CR-374590 Appendix A - Clarifications and Offeror Questions.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 53 KB Posted
- Attached to
- End User Support for Argonne National Laboratory & Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
- Solicitation number
- 6-B162-P-00001-00-CR-374590
- Issued by
-
Department of Energy Office of Science
About this file
Appendix A is a document containing clarifications and questions related to the End User Support solicitation for Argonne National Laboratory and Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. The file appears to be part of an addendum to the original Request for Proposal (RFP), specifically addressing offeror-submitted questions and providing associated clarifications. The solicitation is for end user support services across two Department of Energy (DOE) national laboratories, with UChicago Argonne, LLC and Fermi Forward Discovery Group, LLC seeking a single contractor to provide services for both facilities. The RFP requires separate but coordinated proposal responses, with Argonne and Fermi planning to independently evaluate proposals and jointly select a single offeror using a Best Value/Trade-Off methodology. Correspondence for the solicitation is to be directed to jsladetz@anl.gov and hairston@fnal.gov, with the opportunity managed by the Department of Energy Office of Science.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| CR-374590 Memorandum for Q and A - End User Support.doc | DOC document | |
| 6-B162-P-00001-00 Addendum 1.doc | DOC document | |
| End User Support - Request for Proposal Cover Letter.pdf | ||
| CR-374590 Fermi RFP.zip | ZIP file | |
| 6-B162-P-00001-00 Argonne RFP.zip | ZIP file | |
| End User Support - Request for Proposal Cover Letter.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| RFP: 374590 - IT Managed Services and Support | |
| Questions | Answers |
| Is this a new requirement? If not, could you please share the incumbent contractor’s name and the current contract value? | Not a new requirement. We will not share this information |
| Could you provide the historical staffing matrix and the number of full-time staff currently supporting this requirement? | No |
| What phone system is currently in use? Will the selected vendor inherit the existing system or be responsible for providing a new one? | There is a section in the SOW on ACD |
| Could you provide a breakdown of incidents handled during business hours, after-hours, and weekends? | See Attachment A3 After hours tickets on Contact Channel report |
| Are there any Key Personnel positions defined or expected as part of this requirement? | For Fermilab key personnel is TBD based on proposed staffing. Section H5 Attachment D. |
| In the submission instructions, vendors are asked to provide Performance References demonstrating at least 10 years of experience. Does this mean that vendors must submit a reference that is 10 years old, or that the company should demonstrate a minimum of 10 years of relevant experience overall? | 10 years of relevant experience |
| Please confirm whether a knowledge base currently exists and will be transitioned to the new contractor. | Knowledge Articles and Runbooks |
| Will there be two separate awards, one for Argonne and one for Fermi, or a single award covering both laboratories? | One vendor will be choosen with two Awards |
| Is your teams are open to AI-based operational augmentation—particularly in areas such as: | Yes with appropriate approvals and oversight. |
| Tier 1 support automation (ticket triage, knowledge base updates, request routing) | Yes with appropriate approvals and oversight. |
| IT asset and license tracking | Yes with appropriate approvals and oversight. |
| Endpoint and configuration management | Yes with appropriate approvals and oversight. |
| SLA documentation and audit readiness | Yes with appropriate approvals and oversight. |
| Process execution across ITIL domains (incident, change, problem) | Yes with appropriate approvals and oversight. |
| Question: Please confirm that the three (3) page limit applies to each individual past performance example, rather than a total of three pages for all examples combined. | 3 pages total | |
| In the pricing template, Rows 14 and 20 do not sum all the rquired services or Total Managed Servises, are biddrs responsible for insuring all calculations are correct? | Yes | |
| Please clarify the Base Term Period 1 end date stated in Attachment D which varies from that stated in the Pricing Template which has an end date of May 30, 2028. | Attachement D is a sample document - Please reffer to Attachment C, Sec 4.6 Terms of Order | |
| Will this subcontract require the Subcontractor to submit an ES&H Program or Plan or submit Attachment C with the proposal? | Yes | |
| Will this subcontract require the Subcontractor to submit an ES&H Program or Plan or submit Attachment A with the proposal? | Yes | |
| Can the Government confirm Fermilab is not currently transitioning away from ServiceNow? | Not at this time | |
| The instructions state: “The proposal shall contain two parts: (1) a Technical Proposal and (2) a Cost Proposal.” |
The RFP also lists several required forms under the note:
“These forms need to be completed and returned with your offer:”
SARC Subcontractor Annual Reps & Certs Rev. 4 PUR-466 Proposal Certifications Rev. 2 FL-55 Small Business Plan (Rev. 6-23) FL-57A Organizational Conflict of Interest (Rev. 1-07)
| Can the Government please confirm which proposal part each of the above forms should be included in? | These forms will be retunred serparte from the proposal parts of the RFQ | |
| The RFP instructions state: “The Seller shall address their technical approach to achieving day-to-day operations and special response procedures for quick reaction requirements, including all activities proposed to satisfy the requirements of each sub element in the SOW.” However, the Evaluation Criteria appear to address only a subset of the SOW requirements. Can the Government confirm whether the offeror is required to provide technical responses for all SOW requirements, or only for those specifically referenced within the Evaluation Criteria? | Both - required to provide technical responses for all SOW requirements and for those specifically referenced within the Evaluation Criteria? | |
| "To be considered responsive, the Seller must demonstrate a minimum of ten years of recent experience in providing similar services or solutions as required in this RFP/SOW. The Seller must describe their qualifications and experience provided to the public sector and R&D clients." - Is this a cumulative of ten years across all 3 references, or do we need a contract that spans 10 years (and was awarded within the last 5 years). | cumulative of ten years across references | |
| "Limit past performance information to three pages." - Would the Government consider raising Past Performance section page limitation to six (6) pages? | No - 3 pages max | |
| Section 4.3.1 states: “The Seller shall identify and demonstrate the availability of key personnel to perform under this contract. The Seller must submit resumes of key personnel and provide sufficient information to demonstrate the qualifications, education, and relevancy of experience of each of the proposed key personnel to perform in the position. Proof will include the degree of commitment, availability, technical and/or managerial/supervisory experience, and professional achievements as well as the relevance, recentness, and depth of previous experience of the key individual(s) assigned to this contract.” |
After reviewing all solicitation attachments, we were unable to locate any specific listing or definition of required key personnel positions for the Fermilab solicitation.
