Amendment 1 -POCs Instructions to Offerors 7-17-2023.pdf

SAM.gov Amendment 1 July 17, 2023

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

Amendment 1: questions and submissions must be emailed to alice.sobsey@nih.gov

To: Offeror on SAM.gov

From: National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Identity Credential and Access Management (ICAM)

Title: Center for Information Technology Identity, Credential, Access Management (ICAM) Modernization- Proof of Concepts (POCs)

Solicitation Number: 75N97023R00006

Note to Offerors: Any follow-on award(s) from this Pilot Project will be based on an award to a Prime Vendor awarded project. Vendors not included in the Pilot Project as a Prime Vendor will not be eligible for participation in a follow-on project.

Solicitation Government Point of Contact:

Alice M. Sobsey Senior Contracting Officer Office of Acquisitions Management National Institutes of Health Two Democracy, Room 105 6707 Democracy Blvd., MSC 5488 Bethesda, MD 20892-5488 301-827-6144 Email Address: alice.sobsey@nih.gov

A. GENERAL

The National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Library of Medicine (NLM), and Center for Information Technology (CIT) is issuing this Request for Proposal (RFP) under the SAM.gov.

It is issued to qualified Offerors for the purpose of entering into a Contract as a competitive award. The Government reserves the right to make multiple awards, but no awards are guaranteed.

The Government will conduct this RFP pursuant to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15 Contracting By Negotiation.

Under this RFP, the selected Offerors shall provide the CIT office of Identity, Credential and Access Management (ICAM) with a RFP that meets the requirements as described within the Statement of Objectives (SOO), complies with the Instructions herein.

Offerors are required to submit a written Technical Proposal and a written Business Proposal to Government officials for the purpose of assuring that the Offeror is fully cognizant of the scope of the RFP and has the capability and capacity to complete all requirements, and/or satisfy all objectives of the attached SOO.

B. TYPE OF CONTRACT and AWARDS Using a Firm Fixed Priced Contract the Government contemplates award of one or more Awards for the work. Using the contract line items described below the Government intends to award Milestone 1 and may exercise subsequent Milestones upon successful completion of the work and acceptance by the Government of a prior Milestone. (Regarding Pricing of Project Capabilities see the Sections below, and Table 1 for CLINS and SLINs).

C. PROPOSAL (Whole or In-Part) Referencing the Table below. Offerors may elect to provide a RFP that includes details about the work activities and Deliverables for:

(i) all three (3) Capabilities (Authentication, Directory Services, Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) or

(ii) may elect to bid on Individual Capabilities or

(iii) may elect to bid on Combinations of the three (3) Capabilities.

The Government will use a Firm Fixed Priced Contract type with the award. Awards may be made to one or more offerors for the work. Awards may also be made to firms Proposing on all three Capabilities or to firms Proposing on individual or combinations. There is no preference over offerors bidding on all Capabilities versus one Capability. However, offerors proposing on multiple Capabilities are provided with an additional Section in Volume I (Synergy between Capabilities) where they have the opportunity to explain the benefits and synergy of having Products and Support across the areas of Capabilities.

Using the contract line items described below the Government intends to award Milestone 1 and may exercise subsequent Milestones upon successful completion of the work and acceptance by the Government of a prior Milestone. (See also the Sections below CLINS and Work Area Capabilities).

Table 1. Contract Line Item Number Descriptions and Sub Line Items

CLIN/SLIN Task Area/Work Description Contract Type

001 Capability 1 – Authentication

001AA Milestone 1 – Startup / Mobilization Firm Fixed Price

001AB Milestone 2 – Test Readiness Firm Fixed Price

001AC

Milestone 3 – Testing and Evaluation

Firm Fixed Price

001AD

Milestone 4 – Documentation and Closeout

Firm Fixed Price

002 Capability 2 – Directory Services

002AA Milestone 1 – Startup / Mobilization Firm Fixed Price

CLIN/SLIN Task Area/Work Description Contract Type

002AB Milestone 2 – Test Readiness Firm Fixed Price

002AC

Milestone 3 – Testing and Evaluation

Firm Fixed Price

002AD

Milestone 4 – Documentation and Closeout

Firm Fixed Price

Capability 3 – Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)

002AA Milestone 1 – Startup / Mobilization Firm Fixed Price

002AB Milestone 2 – Test Readiness Firm Fixed Price

002AC

Milestone 3 – Testing and Evaluation

Firm Fixed Price

002AD

Milestone 4 – Documentation and Closeout

Firm Fixed Price

D. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

The resulting award will have an overall Period of Performance beginning on the date of award and ending no later than ninety (90) calendar days after award. Each Milestone will be managed to the Contractor’s proposed schedule of Milestones and activities, and to which the Government has accepted such Schedule. In no event shall the Period of Performance exceed the 90-days and the Government may terminate the Contract for Convenience or for lack of performance if progress on a Milestone is not satisfactory.

