.pdf

Request for Proposal (RFP) 693JJ326R000012 - Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Data Initiative

693JJ326R000012 Questions and Government’s Responses

# Question Government’s Responses

University subcontractors may have difficulty complying with the requirements of the Dissemination of Contract Information clause in TAR 1252.242-72. While

Section H.6 contains language indicating that offerors that are educational institutions will be subject to TAR 1252.242-70, it is unclear whether this also applies to subcontractors that are an educational institution. Could language be added stating that educational institution subcontractors will be subject to the

TAR clause 1252.242-70 Dissemination of Information—Educational

Institutions in lieu of 1252.242-72?

Yes. Please see RFP Amendment 1.

In the event that certain FAR clauses are required to flow down to universities, research institutes, and nonprofits, could additional alternate FAR clauses applicable to universities, research institutes, and nonprofit subcontractors be added to the contract? Alternatively, could certain FAR clauses that are not applicable to universities, research institutes, and nonprofit subcontractors be waived upon request?

If your organization or your subcontractors take exception to any of RFP clauses, please provide the supporting justification in your proposal.

Can FHWA confirm that there are no specific categories designated as “key personnel” and that the Offeror may select which categories it considers to be

“key” for purposes of this submittal?

Offerors may identify and propose labor categories they consider to be Key Personnel for the purposes of their proposal.

If a specific individual is proposed under a certain labor category, but later during the term of the contract qualifies for a more senior labor category based on education/years of experience, can that individual be placed into and invoice at the more senior labor category if they meet those requirements?

No. As this is a firm-fixed price (FFP) contract, changes in an individual’s labor category during contract performance do not affect the contract price or invoice. The Contractor is responsible for providing qualified personnel to perform the required work.

Does FHWA want separate rates for each subcontractor to be included in the

Price Proposal, or only one set of rates for the entire team?

No. As stated in the RFP, this is a FFP contract.

Separate labor rates for individual subcontractors or team members are not required, but can be submitted in the Price Proposal.

Should proposers include annual salary escalation within their proposed fully loaded rates?

Offerors should propose fully loaded rates based on their own pricing methodology. As this is a FFP contract, proposed prices should account for all costs the Offeror expects to incur during contract performance, including any anticipated salary escalation, as applicable.

Request for Proposal (RFP) 693JJ326R000012 - Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Data Initiative

Phase I / Volume I Technical Capability proposal part states Cover Information and Table of Contents 1 Page. Does FHWA want a table of contents on the bottom of the cover information or can table of contents be its own page and begin on page 2?

Yes. The Table of Contents must be included at the bottom of the Cover Information page.

Could you please clarify whether Corporate Experience in AI data processing and pipeline development applied in non-transportation domains may be considered "relevant" under Factor 2, provided the technical nature of the work is substantially similar to the TSMO data challenges described in the SOO?

Please refer to the description of the “relevant” RFP

Factor 2.

Section H.8 provides that FHWA will have unlimited rights, as defined in FAR

27.401, in “software and source code delivered under this contract”. FAR Part

27.4 and the associated clauses (FAR 52.227-14, 52.2227-19) distinguish between (a) computer software first produced in the performance of the contract, in which the Government customarily receives unlimited rights, and (b) pre-existing commercial computer software and software developed at private expense, which is customarily delivered with restricted rights or under the developer’s standard commercial license. As written, H.8 appears to extend unlimited rights, including the right to publicly release source code, to all delivered software, including commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) and privately funded pre-existing software incorporated into the solution, which could have the unintended consequence of limiting FHWA’s access to effective COTS and pre-existing software solutions given a contractor’s desire to protect its proprietary source code. As to avoid such an outcome will the Government confirm that H.8 is intended to apply only to software first produced in the performance of this contract, and that pre-existing, commercial, or privately developed software (and third-party software) delivered under the contract will be provided in accordance with FAR 52.227-14(g)/52.227-19, i.e., with restricted rights or under applicable commercial license terms, provided such software is identified in accordance with the applicable clause? If so, will the Government amend H.8 accordingly, as suggested below?