| Can the Government please confirm which key personnel roles (if any) are required to be identified and resumes submitted with the proposal? | For Fermilab key personnel is TBD based on proposed staffing. Section H5 Attachment D. | |
| Can the Government please confirm key personnel resumes are not subject to any page limits? | Limit to 3 pages | |
| Can the Government please confirm that completion of “Exhibit A 7020 SURF Leased SERVICES_April_2025” is a post-award action? Or is bidder required to complete and provide with proposal submission? | This is a pre-award action | |
| FL-55 Small Business Plan (Rev. 6-23) does not specify goal percentages for each small business designation. Can the government please confirm offerors should use the DOE small business goals as noted in the SBA's Agency contracting goals file titled: “Small Business Procurement - F25 SB Goals - One Page_2.24.2025” (found here: https://www.sba.gov/document/support-agency-contracting-goals) : |
ENERGY, DEPARTMENT OF (8900)
Prime Small Business Goal - 17.03% Prime Small Disadvantaged Business Goal - 5.00% Prime Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Goal -5.00% Prime Women Owned Small Business Goal -5.00% Prime HUBZone Small Business Goal -3.00%
Subcontract Small Business Goal - 49.00% Subcontract Small Disadvantaged Business Goal - 5.00% Subcontract Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Goal -5.00% Subcontract Women Owned Small Business Goal - 5.00%
| Subcontract HUBZone Small Business Goal - 3.00% | Yes - DOE small business goals as noted in the SBA's Agency contracting goals file titled: “Small Business Procurement - F25 SB Goals - One Page_2.24.2025” (found here: https://www.sba.gov/document/support-agency-contracting-goals) : | |
| If a Small Business Subcontracting plan is required, should the offeror include the SB subk plan in Part I or Part II of the submission? | Part 1 | |
| PUR-466_Proposal Certifications 2 states it's REQUIRED FOR ALL PROPOSALS at certain thresholds. This form appears to have certifications that are in regard to products only. If offeror is proposing only services, should the offeror leave any section related to products only blank? | Yes | |
| Can the Government please confirm the awarded subcontract award will be made directly from Fermi Forward Discovery Group, LLC (FFDG)? | Yes | |
| Can the government confirm there are no clearance requirements for any of the personnel employed under this contract? | Yes | |
| Could the Government please confirm the contract number and identify the incumbent contractor associated with the referenced task order? | No | |
| To enhance consistency in support, facilitate joint initiatives, improve cross-laboratory communication and coordination, and achieve cost and staffing efficiencies for the Government, can key personnel be concurrently utilized by both Fermi and Argonne? | Yes as long a the needs of both Lab are met. | |
| 1. Are there any incumbent providers for these services? | Yes | |
| 2. Is there a preferred technology stack or toolset for Service Desk and Asset Management? | ServiceNow | |
| 3. What are the expected SLAs for each service area? | See Attachment B | |
| 4. Are there specific compliance audits or certifications required for the prime bidder (e.g., ISO20000, FedRAMP)? | Compliance certifications are desirable | |
| 5. Can you clarify the scope for South Dakota support and any unique requirements? | General IT Support see section 3.2.1 | |
| 6. What are the transition expectations and timelines? | We expect to be building plan by 8/2026 and agreeing to that plan by 10/1/26. Transition to occur between 12/12/2026 - 3/11/2027 | |
| 7. Are there any restrictions on remote/off-site support? | Depends on the role. Some roles require an onsite presence. While there are no restrictions we expect the seller to be flexible and adjust to Lab policy updates. | |
| 8. What is the process for handling major incidents and escalation? | Runbook Documentation exist for handling major incidents and escalation. | |
| 9. Are there any anticipated changes to the scope during the contract term? | Not at this time | |
| 10. Is there any specific format or template to provide the required references? | See Attachment C | |
| 11. Request for extension of the RFP due date by 30 days. | No, we are not extending the RFP DL | |
| 12. Are exceptions to the RFP terms and condition are accepted, if yes please clarify if there is any format or template to provide them. | Exceptions to Terms should be redlined on the FFDG General Terms and Conditions for Commercial Products and Commercial Services (08.2025) docuemnts and returned | |
| Multiple attachments reference equipment rental or leased services. Is an offeror-proposed ownership model (contractor-furnished equipment with amortized pricing) acceptable in lieu of rental? If not, please define the standard rental term, refresh cycle, and any buy-out provisions at end-of-life. | Fermilab equipment is owned | |
| Does the rental requirement apply only to end-user computing devices (e.g., laptops, desktops, peripherals), or also include AV, print, and network devices? | Fermilab equipment is owned | |
| Can Fermi provide a baseline inventory list of assets (by category, quantity, and average age) to support accurate pricing? | Fermilab equipment is owned. Attachment A6 lists the current Servers which are out of warranty and are being serviced under the Enhanced Server Support service of current provider. | |
| For managed print and AV services, does Fermi intend to retain existing OEM maintenance agreements, or should the contractor include maintenance and consumables in pricing? | Contractor should include maitenance and consumable in pricing. | |
| Will the incoming contractor assume existing equipment leases or rentals from the incumbent, or will all devices transition to new contracts upon award? | Fermilab equipment is owned | |
| Will Fermi provide ticket volume by month and by service category (for example, tickets associated with data center systems) in an excel format for accurate estimations? | 20 Percent of incidents are Deskside Support the remainder is evenly distributed across categories. see Attachment A3 for ticket volume. | |
| Key Personnel – would the Government consider removing resumes from page count and allowing 3 pages per resume? | Yes | |
| Could Fermilab clarify the level and scope of support expected for MSP-MSC Ad hoc Catalog tasks? | In general these are associated with account management. Currently there is no SLAs associated with these tasks. Overtime we are looking to make this more defined. | |
| Can Fermilab provide exact service desk volumes to be considered. | It’s a combination of the charts in Attachment A3. | |