E. USE OF 3RD PARTIES

The Offeror in submitting its bid acknowledges the Government’s use of 3rd Party Contractors to assist the Government in the review of the RFP and participate in the Proof of Concept (PoC) activities. 3rd Party Contractors may advise the Government on the merits and compliancy of the RFP and the work activities, and of the Strengths and Weaknesses of Products.

F. TECHNICAL INQUIRIES AND QUESTIONS

All questions regarding this RFP must be submitted no later than Monday, July 17, 2023, 12:00 noon EST to alice.sobsey@nih.gov. When the Government answers questions, the questions and responses will be posted as an amendment on SAM.gov made available for all Offerors to see.

Offerors shall have five (5) Calendar days from the Official Solicitation release date to submit questions about the RFP or any other matters concerning Technical and Price.

G. RESPONSE SUBMISSION

Responses must be submitted electronically to alice.sobsey@nih.gov on or before the RFP closing date of Monday, July 31, 2023, 12:00 noon EST. Responses received after that date and time will not be considered and will be ineligible for evaluation and award.

Offerors must submit their response in two (2) separate Volumes:

Volume 1: Technical Quote Volume 2: Business Quote

The table below shows the page limits that Offerors’ submissions shall adhere.

Table 2. Document Submission Requirements

Volume Section Page Limit

1 Technical Quote 43

Section 1: Transmittal/Cover Letter 1

Section 2: Executive Summary 2

Section 3: Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM) (See SOO Appendix A)

N/A

Technical and Management Capability 1 – Authentication

Technical and Management Capability 2 – Directory Services

Technical and Management Capability 3 – Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)

Synergy between Capabilities (if multiple capabilities are quoted and synergies exist)

Prior Experience 5

2 Business Quote N/A

Narrative N/A

CLIN 001 SLINs N/A

CLIN 002 SLINs N/A

CLIN 003 SLINs N/A

Market Research Data and Information (see VOL II Section b. below) N/A

H. RESPONSE FORMATTING

Responses shall comply with the following definitions and style guidance.

Table 3. Response Formatting

Subject Format

Page Definition One (1) page equal one side of a sheet of paper.

Page Size 8.5 X 11 inches

Subject Format

Page Numbering Sequentially within each Section

Paragraph Spacing Single Spaced;

Each paragraph separated by 1 – 2 blank lines

Margins 1 inch margins for top, bottom, left and right for all pages.

Header and Footer

Headers and footers may be placed in the margins but shall not contain Quote content.

Gutter – 0 inches

Location from edge – header, footer: 0.5 inches

Font

12 point Times New Roman for text

10 point in the Arial family for tables

10 point in the Arial family for charts and graphs

Orientation

Portrait

Exception: tables and charts/graphics may be landscape. Warning: do not submit an abundance of information in chart/graphic/table form in an attempt to circumvent page limitations).

1) Any pages in excess of the page limitations described in Table 2 will not be considered.

2) Each Section in each Volume shall be submitted as a separate, electronically searchable (e.g., Microsoft Word 2019 or later, or PDF) file.

3) All spreadsheet files provided shall be in Microsoft Excel 2019 format (*.xls) or later with all external objects embedded (not linked).

4) Quotes shall embed all external objects in native format in order to allow the evaluators to better understand the quote and concepts contained therein. However, the Offeror shall not prepare any portion of its quote using sound, animation, or video files. Multimedia files will not be accepted (e.g., QuickTime, Windows Media Player, etc.). SHs are responsible for ensuring the integrity of other types of files such as *.pdf files. Files with the following extensions will not be accepted: *.exe, *.dll, *.bat, *.com.

5) Prior to submission, the Offeror shall scan all electronic media for viruses. Any electronically submitted files that contain viruses will automatically be rejected and the Offerornotified.