“Notwithstanding any other clause in this contract, the FHWA will have

“unlimited rights,” as defined and set forth in FAR 52.227-14 that term is defined in FAR 27.401, in the software and source code first produced delivered under

Yes. See RFP Amendment 1.

Request for Proposal (RFP) 693JJ326R000012 - Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Data Initiative this contract. As a result, the FHWA may modify and distribute the software and source code to the public without restriction.”

Corporate Experience via proposed subcontractor. Section L.6 (Phase I, Volume

I, Part III) states that each corporate-experience description must contain a narrative of "work performed by the Offeror or proposed subcontractor," while

Section M.2, Factor 2, states the Government will assess "whether the Offeror demonstrates five or more years of successfully executed TSMO data processing experience." Please confirm whether the mandatory five-year TSMO data-processing experience requirement may be satisfied in whole or in part through one or more proposed subcontractors that will perform a substantial portion of the TSMO data-processing work under the resulting contract.

Yes. The mandatory corporate experience may be satisfied in whole or in part, through proposed subcontractors.

Subcontractor commitment documentation. If proposed-subcontractor experience is used to satisfy Factor 2 in Phase I, what documentation of the subcontractor's commitment, if any, should be included in the Phase I submission (for example, a signed letter of commitment, proposed workshare, UEI/CAGE, or named technical lead), and does such documentation count against the Phase I page limits?

Please include a signed letter of commitment, which is excluded from the page limit for this section, along with the workshare information.

Continuous versus cumulative experience. For the mandatory five-year TSMO data-processing experience requirement, may the five years be demonstrated through multiple recent projects that cumulatively span five or more years, or must a single entity demonstrate one continuous five-year period?

The required experience may be demonstrated through multiple projects performed during the past five years.

Section L.6 allows a Corporate Experience description to cover work by the offeror or a proposed subcontractor, while Section M.2 refers to five or more years of experience demonstrated by the offeror. May a proposed subcontractor's verified experience satisfy that Phase I threshold? If so, how will FHWA evaluate the combined experience?

Yes. The mandatory corporate experience may be satisfied in whole or in part, through proposed subcontractors. Offerors are required to demonstrate that they have the experience to perform the work whether via Prime and/or subcontractor experience, following Section L instructions.

Section C.2 calls for prototype solutions for at least two AI-TSMO use cases.

Section C.5 calls for at least two preliminary prototypes addressing data challenges for at least one use case. What is the minimum prototype-to-use-case mapping expected during the base period?

Correction:

1. Identify the highest-priority data-related challenges limiting the use of AI in TSMO for at least two use cases

Request for Proposal (RFP) 693JJ326R000012 - Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Data Initiative

2. Develop at least two prototype solutions for data challenges limiting the use of AI in TSMO for at least one AI-TSMO use case

Please see RFP Amendment 1.

Section L.5 says covers and tables of contents do not count against page limits.

The Phase I table assigns one page to Cover Information and Table of Contents, while the detailed instructions mention only Cover Information. Does Phase I require a table of contents, and does that one page count toward the Phase I limit? May the required AI-use disclosure and verification certification also appear on that page?

Yes, Phase I requires a Table of Contents, which must be inserted at the bottom of the Cover Information page.

The SF33 cover and both Phase II cover instructions state a 120-day validity period, but the Phase II SF33 instructions require at least 180 days. Which period controls, and what should offerors place in the Phase II cover statements and

SF33 Block 12?

120 days. Please see RFP Amendment 1.

Section H.3 refers to FHWA Form 4260, but Section J lists no exhibits and the form is not included in the posted PDF. Which version of Form 4260 will apply to ICT deliverables?

Please use the link provided in the RFP.

The SF33 cover says page 1 of 46, while the posted PDF has 44 pages and ends at page 44 of 44. Section G.9 also says FAR 52.228-7 is incorporated in Section

I, but that clause is not listed there. Is the posted 44-page file complete, and does

FAR 52.228-7 apply?

It is a typo. The RFP has 44 pages.

The FHWA definition of TSMO data (Link) [ops.fhwa.dot.gov]) is very broad. Is there anything FHWA considers out of scope for TSMO data experience for this specific RFP?

FHWA does not intend to further define “TSMO data” beyond the information provided in the RFP. Offerors should develop their proposals based on their understanding of the RFP requirements.

To promote fair and equitable competition, can the government confirm whether additional information to help vendors determine the level of effort for pricing will be provided to those selected for Phase 2?

The estimated amount for this effort is $750K.

We are preparing a compliant Phase I technical capability response and would appreciate confirmation of the official submission instructions, required attachments/volumes, amendment package, and whether a focused small-business validation/prototype role is responsive to the solicitation path.

Please refer to RFP Amendment 1.

https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/plan4ops/focus_areas/integrating/operations_strategies.htm http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/

Request for Proposal (RFP) 693JJ326R000012 - Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Data Initiative

Section M states that the mandatory Corporate Experience requirement is "five or more years of TSMO data processing experience." The evaluation criteria define "relevant" experience as work that is "the same or similar in nature, size, and complexity to services being procured." Our firm brings extensive experience in AI-driven data pipeline design, multi-source data integration, automated data quality assessment, metadata standardization, and LLM-based data preprocessing and classification — applied across multiple industries. These are the same core data science competencies required to identify and address

TSMO data challenges.

Could you please clarify whether Corporate Experience in AI data processing and pipeline development applied in non-transportation domains may be considered "relevant" under Factor 2, provided the technical nature of the work is substantially similar to the TSMO data challenges described in the SOO?

FHWA will evaluate corporate experience in accordance with the evaluation criteria in the RFP.

Offerors should clearly justify the similarity and relevance of the referenced work to the requirements of this solicitation.

Could you advise whether a specialist AI/data-orchestration firm may participate through a teaming arrangement and whether there are particular Phase I capability areas where this approach would be useful? We can provide a concise technical capability statement after confirming the appropriate submission path.

The RFP does not prescribe specific teaming arrangements. Offerors are responsible for determining their team composition and should address the evaluation criteria in Section M of the RFP.

Under C2 #2, the RFP says that one objective is to “Develop prototype solutions…for at least 2 AI-TSMO use cases”. However, under the fifth bullet in

C5 “Base Period”, it says that a major objective is to “Develop at least two preliminary prototypes (e.g., algorithms and models) to address…at least one AI-

TSMO use case”. Are we developing two prototypes for two use cases or two prototypes for one use case?

Correction:

1. Identify the highest-priority data-related challenges limiting the use of AI in TSMO for at least two use cases

2. Develop at least two prototype solutions for data challenges limiting the use of AI in TSMO for at least one AI-TSMO use case

Please see RFP Amendment 1.

“Private data providers” are mentioned. If data from these sources is needed for prototype development, will FHWA facilitate/fund access, or should we budget for data licensing?

FHWA will facilitate access as needed. However, the

Offeror is assumed to take responsibility to obtain data access and license to use. Please be advised that this is a FFP contract.

What is the expected maturity level/TRL of the developed prototypes?

a) The RFP mentions “algorithms and models” and “minimum viable product”, which cover a wide range.

Research prototype.

Request for Proposal (RFP) 693JJ326R000012 - Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Data Initiative

The end of section C5 states that “The Contractor is expected to exchange information as needed…with members of other project teams supported by the

JPO AI Program”. Are there specific projects we should be aware of, and is there an expected frequency/method of collaboration?

FHWA anticipates minimal coordination with other

JPO project teams. Any collaboration or information exchange will occur, through electronic means, only as necessary to support the objectives of the contract.

We recognize that TSMO agencies vary in their data and technology readiness. Is this effort intended to also support agencies with more limited existing hardware/software capabilities, or is the primary focus on advancing more mature regions that are ready to deploy new capabilities?

a) For example, some agencies may be able to run LLM solutions locally but be constrained by available hardware, while others may leverage existing cloud deployments but be constrained by costs and data transfer limitations.

The specific focus area should be determined through stakeholder engagement during contract performance.

How many AI-TSMO use cases should be considered in the prototypes? The objectives specify “two” while the tasks specify “at least one.”

•from objectives: Develop prototype solutions for data challenges limiting the use of AI in TSMO for at least 2 AI-TSMO use cases

•from tasks: Develop at least two preliminary prototypes (e.g., algorithms and models) to address high-priority data-related gaps and challenges faced by at least one AI TSMO use case.

Correction:

1. Identify the highest-priority data-related challenges limiting the use of AI in TSMO for at least two use cases

2. Develop at least two prototype solutions for data challenges limiting the use of AI in TSMO for at least one AI-TSMO use case

Please see RFP Amendment 1.

What is the expectation of a prototype? (from Performance Objectives:

“preliminary prototype (e.g. algorithms and models)”)

Does FHWA have a minimum technology readiness level for the prototypes? Are the prototypes required to integrate with AI to demonstrate objective?

The project expects research prototype. FHWA leaves to the Offeror to determine the appropriate metrics for testing and demonstrating the success of the proposed research prototype solutions.

Does the prototype have to be applied to a national-level dataset, or can it be focused on a smaller geographic dataset that is transferable to national-level applications?

FHWA leaves it to the Offeror to determine the appropriate data set (s) for testing and demonstrating the success of the research prototype solutions.

What is the projected date for Phase I advisory notice and RFP release date for

Phase II?

September 2026.

Section M.2, Factor 2 requires "five or more years of TSMO data processing experience." Would substantial commercial transportation-operations data processing experience (e.g., real-time fleet telemetry ingestion, route optimization, and dispatch operations for private-sector fleets) be considered

FHWA will evaluate corporate experience in accordance with the evaluation criteria in the RFP.

Offerors should clearly justify the similarity and

Request for Proposal (RFP) 693JJ326R000012 - Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Data Initiative relevant toward this mandatory requirement, or is experience with public-agency

TSMO systems specifically required?

relevance of the referenced work to the requirements of this solicitation.

May the mandatory five-year TSMO data processing experience requirement in

Factor 2 be satisfied in whole or in part by a proposed subcontractor's experience?

Yes, the mandatory corporate experience can be satisfied in whole or in part through proposed subcontractor. Please refer to Section M.2 of the RFP.

Is there an anticipated budget range or magnitude for the base period of performance that offerors should design toward?

The estimated amount for this effort is $750K.

Section C.2 – Scope of Mission / Section C.5 – Performance Objectives

Will the contractor be responsible for selecting the AI-TSMO use cases to be evaluated, or does FHWA have an initial set of preferred or candidate use cases that offerors should consider?

FHWA anticipates the use cases will be identified through stakeholder engagement during the contract performance.

Section C.5 – Performance Objectives

The SOO requires development of prototype solutions for "at least two" AI-

TSMO use cases. Should offerors base their proposals on exactly two prototypes, or should the proposed solution be scalable to accommodate additional use cases if directed by the Government?

Correction:

3. Identify the highest-priority data-related challenges limiting the use of AI in TSMO for at least two use cases

4. Develop at least two prototype solutions for data challenges limiting the use of AI in TSMO for at least one AI-TSMO use case

Please see RFP Amendment 1.

Sections C.4 and C.5

Will FHWA provide Government-owned datasets, previous research products, or other existing resources to support this effort, or should offerors assume responsibility for identifying and obtaining all data necessary to perform the work?

The Offerors is responsible for identifying and obtaining all data necessary to perform the work required. FHWA will facilitate as needed.

Section C.5 – Inventory of National Data Sources

Should the inventory of national data sources include only publicly available datasets, or should commercial and proprietary data sources also be evaluated?

FHWA does not specify data sources and leaves the offeror to decide what data sources should be considered for proposed AI TSMO use cases.

Section C.5 – Performance Objectives

Does FHWA have priority AI-TSMO application areas (e.g., congestion management, incident management, work zones, freight operations, traveler information, connected vehicle operations) that should receive greater emphasis, or should offerors independently prioritize use cases?

FHWA does not have use case prioritization and anticipates this should be determined through stakeholder engagements.

Request for Proposal (RFP) 693JJ326R000012 - Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Data Initiative

Section C.5 – Prototype Development

What level of maturity is expected for the prototype deliverables? Is FHWA seeking proof-of-concept demonstrations, research prototypes, or production-ready software?

Research prototypes.

Section H.8 – Source Code for Software

May contractors incorporate existing commercial software, internally developed reusable components, or open-source software into the prototype solutions, provided all applicable licensing requirements are identified?

The prototype solutions should be software agnostics.

Section C.5 – Stakeholder Engagement

Approximately how many stakeholder interviews, workshops, or engagement sessions does FHWA anticipate during the prioritization and requirements development phases?

FHWA does not have specifications and leaves the

Offeror to propose an approach that best supports the successful contract performance.

Section G.4 – Travel and Per Diem

Since travel is not currently anticipated, should offerors assume all stakeholder engagement, workshops, and meetings will be conducted virtually for pricing purposes?

FHWA does not have specifications and leaves the offeror to decide to best support the success of the project.

Section C.5 – Communications Materials

Should offerors include the preparation of presentation materials, facilitation, meeting documentation, and workshop summaries within the fixed-price proposal?

All project costs shall be included in the firm-fixed price proposal.

Section C.5 – Prototype Development

Does FHWA anticipate a regular sprint review or demonstration cadence during prototype development, or should offerors propose their own iterative development schedule?

A regular sprint review or demonstration cadence during prototype development is encouraged.

Section C.5 – Technical Deliverables

Will FHWA establish acceptance criteria or measurable performance objectives for evaluating the success of the prototype solutions, or should offerors propose their own evaluation metrics?

FHWA anticipates the Offeror will develop rigorous approaches to evaluate the success of the prototype.

The evaluation approaches and criteria must be approved by FHWA.

Section L.6 – Technical Approach

The solicitation requires submission of a draft Statement of Work. Does FHWA expect offerors to define detailed tasks, subtasks, deliverables, and schedules beyond the objectives identified in the Statement of Objectives?

FHWA leaves the Offeror to determine the format presentation of the draft Statement of Work that best demonstrates their Technical Approach.

49 Section L.6 – Proposal Format Yes.

Request for Proposal (RFP) 693JJ326R000012 - Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Data Initiative

Are organizational charts, schedules, process flow diagrams, graphics, and figures included within the applicable page limitations for the proposal volumes?

Section M.2 – Factor 2, Corporate Experience

The solicitation identifies a mandatory requirement for five or more years of

TSMO data processing experience. Would FHWA consider projects involving transportation data engineering, ITS data integration, AI/ML applications, connected vehicle data, traffic operations analytics, or transportation data modernization efforts to satisfy this requirement, provided they are similar in scope and complexity?

FHWA will evaluate the relevance of the experience to

TSMO use cases and data with more information provided in the proposals.

Section M.2 – Technical Approach

In evaluating technical proposals, how will FHWA balance innovative research concepts with implementation risk? For example, if two approaches satisfy the objectives, will greater consideration be given to technical innovation or to lower-risk implementation strategies?

FHWA will evaluate proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in Section M of the RFP.

The evaluation will consider all applicable factors, including the Offeror’s approach to innovation and risk management, as reflected in the proposal.

Based on the current acquisition schedule, is the Government still targeting contract award in September 2026, or has the anticipated award timeframe changed?

Government targets contract award in FY27 1st Quarter.

Since the solicitation does not identify an estimated contract value, would it be reasonable to look to similar FHWA or USDOT research and development procurements as a general reference when estimating the potential value of this opportunity, or would those not be representative of this acquisition?

The estimated amount for this effort is $750K.

We as a company are currently applying for a SIBR DOT grant that Is similar in scope to what you are asking for. We would love to submit our idea to you as well in full detail of what we are doing. Is there any crossover that is not allowed here?

If you believe your solution fits this requirement, please submit a Phase I proposal.