| The SOW states “This individual must be able to handle a wide variety of IT tasks and also be willing to work underground, in tunnels and remote buildings.” Can you expand upon the details of the “underground, in tunnel” requirements? | The research area is approximately mile underground. The tech may perform desktop support or assist with troubleshooting newtork problems. Safety training is a requirement. | |
| The SOW seems to indicate the desire for a single on-site lead in SD. With a single FTE, is there an understanding that support will need to be virtual during normal PTO of the on-site staff? | Contigency planning should be in place if there is an extended PTO. | |
| The Combined Required Services has offerors price the Combined Service 1 (Fermi Portion) and Combined Service 2 (Fermi Portion). Does Service 1 and Service 2 refer to the required Services in rows 15:19? If so, which services go in Service 1 and which go in Service 2? | The Combined Services Pricing section should only be used if the Seller can show cost savings realized by Fermi by issuing a joint RFP with Argonne (List the name of the Service) | |
| The Combined Optional Services has offerors price the Combined Service A (Fermi Portion) and Combined Service B (Fermi Portion). Does Service A and Service B refer to the Optional Services in rows 44:52? If so, which services go in Service A and which go in Service B? | The Combined Services Pricing section should only be used if the Seller can show cost savings realized by Fermi by issuing a joint RFP with Argonne (List the name of the Service) | |
| This document indicates that the RFP consists of two separate proposal requests. It further states that Offerors must provide individual responses to each proposal request separately and must be responsive to both proposal requests to be considered for selection. Does this mean that if an offeror proposes for only one of the two proposal requests it will not be evaluated? | No - It will be evaluated | |
| We appreciate that there are separate evaluation criteria provided for each proposal. Can the Laboratories also provide the criteria that they will jointly apply to select a single offeror that represents the best overall value to both Laboratories? | We are going to apply our jointly requirements | |
| Is there a page limitation (or limitations) on the Fermi proposal submission? | Not to our knowledge | |
| The Argonne proposal is based on best value/trade-off but the Fermi proposal only states best value. The laboratories will jointly determine a single awardee. Is there a material difference in the method of evaluation between the two laboratories? | No | |
| Transition plan is for 60 days but is 90 days for the Argonne contract. If there is a single awardee for both contracts, does the laboratory have a reason for the difference in the length of the transitions? | Attachement C section Term of Order 4.6 shows the Transition Period. | |
| Is there a preferred font type and size for the proposal submission, and are there any restrictions or guidelines regarding the size, resolution, or formatting of graphics, tables, or charts included in the proposal? | No | |
| Are there any total page limits or section-specific page limits for the technical and cost proposals, including appendices ? Also please clarify whether appendices count toward the overall page count. | No | |
| Could you please confirm whether the three-page limit applies to each individual past performance reference or to the entire reference performance section collectively? | No - 3 pages max | |
| As noted, “These forms need to be completed and returned with your offer: Pricing Matrix – IT Managed Services and Support, SARC Subcontractor Annual Reps & Certs Rev 4, PUR-466 Proposal Certifications Rev 2, FL-55 Small Business Plan (Rev. 6-23), and FL-57A Organizational Conflict of Interest (Rev. 1-07).” |
| Could you please confirm whether these forms should be included as part of the Technical Proposal, the Price Proposal, or submitted as separate documents? | Not a Question - Yes they need to be retuend see line 23 of spread sheet | |
| Could you please confirm if there is a page limit or formatting requirement for the key personnel resumes to be included in the proposal submission? Also do we need the Letter of Commitment for them ? | No | |
| Could you please confirm the required list of key personnel positions and the expected number of Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs) to be proposed for this contract? | For Fermilab key personnel is TBD based on proposed staffing. Section H5 Attachment D. | |
| Can we utilize the same Key Personnel (KP) for both the Argonne National Laboratory and Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory projects, or is separate staffing required for each contract? | Yes as long a the needs of both Lab are met. | |
| As stated, “If the Seller intends to subcontract various services/solutions, the Seller must describe their experience managing subcontractors and their relationship or experience with the proposed subcontractors. The Seller must submit three past performance references that cover the requested services outlined in this Statement of Work.” |
| Could you please clarify whether these three past performance references must be specific to the proposed subcontractors, or if they may include a combination of the Prime Contractor’s and subcontractors’ relevant past performance covering the requested services in the Statement of Work? | It can be any combination of contractors | |
| Could you please provide the incumbent details like company name and the existing contract value? | No | |
| Could you please confirm if Fermi Labs is open to introduce latest COTS solutions to enhance the operations for the services outlined in the SOW? | Yes with appropriate approvals | |
| The Best Value Selection paragraph states that orals may be conducted for vendors in the competitive range, and that the presentations shall be part of the evaluation; but does not specify either the part of the evaluation, order of precedence, or weighting of the orals as part of the determination. Please clarify. | If a clear best value is not determined through the written prosposal we will use Oral Presentations to detrmine best value. | |
| In the Cover Letter, Item B states "Offerors should be prepared to respond to requests by the Laboratories for oral presentations or written discussions, or both, facility surveys, and other information as may be necessary to assist in the detailed evaluation process." |
Att C Instructions states "Following the submission and initial evaluation of vendor proposals, Fermilab may request selected vendors within a technical competitive range to present their proposals on-site to the Fermilab Technical Evaluation Committee."