I. TRANSMITTAL/COVER LETTER (Volume 1, Section 1) The Offeror’s transmittal/cover letter for the response shall identify their point of contact (POC) for any matters or issues related to this RFP. Contact information shall include: POC name, title, phone number, and email address, NAICS code, Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), and the classification of their Business Size.

J. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (Volume 1, Section 2) The Offeror shall provide an Executive Summary for the Technical Quote. The Executive Summary shall be used to draw attention to important items the Offeror wishes to bring to the attention of the Government Contracting Officer or Government Officials. The Executive Summary is not part of the Evaluation.

K. TECHNICAL QUOTE (Volume 1, Section 3)

The work is a Proof of Concept (PoC) and is described in detail within the Government’s SOO.

The Offerors Technical Proposal shall describe the Technical Products and Management Approach that will be used to satisfy the objectives and requirements defined in the SOO. It is essential that the Proposal contain a level of detail (by Milestone) sufficient to communicate the Contractor’s activities, dependencies on the Government (what Government actions are required and when), a schedule of planned activities, key performance measures (overall and showing exit criteria for each Milestone), and final documentation to be delivered.

a. SOO Requirements, Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM) (SOO Appendix A) and Use Cases (SOO Appendix B)

The Offeror will review and complete the RTM, SOO Appendix A, and (using the form) indicate whether or not their product(s) satisfy mandatory requirements, as well as non-mandatory/preferred requirements. Separately, the Offeror shall detail within its response how it will demonstrate that the Products and Solution satisfy the requirements outlined in the SOO, SOO Appendix A RTM, and SOO Appendix B Use Cases. Compliance will be evaluated based on the extent to which the SH is able to meet the requirements listed in the SOO, SOO Appendix A RTM, and SOO Appendix B Use Cases.

b. Technical and Management Approach

The Technical and Management Approach shall describe each of the Milestones by Capability (i.e., Authentication, Directory Services, and SASE):

1) The Offeror’s understanding of the Project objectives and requirements of the SOO.

2) Milestone 1 – Startup and Mobilization. [Approach and deliverables]

a. Onboarding and Startup Activities

b. The Offeror’s proposed draft Project Plan outlining schedules and discrete tasks to meet the SOO and to satisfy the objectives and requirements.

c. Products and Licenses/subscriptions that are required and the disposition of those Products and Licenses/subscriptions upon completion of the PoC.

d. Roles and Responsibilities showing dependencies on the Government.

e. Exit Criteria is the documentation and demonstration of completion of Milestone 1 and 2.

3) Milestone 2 – Test Readiness. [Approach and deliverables]

a. The Offeror’s proposed Plan outlining schedules and discrete tasks to meet the

SOO and to satisfy the objectives and requirements.

b. Security Authorizations and other compliance (e.g., connectivity).

c. Test Plans and Documentation (OEM demonstration and government Use

Cases).

d. Roles and Responsibilities showing dependencies on the Government.

e. Exit Criteria is the documentation and demonstration of completion of Milestone

3.

4) Milestone 3 – Testing and Evaluation. [Approach and deliverables]

a. The Offeror’s proposed Plan outlining schedules and discrete tasks to meet the

SOO and to satisfy the objectives and requirements.

b. Demonstration Use Case Results.

c. Roles and Responsibilities showing dependencies on the Government.

d. Exit Criteria is the documentation and demonstration of completion of Milestone

4.

5) Milestone 4 – Documentation and Closeout. [Approach and deliverables]

a. The Offeror’s proposed Plan outlining schedules and discrete tasks to meet the

SOO and to satisfy the objectives and requirements.

b. Documentation of Use Cases and other Programmatic artifacts.

c. Additional Information for Products (e.g., types of licensing arrangements and costs, Total Lifecycle type information, trends, market share, etc.).

d. Roles and Responsibilities indicating any dependencies upon the Government.

e. Completion of documentation and demonstration.

6) Synergy between Capabilities (Optional)

If the Offeror proposed solution satisfies multiple Capabilities (1, 2, and/or 3), then the Offeror may use this Section reserved for describing benefits, synergy, and inter-operability.

This Section shall only be used to describe how a Product (when used across multiple Capabilities) may result in improvements to Operations, Logistics, or Costs.