| If down-selected and if oral presentations are required, will Offerors be required to present both the Argonne and the Fermi proposals orally? | Only the Lab that down selects the Vender | |
| The Cover Letter indicates oral presentations may be required, though only the FermiLab Instructions mention orals presentations. If down-selected and if oral presentations are required, will Offerors also be required to present the Argonne proposal orally? | Argonne needs to answer this question | |
| For planning purposes, approximately how long after proposal submission will down-selected Offerors be notified of down-select and advancement to oral presentations if required? | Two to Three Months | |
| For planning purposes, approximately how long after notification of down-select and advancement to oral presentations will the oral presentations be held? | Aproximately 30 days | |
| Please clarify what presentation materials (e.g., slides)—if any—will be required to be submitted as part of oral presentations? If so, when will the slides be required to be submitted? | Provide information such as Org Charts, explanations of combined services, staffing plans and what ever you need to convey the strength of your solution. | |
| If oral presentations are required, what is the maximum amount of time Offerors will receive to present? | Approximately 2 to 3 hours | |
| Please clarify who (e.g., numbers of presenters, functions of presenters) from invited Offerors will be required to present orals? | No Requirement | |
| If an offeror provides alternative pricing models, please describe how will offeror's alternative pricing models be evaluated? | Best Value | |
| Please provide detail on how optional services proposed by the offeror will be evaluated? | Best Value cost aware | |
| Cells G16 and G19 don't contain SUM formulas. Can you please confirm these formulas should have SUM functions consistent with the other cells in the Total column? | Yes | |
| For Tier 1 Support, would the government permit off-site Tier 1 remote service desk support assuming the technicians will meet all training requirements? |
For Tier 1 Support, would the government permit off-site shared service Tier 1 assuming the technicians will meet all training requirements and the shared service center has a proven track record of achieving the SLAs outlined in the RFP?
| Would the government consider allowing Tier 2 remote deskside support as well assuming the technicians have a remote desktop software? | Yes but there is a requirement to have some onsite support presence but remote agents can supplement the onsite support. | ||
| Offerors are instructed to complete the following: SARC Subcontractor Annual Reps & Certs Rev 4; PUR-466 Proposal Certifications Rev 2; FL-55 Small Business Plan (Rev. 6-23); FL-57A Organizational Conflict of Interest (Rev. 1-07). However, there is no instruction of which volume/part these are to be included. Please provide guidance on how these are to be provided. | These forms can be retunred serparte from the proposal parts of the RFQ | ||
| The RFP requires Seller to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Are there any specific small business goals? If so, could Fermi please provide the subcontracting percentages Seller is required to meet? | There are no small business specfic goals seller is required to meet | ||
| Can the government clarify what the required skills include in the following statement: "Past performance examples must address all required aspects of the proposed technical solution, and all relevant required skills set forth in the related section."? | Focus on Solutions | ||
| Please confirm the page count for the Technical Proposal is 50 pages. | Fermi is Flexible on this | ||
| Please confirm that front matter such as Cover page, cover letter, Table of Content, List of Figures, List of Tables, and Acronym list are excluded from page count. | Fermi is Flexible on this | ||
| Please confirm that Past Performance references are excluded from page count for Technical proposal as defined and laid out in the Argonne RFP Instructions. | Fermi is Flexible on this | ||
| Confirm whether the requirement is for a combined 10 years of experience of overall company experience or consecutive company experience versus information reference of past performance? | Overall | ||
| Will FFDG, LLC consider expanding the Past Performance page count from 3 pages to 6 pages in order to provide adequate coverage of requested requirements? | Fermi is Flexible on this | ||
| Instructions for Management Approach require offerors to submit Resumes for Key Personnel. Please confirm that resumes of Key Personnel are excluded from page count for the Technical proposal. | Fermi is Flexible on this | ||
| Can the customer define MSC, MSP and RITM in Attachment A3 Statement of Work Appendix 3? | Manage Service Contract, Managed Service Providor, Requested Item | ||
| Can the customer provide the data in the graphics in a spreadsheet verses graphics? | Not at this time | ||
| How many requests/incidents (volume) are handled by support staff per week/month and what is typical resolution time if available? | Please see atachment A3. SLA are listed in Attachment B | ||
| 1. What is the anticipated contract duration and potential option years? | Attachment C Terms of Order | ||
| 2. Does Fermilab expect a single award for all required and optional services, or could awards be split among multiple vendors? | Single Award | ||
| 3. Are there any transition-out requirements at contract end (knowledge transfer, staff transition, data return, etc.)? | TBD and agreed to during the transition planning. | ||
| 4. How many Fermilab locations are in scope (e.g., Batavia IL, Lead SD, remote sites), and what level of support is expected for each? | There are two sites, SLAs are available in attachment B | ||
| 5. What are the current ticket volumes and categories (incidents, service requests, VIP requests, etc.)? | 20 Percent of incidents are Deskside Support the remainder is evenly distributed across categories. see Attachment A3 for ticket volume. | ||
| 6. Will Fermilab provide access to its existing ServiceNow ITSM platform, or should the vendor propose one? | We will provide acess to our ISTM Platform | ||
| 7. For the Automated Call Distribution (ACD) system, is Fermilab currently using a specific product, and should the vendor host/manage a new solution? | The vendor should host/manage a new solution | ||
| 8. How many Service Desk agents are expected to be on-site versus remote? | We expect the Seller to staff appropriately the different contact channels. | ||
| 9. What is the expected on-site staffing level for Batavia and Lead, South Dakota? | We expect the Seller to staff appropriately the different contact channels. We have a requirement for a FTE in South Dakota. | ||
| 10. What are the typical response and resolution expectations for deskside tickets beyond the SLA matrix (e.g., average daily calls or escalations)? | Expectations are in the SLAs | ||
| 11. Will Fermilab provide service parts inventory and spares, or should the vendor maintain its own? | The question is not clear enough | ||
| 12. Which versions of SCCM and Jamf are currently deployed, and is the vendor expected to upgrade or maintain them? | The Seller is expected to upgrade and maintain | ||
| 13. Are there any third-party software deployment or patch management tools that must integrate with the existing environment? | Question is not clear enough | ||
| 14. What is the server environment composition (physical vs. virtual, OS types, OEM models)? | Its a combination of physical, and virtual. Attachment A5 has a listing. | ||
| 15. Is after-hours data center access available for vendor technicians? | We will work to provide the access you need. This can be discussed further during transitioning | ||
| 16. Will Fermilab provide remote management access for servers, or must vendor technicians be on-site for all repairs? | Remote acces is expected to be available | ||
| 17. What VoIP platform is in use (e.g., Cisco, Microsoft Teams, Avaya)? | Cisco | ||
| 18. Does Fermilab expect 24/7 monitoring and management of VoIP infrastructure? | Not and vendor requirement | ||
| 19. For A/V Teleconferencing, are there preferred OEMs or existing systems to integrate with (Zoom, Polycom, Teams Rooms)? | See Attachment 2 | ||
| 20. For Major Incident and Change Management, will Fermilab provide its own procedures, or should the vendor propose frameworks aligned with ITIL? | Fermilab has our own procedures but are willing to entertain improvements. | ||
| 21. For Customer Experience Service, is there an existing satisfaction survey system, or should the vendor propose one? | We would be interested in what you could help us with. We do have a survey. | ||
| 22. For Cybersecurity Support, what level of responsibility is expected (monitoring, endpoint protection, FedRAMP system operation)? | See SOW | ||
| 23. For Hourly Infrastructure and Telecom Support, what are the expected response times and escalation paths? | See SLAs | ||
| 24. Will Fermilab provide its own SLA tracking dashboards, or should the vendor implement performance monitoring? | We will make one together as part of transition planning. | ||
| 25. How often should service performance reviews and governance meetings occur (monthly, quarterly)? | See Attachment B | ||
| 26. What is the expected reporting cadence and format (weekly status, monthly SLA reports, quarterly executive summaries)? | See Attachment B | ||
| 27. What is the expected transition timeline (the RFP mentions 60 days to full operational capability—confirm)? | Approximatley 90 | ||
| 28. Will the incumbent contractor provide handover documentation or staff shadowing during transition? | Runbook Documentation and Knowledge Bases | ||
| 29. Are there restrictions on data migration, knowledge transfer, or tool access during transition? | No | ||
| 30. Should pricing be presented as a fixed annual fee per service area, or can it be modular per FTE/hour? | Fixed | ||
| 1. What similar contracts should be highlighted to match the scope (federal labs, IT managed services, end-user support)? | Please review Attachment C | ||
| 2. Are client references required? If yes, how many? | Please review Attachment C | ||
| 3. What are the key personnel qualification requirements? | For Fermilab key personnel is TBD based on proposed staffing. Section H5 Attachment D. | ||
| 4. How is pricing structured — by labor category, service bundle, or fixed monthly rate? | It’s a combination of Fixed bundle for Required Service excluding Enhanced Server Support and Managed Print. Both Enhanced Server Support and Managed print should have individual fixed pricing for each of those two services. | ||
| 5. Are there volume-based metrics (tickets, devices, servers) that influence pricing? | Its fixed Pricing | ||
| 6. What are the core services required? (End-user support, managed services, helpdesk, device management, etc.) | Required Services are listed in the SOW | ||
| 7. What are the performance standards and SLAs (response times, uptime, ticket closure rates)? | Please review Attachment B | ||
| 8. Is subcontracting restricted? | No | ||
| 9. Is key personnel substitution restricted? | For Fermilab key personnel is TBD based on proposed staffing. Section H5 Attachment D. | ||
| 10. What are the expected staffing levels and roles (onsite vs remote)? | Manage to contact channel demand. | ||
| 11. What are the hardware/software environments (Windows, Linux, ServiceNow, SCCM, etc.)? | Please see Attachment A5 | ||
| 12. Are there any transition or onboarding requirements? | We will define and agree requirements during the Transition Planning | qu | |
| 13. What are the payment terms (Net 30, milestone-based, monthly invoices)? | Ryan? | ||
| Any certifications (ITIL, CompTIA, ISO, etc.) required? | Certifications are desireable | ||
| What are the current Service Desk performance metrics against the contractual SLAs (ASA ≥90% within 30 seconds, Call Abandon Rate <10%)? | Required Services are listed in the SOW | ||
| What is the current First Contact Incident Resolution rate (target: 65-70%)? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| What is the current Service Desk Overall Incident Resolution rate (target: 50-60%)? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| What is the current Call Handle Time performance (target: ≥95% within 10 minutes)? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| What is the average number of misrouted tickets per month (target: <10)? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| What is the Service Desk Contacts to Tickets ratio (target: 1:1 - 100%)? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| What is the current ticket volume breakdown by channel (phone, walk-in, web, chat, email) per Appendix 3? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| What ACD metrics are available from the current phone switch per Appendix 4? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| What is the current Service Desk staffing model (on-site vs. VCC - virtual call center)? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| How many Service Desk staff have CompTIA A+ certification as required? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| What percentage of current staff have completed customer service training (formal or in-house)? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| Is it mandatory for Managers and Technicians to have CompTIA A+ and ITIL Foundation certifications? | Certifications are desireable | ||