7) Government Furnished Documentation

a. Statement of Objectives (SOO)

b. Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM), SOO Appendix A

c. Use Cases, SOO Appendix B

8) Prior Experience

a. The Quoters shall provide similar (size, scope and complexity) implementations.

i. Number of experiences

ii. Number of users for each experience

L. BUSINESS QUOTE (Volume 2) The Offeror’s Business Proposal shall be a separate Volume from the Technical Proposal.

Pricing shall include all anticipated costs to fully perform and satisfy all objectives and requirements identified in this Proposal, including option year pricing. The Offeror is to use their own construction of Pricing by Milestone and present in a manner that they feel best communicates visibility into the work and its cost/price (i.e., by licensing, labor, etc.).

a. Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Type Order

Business Proposals shall include the following:

1) A price for each Capability (CLIN) bid and broken down into discrete Milestones (SLIN).

If the Offeror elects to perform a SLIN as ‘not separately priced’ then the Price Section (by Milestone) shall clearly indicate “As Not Separately Priced.”

2) A statement indicating that prices are inclusive of all reductions including rebates offered.

3) Not to Exceed per PoC ($220K) Offerors will be awarded to conduct each PoC proposed for up to / not to exceed $220K, payment will be according to the milestones outlined in the SOO.

4) Other proposed associated costs, if any, shall be identified but included within the CLIN and or within each SLIN:

i. Other Direct Costs (ODC)

b. Market Research Data and Information

At the conclusion of the PoC vendors shall provide a report focused on next steps in the form of an Enterprise-Wide Adoption Plan. Some suggested data includes:

Description of next steps including types of licensing arrangements and costs offered by the Offeror and total estimated timeframe for implementation at an enterprise level.

Draft of a Transition-In Plan that describes how the solution can be implemented widely at NIH. The plan should outline how the solution can be implemented widely, ensuring minimal service disruption to the current work, no service interruptions to mission critical initiatives and security services, and minimal service degradation during and after transition using existing tools and processes already in place.

Such information may be used as market research for a future NIH ICAM Architecture solicitation.

The Offeror understands that by providing data and information on the Products that this is not a guarantee that the Products and features will be included in a larger Enterprise solution, note that the Government will specify future requirements by Make or Model.

M. EVALUATION

Proposals will be reviewed and evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria identified below. The technical factors are in descending order of importance and when combined are significantly more important than price. In the event quotes are evaluated as technically equal in quality, price will become a major consideration in selecting the successful Offeror.

a. Evaluation Criteria

Following receipt of responses to this Request for Proposal, the Government will evaluate each technical response to the SOO Requirements and SOO Appendix A, RTM. Technical Proposals will be evaluated using criteria of part ‘e’ below and the results of compliance with the RTM.

Those Proposals evaluated as the Government having ‘High Confidence’ (see section b. below) in the ability of the Products and to address the RTM, and of the Offeror being able to successfully perform the Proof of Concept and each Milestone, may be asked to perform a demonstration of their product(s). Preference may be given to products that address multiple Capabilities. The Government's objective is to obtain the highest technical quality considered necessary to achieve the project objectives, at a realistic and reasonable cost.

b. Technical Quote Adjectival Ratings

Adjectival Rating Description

High Confidence The Government has high confidence that the Products meet the RTM, and that the quoter understands the requirements, proposes a sound approach, and will be successful in performing the contract with little or no Government intervention.

Confidence The Government has confidence that the Products can meet the RTM, and that the quoter understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, and will be successful in performing the contract with some Government intervention.

Low Confidence The Government has low confidence in the Products meeting the RTM and has low confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, or will be successful in performing the contract even with Government intervention.

c. Award on Initial Responses

The Government anticipates selecting the best-suited Offeror from initial responses, without engaging in exchanges with Offerors. Offerors are strongly encouraged to submit their best technical solutions and price in response to this RFP.

d. Exchanges with Best-Suited Contractors

Reference is made to Sections A and C above. Once the Government determines the Offerors that are the best-suited (i.e., the apparent successful Offeror), the Government reserves the right to communicate with only those Offerors to address any remaining issues, if necessary, and finalize a Proposal with those Offerors. These issues may include technical and price. If the parties cannot successfully address any remaining issues, as determined pertinent at the sole discretion of the Government, the Government reserves the right to communicate with the next best-suited Offerors based on the original analysis and address any remaining issues.