| How is VIP support currently managed? | Documented in Runbook | ||
| How many employees are currently located in South Dakota? | Approximately 50 | ||
| What types of IT support are most frequently requested at the South Dakota site? | Desktop level 1 and level 2 support | ||
| What underground/tunnel support requirements exist, and how often is this needed? | Desktop level 1 and level 2 support, troubleshoot level 1 network | ||
| What is the typical response time expectation for on-site support in South Dakota? | Please see SLAs | ||
| How is remote support from Batavia currently coordinated with local South Dakota techs? | We have aliason in Batavia that coordinates activities in South Dakota. | ||
| What specialized safety training or JHQ (Job Hazard Questionnaire) requirements exist for underground work? | We will work with Seller on Transition Planning. | ||
| What PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) is required for South Dakota work? | Any thing unique to Fermi will be provided by Fermi | ||
| What is the relationship and coordination process with the local South Dakota IT team? | Batavia has a liason to South Dakota which coordinates activities. | ||
| What customizations, workflows, and automations currently exist in ServiceNow? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| What asset and CMDB data is currently maintained in ServiceNow? | All of it. | ||
| What is the current MSP Overall Incident Resolution rate (target: 55-60%)? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| What is the current percentage of incidents reopened (target: <5%)? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| What is the Mean Time to Respond (MTTr) and Mean Time to Resolve (MTTR) by priority? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| What is the current incident classification structure (P1, P2, P3, P4)? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| For the P1 incidents, what is the response/resolution performance? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| 39. What is the current MSP Request Backlog (target: <10% of open requests)? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| 40. What is the current Request MTTr performance? | Not providing this information see SLAs | ||
| 41. What Standard Request catalog items currently exist? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| 42. What is Fermilab's Continual Service Improvement initiative to reduce general/ad hoc requests? | We are maturing demand management | ||
| How many major incidents typically occur per month/quarter? | See Attachment A3 | ||
| Is there currently a dedicated Major Incident Manager role, or is this a gap? | We have people in the role, we are looking to augment. | ||
| What is the current major incident declaration criteria and process? | We have procedures and documentation we follow ITIL. Will discuss and agree to them during Transition Planning | ||
| What paging service is currently used for MIM notifications? | ServiceNow | ||
| What communication channels are used during major incidents (bridge calls, Teams, etc.)? | We have procedures and documentation. We have push and pull communication channels. | ||
| Who comprises the major incident response team, and what are the escalation paths? | All levels of the organization may respond to an incedent. We follow ITIL. | ||
| What administrative tasks are currently performed during major incidents (timeline documentation, etc.)? | Administrative task may include but not limited to creating notes, timelines, paging, customer followup, relating tickets | ||
| Is there currently a dedicated Change Manager/Coordinator role, or is this a gap? | There someone in this role we are looking to augment. | ||
| What is the current CAB meeting frequency and attendance? | Weekly a dozen people. | ||
| What is the MSP Changes by Performance Rating metric showing? | Post implementation review rating from change manager | ||
| What is the current change approval workflow and timeframes? | Hierarchical and Functional we follow ITIL | ||
| How many RFCs are submitted monthly (standard, normal, emergency)? | Monthly approximately 50 stanard, 35 minor, 5 major. This may vary. | ||
| What emergency change process exists, and how often are emergency changes executed? | We have a separate process. We follow ITIL Emergency Changes are rare. | ||
| What change management dashboards and operational tasks are reviewed daily? | Overall the process is monitored for effectiveness using dashboards. | ||
| What Post Implementation Review (PIR) process exists? | We have a process, we follow ITIL. Changes get a rating. | ||
| Who comprises the CAB, and what is the typical agenda? | CAB has many stakeholders typically we focus on changes with the most risk | ||
| What CAB-related communications, notes, and meeting minutes processes exist? | All of those | ||
| What is the current Customer Experience/Satisfaction score (target: ≥90% with positive responses)? | Not Providing that information now. | ||
| Is there currently a dedicated Customer Experience role, or is this a gap? | Not Providing that information now. | ||
| What customer feedback mechanisms are in place beyond standard CSAT surveys? | We also do surveys. This is an area of investment we want to build out. | ||
| What percentage of VIP/High Priority tickets are tracked for satisfaction follow-up? | See Attachment B Section 5.3 | ||
| What percentage of tickets are pending customer action >2 days? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| What percentage of general/ad-hoc requests remain open >2 weeks? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| How many automation opportunities have been identified but not implemented? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| What is Fermilab's current ISO 20000 certification status? Which service(s) are ISO 20000 certified? | We status is current. Core IT services and a subset of Scientific Computing | ||
| What documented ITIL processes exist (Incident, Request, Change, Problem, Knowledge)? | Yes | ||
| What ITIL processes are currently mature vs. immature? | We are ISO certified and meet our internal requirements | ||
| What knowledge base articles currently exist, and what is the usage/deflection rate? | Knowledge Based are in Service now. | ||
| What is the current state of the Fermilab Runbook (SOW compliance, procedures, work instructions)? | Current and approved | ||
| What is the review and approval process for Runbook updates? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| How frequently is the Runbook updated, and who maintains it? | As needed, at minimum once a year. Serivce Owners and Supplier Manager | ||
| What documentation exists for current processes, procedures, and work instructions? | All of these are documented | ||
| Does the incumbent MSP have warranty authorizations for HP, Dell, Apple, IBM, Cisco, Xerox, Ricoh, and Canon? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| What warranty management processes exist with OEMs? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| What is the current NO WARRANTY Response and Resolution performance (24x7 and 8x5 SLAs)? | Not Providing that information see SLAs. | ||
| What is the current governance structure (Operational, Performance, Executive)? | Not Providing this information, propose a structure. | ||
| Who attends each governance level, and what are the typical agenda items? | See Attachment B | ||
| How are meeting minutes, action items, and escalations tracked? | Written Documentation | ||
| What SLAs have been missed over 2 consecutive months, and what mitigation plans exist? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| When was the last SLA review for fit and feasibility conducted? | Not Providing this information. | ||
| What is the process for re-baselining SLAs annually? | We have documentation negotation process | ||
| What comprehensive ticket quality review process exists for all technicians? | Not Providing this information | ||
| What quality review process ensures escalated tickets are fully documented? | Not Providing this information | ||
| What improvement items have been proposed based on industry best practices? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| What are the top 3 service improvement priorities for Fermilab in the next 12 months? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| Who is the current incumbent provider (NTT)? | Not Providing this information | ||
| What is the expected transition timeline and approach? | See Attachment C | ||
| Will incumbent staff be available for knowledge transfer? | Sellers need to manage this risk. | ||
| What are the critical success factors for the first 90 days (establishing KPIs, metrics, reporting)? | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transition planning. | ||
| Why are Major Incident Management, Change Management, Customer Experience, and Cybersecurity listed as "optional"? | We may or may not purchase them. | ||
| What budget or appetite exists for adding these optional services immediately vs. over time? | Future Budgets will determine this. | ||
| Are these services currently provided by another vendor, internal Fermilab staff, or represent gaps? | Not Providing that information. | ||
| What would trigger Fermilab to activate these optional services during the contract period? | Optional Services may or not be purchased during the award. | ||
| Is Fermilab looking to mature these processes similar to Argonne's comprehensive approach? | Similar to Argonne,Fermilab follows a continuous improvement plan | ||
| Please provide the current staffing levels supporting each service area under the incumbent contract, including role types, coverage hours, and on-site versus offsite distribution. | Not Providing this information | ||
| Please provide historical ticket volume data categorized by priority level (P1, P2, P3, and P4) | See Attachment A3 | ||
| Please provide the defined business hours for Service Desk operations, including standard working hours, after-hours coverage expectations, and any requirements for weekend or holiday support | These are defined in the SOW and supporting documents | ||
| Please provide the expected average handle time for Service Desk Support. | See Attachment B | ||
| Please provide the number of VIP users who require 24x7 service desk and deskside support | Currently 68 staff approximately 20 tickets a month | ||
| Please confirm whether the requirement for Deskside Support personnel to hold Apple Certified Mac Technician and Microsoft 365 Certified: Modern Desktop Administrator Associate certifications is mandatory for all assigned staff, or relevant experience would be acceptable. | Certifications are desireable | ||
| Please confirm whether dedicated Desktop Systems Engineers are required on-site or if this function can be fully remote (Offsite). | Desktop Support staff generally need to be onsite or hybrid. | ||
| How many engineers or administrators currently maintain SCCM and Jamf environments? | Not Providing this information | ||
| Please clarify which specific Microsoft certifications are considered ‘appropriate to engineering’ for Desktop Systems Management personnel. | Certifications are desireable | ||
| Is it possible for resources to perform backup roles. i.e. If two major incidents are declared, could the problem or change manager temporarily perform the major incident coordination role? | We encourage Sellers to be resourceful in their staffing solution, as long as our requirements are met. | ||
| Are there any planned technology refreshes, migrations, or major initiatives that will impact service demand or scope? | Upgrades and migrations are a continous part of any IT organization. We expect the Seller to be collorbative and supportive. | ||
| Provide a detailed breakdown of the estimated incident and service request volumes by service area (Example, Service Desk, Deskside Support, Asset Management, Data Center, Enhanced Server Support, Audio/Video Support, VoIP, Managed Print, and Cybersecurity). | 20 Percent of incidents are Deskside Support the remainder is evenly distributed across categories. see Attachment A3 for ticket volume. | ||