Once the Government has begun communications with the next best-suited Offerors, no further communications with the previous Offerors will be entertained until after the Contract has been awarded. This process shall continue until an agreement is successfully reached and a Contract is awarded.

e. Evaluation of Technical Quote (Volume 1, Section 3)

1) Evaluation of Technical Capabilities and Management Approach. Each factor is equally rated.

The Government will evaluate the Offerors Technical Approach including the extent to which the Offeror:

i. Demonstrates a thorough understanding of the objectives and requirements of the SOO.

ii. Demonstrates technical expertise to meet the needs of NIH in its response to the RFP and technical questions posed.

iii. Demonstrates their ability to be proactive in reducing the likelihood and impact of problems/risks that might jeopardize the success of the project, including problems related to cost, schedule, and performance as defined in the

SOO.

iv. Demonstrates a feasible project plan and schedule, which meets the requirements of the SOO and ensures effective management of the Quote and stakeholders that support and perform the work.

v. The Government will conduct an initial assessment of Product(s)’ features and the Offerors ability to meet the larger goal of becoming a long-term partner.

This assessment may be based on responses to the RFP and other sources (e.g., RFI responses and other market research). The Government is not only interested in Products that meet technical requirements but that also have longevity and that can scale with NIH's modernization needs.

f. SOO Appendix B, Use Cases (PoC only)

Provided with the Statement of Objectives are specific Use Cases that are to be used during the Proof of Concept (PoC) Phase. At this time these are provided as information only and will apply to evaluation and testing of Products during the PoC.

g. Evaluation of Business Quote (Volume 2)

Offerors will be evaluated based upon cost/price completeness and accuracy to determine the validity of the price, cost/price realism, cost/price reasonableness, and cost/price risk.

Total estimated ceiling price to accomplish the requirement and all of its options will be utilized as a basis for evaluating price. The factors below will be used to assess whether the SH’s quote is complete, accurate, and realistic to minimize cost or performance risk.

1) Evaluation of Cost/Price Completeness and Accuracy:

The Government will review the cost/price schedules for completeness and accuracy. A determination will be made as to whether the Offeror has properly understood the Business Proposal instructions and properly completed the cost/price schedules. Changes to the evaluation quantities, blanks or zeros in the pricing columns, and/or mathematical mistakes are subject to clarification for confirmation of the Offeror’s intent. The Offeror’s quote will be checked for mathematical correctness to include the following:

i. Checking arithmetic in all computations

ii. Making sure that all prices/costs are summarized correctly

iii. Comparing electronic submittals with hard copies (if applicable)

A determination will be made regarding whether the cost/price appears unbalanced, either for the total cost/price of the proposal or separately priced line items. An analysis will be made by item, quantity, and year to identify any irregular or unusual pricing patterns. An unbalanced quote is one that incorporates prices that are less than the cost for some items and/or prices that are overstated for other items.

2) Evaluation of Cost/Price Reasonableness:

The Offerors are expected to establish a reasonable price relationship between all cost/price elements. An evaluation of the Offeror’s price Proposals will be made to determine if they are realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and are consistent with the Technical Proposal. Reasonableness determinations will be made by determining if competition exists, by comparing proposed cost/price with established commercial prices, other contract vehicles, and/or by comparing proposed cost/price with the Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE). The IGCE will not be released to the Public and shall not be released as part of this RFP.

3) Evaluation of Cost/Price Risk:

Risk refers to any aspect of the Offerors’ Proposals that could have significant negative cost consequences for the Government. Proposals will be assessed to identify potential risks.

Where cost/price risk is assessed, it may be described in quantitative terms or used as a best-value discriminator.

N. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)

In accordance with FAR 9.504, the Government is seeking to identify and evaluate potential OCI as early in the acquisition process as possible. If the Offeror has or envisions a potential conflict of interest in performing the work, the Offeror shall identify this in the Proposal and, if appropriate, address its proposed mitigation strategy. The guidelines and procedures of FAR

9.5 will be used in identifying and resolving any issues of organizational conflicts of interest under this RFP.

Offerors found to have an apparent or actual conflict of interest for which no acceptable mitigation strategy is possible will be removed from further consideration.

O. CONTRACT AWARD

Award(s) will be made to selected Offerors whose proposals, in conforming to this RFP, provide an overall best value to the Government.

Any follow-on award(s) from this Pilot Project will be based on an award to a Prime Vendor awarded project. Vendors not included in the Pilot Project as a Prime Vendor will not be eligible for participation in a follow-on project.