| Please confirm whether FedRAMP authorization is a mandatory requirement for all proposed tools (Example, ITSM tool) | FedRamp is desireable all solutions need to be approved | ||
| Please provide current staffing levels, ticket volumes, and any unique requirements (e.g., remote vs. on-site) for support in Lead, South Dakota, including how it integrates with Batavia operations. | 1 staff that integrate with a liason in Batavia | ||
| Please clarify if dedicated on-site personnel are required for IT Asset Management or if remote/offsite support is acceptable. | Hybrid is acceptable | ||
| Please indicate what IT Asset Management tool is being utilized. | We have a proprietary syste with integrations to our ITSM | ||
| Please indicate if there is a discovery agent or agents present in the environment. | Not Providing that information now. | ||
| Please provide details on the current data center infrastructure (e.g., number of servers, racks, vendors), maintenance schedules, and staffing levels for operations. | Not Providing that information now. Will discuss during Transitional planning. | ||
| Please provide historical support ticket volumes for enhanced servers, including breakdown by OS (e.g., Windows, Linux) and any VIP/server-critical designations. | Aproximately 20 ticket per year occurr. | ||
| How many engineers currently handle enhanced server support, and can this be performed remotely? | Not Providing that information now. | ||
| Please provide the number of AV/teleconferencing rooms and systems in use, along with historical maintenance requests and any integration with tools like Zoom or Cisco. | See Attachment 2 | ||
| What are the expected service hours for AV support, including after-hours for global collaborations? | Please see SOW | ||
| Please provide details on the PREP inventory (e.g., types and quantities of equipment), loan volumes, and current staffing for logistics management. | The Prep window is staffed approximately 3 hours a day. The logistic requests average approximate 150 per month. | ||
| Are there specific certifications or scientific knowledge required for PREP personnel? | No Scientific Knowledge, training on fork lift may be required. | ||
| Please provide the number of VoIP endpoints, historical outage data, and current maintenance staffing levels. | |||
| What tools or systems are used for VoIP management, and is 24x7 support required? | Managed 24/7 by internal IT not by Seller | ||
| Please provide current printer fleet size, print volume metrics (e.g., pages per month), and staffing for maintenance. | See Attachment A7 | ||
| What reporting tools are used for managed print, and are there requirements for sustainability tracking (e.g., paper usage)? | Not Providing that information now. | ||
| For each optional service (4.1-4.6), please provide estimated annual usage hours or instances under the incumbent contract, if applicable. | Not Providing that information now. | ||
| Please clarify the definition of a 'major incident' and provide historical data on frequency and resolution times. | Priority 1 incidents. Please see Attachment A3 | ||
| What change management tools (e.g., ITIL-based) are in use, and how many changes are processed annually? | Approximately 1200 a year | ||
| Please provide current customer satisfaction metrics (e.g., NPS scores) and any tools used for surveys or feedback. | Not Providing that information now. | ||
| Beyond NIST basics, what specific cybersecurity tools or processes (e.g., vulnerability scanning) are expected, and provide historical incident data. | Not Providing that information. | ||
| Please provide examples of typical tasks under hourly support and historical billing hours. | We are asking for fixed pricing based on the hours of work in the SOW | ||
| Please confirm remote work approval processes and any additional vetting requirements for seller staff accessing sensitive data, and are remote workers required to be in the US? | Sellers are subject to HSPD12 and internal training requirements. | ||
| What transition support is expected from the incumbent to the new seller, including knowledge transfer timelines? | We have Runbooks processes and procedures other than that there are not any expectations. | ||
| Please provide more information on Adhoc Requests" and Adhoc reporting requests. | We looking to reduce this task type. The requests can vary | ||
| Can you define the amount of physical server hosts vs virtual hosts and VM counts | Not Providing that information now. | ||
| What tools are currently in place for monitoring and patching of servers both physical and virtual? | Not Providing that information now. | ||
| Can you please provide manufacture and models for servers that will require out of warranty support equipment list? | See Attachment A6 | ||
| For the storage arrays can you please provide hard drive speed, quantity, and sizes? | No | ||
| Please provide the total number of software licenses managed, tools used (e.g., license servers), and historical audit/compliance data. | Centrally managed licenses under the Supplier consist of approximately 6 to 10 software packages. Inaddition to the Enterprise agreements with Microsoft and Adobe. There is the potential for additional software to be centrally managed in the future. License management does discover for other software licenses for reporting but not management. | ||
| Can you confirm whether Argonne retains full ownership and purchasing responsibility for software licenses, or is the Seller expected to manage procurement and renewals? | Please ask Argonne | ||
| Are there specific software publishers or license types (e.g., DOE-restricted, academic, open-source) that require separate management processes or reporting? | Centrally managed license under the Supplier consist of approximately 6 to10 software packages. Inaddition to the Enterprise agreements with Microsoft and Adobe. There is the potential for additional software to be centrally managed in the future. License management does to discover for other software licenses for reporting but not management. | ||
| Should the Seller actively perform license optimization and reclamation (reclaiming unused seats) or only report on utilization trends? | During renewals reclaiming unused seats does occur. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .