Solicitation 86615723R00004_Amendment 0001_Attachment 2_ Industry Questions with Responses.pdf

Visit our web page at http://www.hud.gov/program_offices/cpo

Reference: Questions in response to Solicitation Number 86615723R00004

To: Prospective Offerors

The following questions and answers addressed below are hereby incorporated into this solicitation:

THE CLOSING DATE OF THIS SOLICITAITON is changed from Tuesday, August 15, 2023, at 2:30 PM EST to Monday, August 21, 2023, at 2:30 PM EST.

Q1 The lead modeler requirements include specific degrees of economics, finance, statistics, or mathematics. Academic backgrounds in business administration (MBAs/DBAs), information systems, data analytics, and others, are very relevant based on their coursework for the PWS. Would the government consider expanding the degree background requirements to include those listed above to make it less restrictive for small business vendors?

A1 No.

Q2 How would HUD evaluate "sufficiency"? Is there a minimum number of references that

HUD would consider sufficient?

A2 HUD will consider a maximum of 5 references.

Q3 The document asks for 5 past performances for prime and additional for any joint venture partner or subcontractor working more than 20% scope on the project.

This is unusually restrictive for small businesses and unusual for almost all RFPs issued by this office. Would the government reconsider making this requirement the usual 3 past performance including prime and sub to allow for small business participation?

A3 HUD will consider a maximum of 5 references.

Q4 The key personnel requirements for the PM asks for PMP or similar certification, which can be restrictive for small businesses. As the detailed requirements lay out HUD uses PPM methodology to manage such projects, but HUD does not provide any certification for their methodology. Would a project manager with experience working at HUD using PPM methodology to manage projects qualify for Project Manager?

A4 The Project Manager must have a PMP, Program Management, Portfolio Management, or related certification. HUD experience is relevant, but not sufficient.

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

Industry Questions with Government Responses http://www.hud.gov/program_offices/cpo

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

Q5 Requirement 3 for Key Personnel asks for an Agile and Scrum Certification for the database administrator. These certifications can be unnecessarily cost-prohibitive for small businesses. An employee with demonstrated ability and experience should be able satisfy the requirements for the role. Would the government consider demonstrated professional experience and knowledge of agile/scrum methodologies acceptable for this role?

A5 No.

Q6 The CCAP solicitation states that 'The offeror shall submit a technical approach that demonstrates logical and feasible methods for meeting the requirements described in the Performance Work Statement Tasks 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7.' The Performance Work Statement also includes tasks 5.5 and 5.6. Would the government please clarify whether the technical proposal should also include tasks 5.5 and 5.6?

A6 Tasks 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7 are to be evaluated for the logical and feasible. All tasks should be included for the other (3) three Sub-Evaluation factors for Technical Approach.

Q7 In the review of the PWS, it is unclear as to the use of Java and C++ to complete the requirements. Would the government please elaborate on how Java and C++ coding skills are relevant to the statement of work?

A7 C#, Python and some Java code are currently contained in the CCAP solution.

Q8 Would the government clarify what cloud platform will be utilized to perform requirements under the CCAP PWS?

A8 AWS is the current HUD Cloud Platform.

Q9 What ETL tools/methodologies does HUD OCIO currently mandate to be used in the Cloud environment? If not, would the contractor have the latitude to select the most appropriate method? Further, would HUD make the tools available?

A9 This information is currently unknown, but OCIO would make the decisions for tools and methodologies. Yes, HUD will make the tools available.

Q10 Would the government clarify the process to request needed cloud components such as virtual machines, blob storages, etc. to satisfy the requirements proposed in the CCAP

PWS?

A10 Once they have been defined by OCIO, yes.

Q11 After transition to the cloud, should the database still be available to query for users?

A11 Yes.

Q12 HUD defines the key personnel required for submission in the RFP document as:

a. Project Manager

b. Project Manager Alternate.

However, in Attachment A, PWS, it is defined as:

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

a. Project Manager

b. Assistant Project Manager

c. Lead Modeler

d. Database Administrator

e. SAS EG and Viya Support Lead Would the government please clarify the required Key Personnel for this submission?

Further, would the government clarify whether key personnel should be identified by name and resume in the RFP response?

A12 Please see attachment 3 “Update to clause 2452.237-70 Key Personnel chart” for the updated key personnel in the solicitation.

Q13 Requirement 6 asks for the development of three short-term claim models for the commercial portfolio. Would the government clarify the timeframe required to complete and deliver on this requirement?

A13 Short-term models would be adapted from the longer-term models we currently have in place but would simply be executed for a shorter time period. While there are no short-term models now, we expect to start developing them within the first six months of the contract. The vendor will have had sufficient time to become familiar with the existing models so that the modifications to make a longer-term model (forecasting out 25 years) do short-term forecasting (only 10 years, for example) would be able to be accomplished with minimal effort.

Q14 Would the government confirm that the SAS IDP and Microsoft SAS Add-In are the only SAS products the contractor will be required to use for report retrieval purposes?

A14 The PWS has been modified to add items and clarify which version of SAS will be used for the two types of reports in CCAP:

Report Storage: CCAP web enabled reports and all associated report-related objects are stored in the CCAP environment. To ensure a timely transition-in period, and for the Department to provide timely reports (Budget, forecasting, Re-estimate, etc.) to Congress, these SAS products are required to be used by the Contractor for reports remaining on the SAS EG environment:

• SAS Information Delivery Portal (IDP) for report retrieval: Web reports are retrieved through the SAS IDP (IDP) via the OPIIS portal. It provides the ability to view reports, execute stored processes and apply report level or data level security. The reports viewed online can then be exported into Excel or PDF formats.

• Microsoft SAS Add-In: HUD users shall have the option of retrieving web reports with a familiar MS Office Client after enabling a SAS Add-In. Once a web report is opened in Excel, the user can analyze data using SAS analysis tools.

• SAS Web Studio SAS Visual Analytics will be required to be used for reports that have been migrated to the SAS Viya environment.

Q15 Statement 6 includes a requirement to "conduct special analysis on FHA MF and healthcare housing policies". Later in the SOW on Page 32, it states that the contractor shall prepare up to 12 special analyses in each contract year. Does the annual quantity of

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

12 special analyses include those special analyses mentioned in the requirements of the MPDA Tool as well as CCAP/OPIIS support services?

A15 No, the MDPA analyses would be in addition to those tasks.

Q16 The RFP states a CLIN is specific to SAS Software Maintenance Fee. Would the government elaborate on who, the government or the contractor, is purchasing the software? Further, would the government elaborate on the components of the software?

A16 SAS Viya licenses were purchased by HUD's current contractor FBO the government.

The contractor is currently paying annual maintenance fees and any winning vendor would be required to pay that fee on behalf of HUD. Components will be provided during the Transition-In process.

Q17 The RFP asks for maximum 5 past performance. What is the minimum number of Past performances that would be considered sufficient?

A17 HUD will consider a maximum of 5 references.

Q18 The RFP states that for a past performance to be relevant it must apply to all 3 activities of building predictive cash flow models, working with loan performance data, and executing subsidy estimates and re-estimates. Additionally, each past performance must involve one of the 3 asset classes. With limited federal programs in the area this is extremely restrictive for small business vendors to have 5 individually or even with teaming partners. We suggest this number of past performances to be 3 together with prime and teaming partners as standard government procurement practices.

A18 HUD will consider a maximum of 5 references.

Q19 The RFP states that for a past performance to be relevant it must apply to all 3 activities of building predictive cash flow models, working with loan performance data, and executing subsidy estimates and re-estimates. Additionally, each past performance must involve one of the 3 asset classes. The past performance activities above are overly focused on modeling while more than 50% of the PWS is focused on other requirements that are not part of the evaluation criteria for past performance.

Would the government consider the other PWS requirements (5.2 - CCAP Business Services, 5.3 - Data Element Management, 5.5 - Reporting Services, 5.6 - Application Support Services, 5.7 - Testing and Validation) outside of modeling activities as relevant for the past performance evaluation criteria?

A19 No.

Q20 Will the government require additional contractor services to support the GRRP policy and modeling efforts? Will this require additional models?

A20 GRRP has become one of the programs for which ORMRA is responsible. A model for calculating subsidy costs currently exists. Additional work may be required for formulated re-estimates and the LLG.

Q21 Section V of the Solicitation breaks out Technical Approach and Management Plan as different evaluation factors. Is the Management Plan intended to be a section of the Technical Approach submission or is it supposed to be a separate submission independent of the Technical Approach? See copied text from Eval Factors. kl

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

Page 69 of the solicitation documents the requirements for the management plan, which must be no more than 15 pages. The Management Plan should be submitted as a part of Volume I of the response.

Q22 In filling out form 1449, block 17a requests “Code” and “Facilities Code”. Does “Code” denote UEI and “Facilities Code” DUNS?

A22 In filling out the SF 1449, block 17a: The Offeror is to complete this block by entering their name, address, and cage code in block 17(a), and place an “X” in the block 17b if the Offeror has a remittance address that is different from that addressed in Block 17(a).

Q23 The Solicitation notes that Volume I – Technical Proposal and Volume II – Business Proposal shall be kept separate from each other. Should Volume 1 and Volume 2 be included in the same document as different sections, or should they be emailed as separate documents when submitting?

A23 Submit Volume I and Volume II as separate documents.

Q24 In the Technical Approach instructions, the RFP states that “The offeror shall submit a technical approach that demonstrates logical and feasible methods for meeting the requirements (including any Section 508 requirements) described in the Performance Work Statement Tasks 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7, and meeting the performance objectives outlined within the solicitation.” Should offeror’s only address technical approaches to sections 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7, or all of the tasks outlined in section 5 of the performance work statement?

A24 Tasks 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7 are to be evaluated for the logical and feasible. All tasks

Q25 The execution of subsidy estimates and reestimates is distinct to US Federal credit programs. Per the Federal Credit Supplement, the number of Federal agencies with credit programs that directly involve the solicitation’s 3 asset classes—multifamily, hospitals, and assisted living centers—is extremely limited, making it virtually impossible for any single bidder to have 5 unique past performances that meet all of the solicitation’s past performance requirements. In light of this, would the Government consider reducing the solicitation requirement to three past performance citations instead of 5? Alternatively, would the Government consider allowing a combination of past performance citations that may not each individually meet the 3 activity and 3 asset class requirements but that collectively demonstrate strong expertise in both areas? For instance, past performance citations that meet the 3 activities (e.g., federal credit reform modeling engagements) but for other than the 3 asset classes, and past performance citations that demonstrate expertise in one or more of the 3 asset classes but for other than the 3 federal credit reform modeling activities.

A25 HUD will consider a maximum of five (5) past performance experiences each for the Prime and any subcontractors performing more than 20% of the services.

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

Q26 NAICS Code, Page 1 SF1449 - The Government has listed NAICS code 541611 with a small business threshold of $16.5M. The size standard for 541611 was increased to $21.5M by the SBA in 2022. Please confirm that the size standard is $21.5M.

A26 The size standard for NAICS code 541611 was increased to $24.5M in 2023.

Q27 Please explain the difference between forecasting future values and randomly simulating future values for loan, financial, and market conditions. Are you looking for a range of randomly simulated values that will allow for the estimation of portfolio performance across multiple potential scenarios? Or is this a Monte Carlo Simulation?

A27 The current models employ monte carlo simulation for forecasting loan, financial, and market conditions.

Q28 Please provide information on the effectiveness (including operating environment and maintenance requirements) and preference for continued use of the loan performance forecast simulation developed by the incumbent.

A28 The loan performance forecasts and the models supporting those forecasts have been reviewed and approved by OMB. OMB has the authority to reject model changes that would significantly impact the President's Budget. Also, the FHA Model Risk Governance committee has reviewed and approved the models that generate the forecasts. Financial Statement Auditors and IV&V auditors review the models and the effectiveness of the forecasts every year and offer refinements to improve the results or incorporate best practices. The incumbent's methodology, models and forecasts have passed multiple reviews, audits and are accepted by OMB, FHA senior management, and auditors. The new contractor will continue to use the existing models until better methodologies can be statistically shown to perform better with results acceptable to OMB, FHA senior management and auditors.

Q29 Does the current platform allow for end-user production of dynamic performance reports?

A29 When fully implemented, it will.

Q30 Do you have a schematic that shows the different systems and tools in place to help assess how we can structure a proposal?

A30 The information needed to structure a proposal is contained in the PWS.

Q31 Is there a tool currently in place that provides the scenario analysis HUD desires from the MDPA tool? Do you have an estimate of how many policies will be initially analyzed and loaded into the MDPA tool and into subsequent monthly revisions to the MDPA tool?

A31 This is a new requirement and does not currently exist.

Q32 Does the full scope of work defined in the PWS match the scope of work under the existing contract with the incumbent? Can you please provide a breakdown of existing work vs new work? Can you please provide FTEs required for existing work?

A32 No. No. No.

Q33 Are there restrictions on vendors and tools that can be used to develop climate risk models?

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

A33 The vendor will use what is in existence and can propose additional vendors and tools if needed.

Q34 What platform is used for data warehousing and extracting data for the DataMart?

A34 OPIIS which was constructed by the incumbent. This draws on numerous FHA source systems.

Q35 Can you provide details on OPIIS migration to date and a scope of remaining work to complete the migration to the new environment?

A35 No. Migration activities are underway for the OPIIS reports into the Viya platform, but the full scope of work to complete the migration will not be available until the Transition-In period begins.

Q36 Is there a help desk ticketing application currently in place?

A36 The existing Help Desk is vendor owned and will not be transferred to the new contractor.

Q37 Will there be other methods for potential offerors to assess the work required for Transition in Plans? We appreciate the information in the PWS, but it is difficult to accurately determine what will be needed to affect a smooth transition within the 60-day transition window.

A37 The immediate need will be for security forms to be completed so that the PIV process can start. The winning vendor will be required to assume all work being done by the incumbent; however, precise information is not available at this time.

Q38 Given the scope and complexity detailed in the PWS, would the government consider extending the submission deadline?

A38 Yes. The proposal due date is changed to 8/21/2023 at 2:30 PM EST.

Q39 The requirements for past performance references states that “HUD will consider only references performed within the three years immediately prior”. We request that HUD open this to 5 or 7 years. The 3-year requirement is short for federal procurements and may deter bidders who may see it as an attempt by HUD to favor incumbents. After all, there are very few federal housing programs with multifamily mortgage insurance.

A39 No. HUD will only consider a maximum of five (5) relevant past performance performed in the three-year period immediately preceding submission of the proposal (proposal due date).

Q40 Should “Appendix E” be “Appendix D”?

A40 No. The Solicitation does not have Appendices attachments. All attachments are labeled as Attachments A-E. Attachment “E” should be Attachment “E”

Q41 Will there be (a) fast enough turnaround of Clearance/PIV/Access by HUD and (b) sufficient support, scope, and length of tenure of the Transitioning Out vendor’s Transition Out duties to align with a 60-day Transition-In Period as measured from the date of award?

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

A41 HUD is aware of the PIV turn-around time and will do it's best to expedite this process.

Yes, the incumbent will be available during the Transition-In period.

Q42 Many of the tasks described will be difficult quantify for a “firm fixed price” bid. Can HUD provide specifics on quantity, complexity, and expected level of effort for the tasks described? For example, subtask 5.2-7 requests “Perform testing and validation of any changes to the CCAP environment …” How many changes? What kind? What type of testing and validation? Similarly for subtask 5.2-10: “Meet the demand for all data mart inputs, outputs, analyses, modeling, and risk analyses to include the following data: …” Meet the demand? How many? What kind? What staffing skills and extent?

A42 Depends upon the level of expertise provided by the contractors. Not all of these tasks will occur at the same time. This leaves time to transition from one task to the next.

The changes will depend upon how many weaknesses or changing economic factors or policy initiatives the contractor identifies as important that are not addressed in the current models. There are up to five months devoted to incorporating changes followed by the validation tests deployed to ensure the changes will improve the model results. The testing and validation tests will depend upon which type of changes the contractor decides to make. Generally, the validation tests will be forecasts compared to actual values. Data mart inputs do not change dramatically. Generally, only as new programs are devised, or new data requirements are requested. The outputs will usually be met by reports constructed to meet customer specifications.

Again, the time and manpower needed will be dependent upon the skill and experience levels of the contractor's staff. Cannot predict how many and what kind because that will depend upon administration priorities and programs that are being implemented.

JC can address the specific staffing skills. But these type of situations by experienced, skilled programmers that will be given sufficient time to complete these tasks. The contractor will be able to determine how long it will take to complete these requests.

Q43 Can the government clarify the complexity of current models through coding language, lines of code, run-time and number of records used for modeling?

A43 CCAP currently runs over 12,000 lines of code against over 2.6 million records, and it takes a week to execute.

Q44 Can the government please provide the expected number of programs and/or cohorts that will require model enhancements (PWS Section 5.4.2) on an annual basis?

A44 Only the President's Budget is modeled by cohort. The other requirements for the OMB Re-estimate and the financial statement audited figures are constructed on a portfolio level. It is possible that none of the three will require enhancements, but these three models are continually reviewed for possible enhancements.

Q45 Can the government clarify if the three short-term models of claims (PWS Section 5.4.2.6) and the climate risk models (PWS Section 5.4.2.7) are minor or major enhancements?

These models, especially the climate risk models, have a potential to be complex and require more time than the 15 or 30 days allowed for minor or major enhancements, respectively.

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

A45 The three short term models would be minor enhancements but could be major enhancements if the contractor so desired. The climate risk model would be a new model and the level of complexity would depend upon the contractor.

Once the contractor has gained familiarity with the existing models and how to access FHA data through OPIIS, the 15 - 30 days will be sufficient.

Q46 Can the government please provide the expected number of new proposed policies annually for the MPDA tool (PWS Section 5.4.3)?

A46 Usually, less than twelve a year. In a busy year it could be slightly above a dozen possibly around 15.

Q47 There is mention of new single-family housing (page 4) programs in PWS Section 1.1, is that in the scope of PWS Section 5.4 – Modeling Services?

A47 Yes. However, at present, there are no new single family housing programs.

Q48 Given the need for clarity on quantities, scopes, and requirements, can HUD extend the due date to a time at least 3 weeks after the answers to the questions are received? We would also point to the imbalance of size of the PWS (20 pages of scope) to size of Technical Approach (25 pages.

A48 No. However, the proposal due date is changed to 8/21/2023 at 2:30 PM EST.

Q49 Please confirm the small business size standard under the under NAICS code 541611 is $24.5 million, per the latest SBA table of size standards:

https://www.sba.gov/sites/sbagov/files/2023- 06/Table%20of%20Size%20Standards_Effective%20March%2017%2C%202023_.xlsx

A49 Correct, the 2023 Small Business size standard under NAICS code 541611 is $24.5 million, per the latest SBA table of size standards at:

https://www.sba.gov/sites/sbagov/files/2023- 06/Table%20of%20Size%20Standards_Effective%20March%2017%2C%202023_.xlsx

Q50 Please confirm the NAICS code intended for this procurement. The Solicitation lists 541611 on Form 1449 and 541519 on page 56.

A50 The NAICS code for this requirement is 541611. This section will be updated during final award document.

Q51 Would you consider offering a two-week extension of the due date to allow for a more thoughtful and compelling response? That would make the new due date August 29, 2023.

A51 No. However, the proposal due date is changed to 8/21/2023 at 2:30 PM EST.

Q52 In the Solicitation, the Key Personnel is listed as the Project Manager and the Alternate Project Manager, but in the PWS there are five key personnel detailed (Project Manager, Assistant Project Manager, Lead Modeler, Database Administrator, and SAS EG and Viya Support Lead). Could you please confirm that there are 5 key personnel?

A52 Please see attachment 3 “Update to clause 2452.237-70 Key Personnel chart” for the

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

Q53 If the key personnel combined covers all the expertise listed in the PWS, is that acceptable?

A53 Yes, but make sure to note that if that person leaves you have to hire enough to replace all expertise and functions they performed as we will require the same levels of service.

Q54 Is the 5 relevant past performance references requirement the maximum number and minimum number required?

A54 HUD would consider 3 minimum to be sufficient, with a maximum of 5 for each (Prime and subcontractors performing more than 20%).

Q55 If the offeror is proposing to subcontract more than 20% of the contract value, must the subcontractor also submit 5 relevant past performance references?

A55 Per page 70 of the solicitation: "If the offeror is proposing to subcontract (or use joint ventures/ partners, or other entities other than the prime contractor to perform) more than 20% of the contract value, the offeror shall submit a separate chart and narrative described for past performance above, for the proposed subcontractor(s)." The maximum allowed is 5 for each one meeting more than 20% criteria.

Q56 Is it acceptable for the proposal to have 5 relevant past performance references regardless of the number of subcontractors?

A56 No. HUD would consider 3 minimum to be sufficient, with a maximum of 5 for the prime and each subcontractor performing more than 20% of the contract value

Q57 The past performance requirements are currently unduly restrictive, are you amenable to accepting past performance examples that involve at least one of the asset classes listed but involve either of the following activities: (1) building predictive cash flow models; or

(2) processing loan performance data; or (3) executing subsidy estimates and reestimates.

A57 Across all past performances, as state on page 74 of the solicitation, "a past performance effort shall have involved all the following.

activities (1) building predictive cash flow models; (2) processing loan performance data; and (3) executing subsidy estimates and reestimates. Also, each effort shall involve one or more of the following asset classes: (1) multifamily housing, (2) hospitals, and (3) assisted living centers." As stated on page 75, "Each past performance effort does not have to address all three asset classes (multifamily housing, hospitals, and assisted living centers). However, to have the highest confidence rating for overall past performance, the offeror’s past performance record must include efforts that include all three asset classes." Across all past performances, the respondent should endeavor to show experience with all three activities across all three asset classes. Great relevancy is placed on past performances that meet more requirements per past performances. Past performances with fewer demonstrated experiences are accepted but considered less relevant.

Q58 The Solicitation states," The offeror shall submit a technical approach that demonstrates logical and feasible methods for meeting the

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2 requirements (including any Section 508 requirements) described in the Performance Work Statement Tasks 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7, and meeting the performance objectives outlined within the solicitation." Should we only write to these tasks?

A58 Tasks 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7 are to be evaluated for the logical and feasible. All tasks

Q59 Will responses to tasks 5.1, 5.5, 5.6, and 5.8 be evaluated?

A59 Tasks 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7 are to be evaluated for the first sub-evaluation factor (logical and feasible). All tasks should be included for the other (3) three Sub-Evaluation factors for Technical Approach.

Q60 Can HUD share examples of the most recent model IV&V findings?

A60 This is not publicly available information at this time.

Q61 Will the incumbent be available during the transition-in period?

A61 Yes.

Q62 Is the CCAP Data Mart hosted by HUD or the Contractor?

A62 HUD

Q63 Can HUD confirm PIV Card enabled laptops will be provided to each contractor staff supporting this contract?

A63 Yes

Q64 Is the Assistant PM considered an Alternate PM in absence of the PM or is the Assistant PM expected to be a full-time role?

A64 The Assistant Project Manager shall be a member of the contractor's team fully aware and engaged in the team's work. The Assistant Project Manager is not required to be full time, but must have the required knowledge and experienced identified and be able to serve as the alternate in the absence of the Project Manager.

Q65 Is each key personnel identified in the PWS required to have ALL the areas of expertise listed on page 18-19? Including SAS software, Cloud-based SAS Viya and SAS Visual Statistics, deploying cloud enabled solution as a DBA with Agile and Scrum Certifications, professional modeling, Java and C++, advanced data processing, and commercial real estate experience. for example, is the Database Administrator expected to have expertise in professional modeling and SAS Viya and Visual Statistics? or is the Lead Modeler expected to have expertise in deploying a cloud enabled solution?

A65 No, experience can be divided across the personnel.

Q66 The areas of expertise listed on page 18 of the PWS lists that the DBA's "ability to deploy a cloud enabled ETL solution as a DBA with Agile and Scrum certifications". The description of the DBA role on page 17 does not indicate Agile and Scrum certifications are a requirement. Can HUD clarify if both Agile and CSM certifications are required of the DBA?

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

A66 Both are not required, but one of them is.

Q67 It states that the new contractor will "attend any required training provided by HUD and the former Contractor". Will the training be in person or virtual? How many trainings or hours of training will be available to the incoming contractor? What will be the nature of the training?

A67 Training will be virtual and will be sufficient to turn over operations.

Q68 Does HUD expect to award this contract following the submission of the FY25 Budget and Credit Subsidies by the incumbent team? Or will the new awardee, if different from the incumbent team, be involved in the Budget and Credit Subsidy submission process during the Transition In period?

A68 The intent is to award before the FY25 budget and credit subsidies.

Q69 How often are changes from the Change Control Board requested?

A69 The models are reviewed at least monthly

Q70 How often does the Change Control Board meet?

A70 The models are reviewed at least monthly

Q71 The Section 5.2 on page 22 of the PWS states ". Improve overall accountability, monitoring, reporting, and oversight over the various stages of the CCAP data mart life cycle to include the overall efficiency of insurance application processing, loan production, premium collection, loan administration, servicing of endorsed and assigned notes, claims processing, accounting, reporting, modeling, and portfolio analysis." This appears to be process improvements pertaining to operational processes that may be executed and managed by various FHA Multifamily offices. Can HUD confirm that it is expected the contractor work with the various FHA stakeholders, offices or relevant contractors to identify process improvements in the above referenced work streams and "improve overall accountability, monitoring, reporting, and oversight" over these stakeholders, offices, and relevant contractors?

A71 The process improvements are reported in data in the OPIIS datamart. The expectation is that the contractor will work with the Program Offices to develop codes or descriptions that would allow the capture of changes to the operating processes.

Q72 Deliverable A003 is CCAP Business Services. There are 20 various tasks listed in Task 2.

Can HUD clarify how the Contractor demonstrates successful completion and submission of this deliverable? For example, what is the expected deliverable for "have the demonstrated flexibility to leverage advancements in Information Technology"

A72 Successful completion is assuming all listed functions with minimal disruption. The expected deliverable for having the demonstrated flexibility to leverage advancements in IT is if one of the interfacing systems changes their delivery mechanism, the vendor must be flexible enough to change its solution to ingest the data via the new method, again with minimal disruption.

Q73 The first paragraph states "...data requirements change within 5 days of the Contractor receiving data." Please clarify this statement. Are CCAP data requirements currently

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2 being changed? Is this statement referring to a specific periodic review and change to the data structure/elements/contents, perhaps once a year?

A73 Please see the revised PWS with following change to this section:

The Datamart Validation Report does not currently exist. Data usage is documented in the Data Element Dictionary and the Business Requirements Document, however, over time, data requirements have been refined and the process must be re-examined.

Potential changes from this process could include addition of new data elements and removal of data elements that are no longer needed, or modification to variable logic or data sources. The Datamart Validation Report shall document and contain the results of these analyses and changes as they occur and will be reviewed during the Change Control Board process.

Q74 Can HUD confirm if the Data Validation Report is to be submitted 1) within 60 days of contract award, and subsequently 2) each month?

A74 Yes.

Q75 Can HUD share what is included in the Data Validation Report?

A75 There is no Data Validation Report at this time, but the requirement has been clarified in the PWS in Section 5.3, as shown in the response to question #77.

Q76 What is the format of the Data Validation Report?

A76 There is no Data Validation Report at this time, but the requirement has been clarified in the PWS in Section 5.3, as shown in the response to question #77.

Q77 Will all models be transferred to the new contractor?

A77 Yes.

Q78 #2 under the Loan Performance Modeling steps states that the loan performance forecast simulation will only be run for 232 and 242 loans. Is this accurate?

A78 The loan performance forecast simulation is performed for all three asset classes:

multifamily housing, section 232 loans (colloquially nursing homes), and section 242 loans (colloquially hospitals).

Q79 #7 under the Loan Performance Modeling steps in section 5.4.1 states that the contractor will build a short-term model or module to produce loan level risk scores. Does a loan level risk score model or module exist currently? If so, will that model be made available to the new contractor?

A79 It does not currently exist.

Q80 #8 states the contractor shall "migrate and develop web reports". Where are the reports being migrated from?

A80 From the server based OPIIS system to CCAP Viya environment.

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

Q81 #8 states the contractor shall "migrate and develop web reports". Is there a preferred web tool or interface HUD prefers?

A81 Yes, Viya.

Q82 What is considered a minor vs a major model enhancement?

A82 A minor adjustment would be a coefficient change to an existing model. A major enhancement would be to revise the process or delete an existing model and replace with a different methodology.

Q83 How often are minor and/or major enhancements implemented?

A83 Annually

Q84 #6 states that the contractor shall "develop three new short-term models of claims for the Multifamily, 232 and 242 portfolios. What is the state of the current short-term claim models? Why are they considered "short-term"? Will they be replaced by another model?

A84 There are no existing short-term models. Short term models would use the longer-term models as their basis, then run for shorter time periods.

Q85 #7, Do climate risk models exist currently or will the contractor be developing new climate risk models?

A85 Climate models to not currently exist.

Q86 #8. How do the loan performance forecast simulations differ from the new short-term models of claims stated in #6?

A86 The long-term forecasts are used for 40-year forecast. The short-term models will be used for shorter term forecasts.

Q87 Can HUD confirm if the Menu-driven Policy Analysis Tool currently exists?

A87 It does not exist

Q88 If the MDPA exists, what application/platform is it developed in?

A88 It does not exist

Q89 If the MPDA does not exist, does HUD have a preferred application/platform?

A89 The MDPA tool should be developed in solutions that are compatible with existing models and tools.

Q90 It states that various documents will be published on the CCAP intranet site. Who maintains the CCAP intranet site? Will the contractor be responsible for posting it to the CCAP intranet site?

A90 HUD maintains the CCAP intranet site, the CCAP vendors prepare the documents or changes, and they are submitted to Housing Operations for execution.

Q91 Will the required SAS licenses be provided to the Contractor?

A91 Yes.

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

Q92 What cloud platform is HUD utilizing for the cloud migration of OPIIS and CCAP?

A92 HUD is currently using the AWS cloud.

Q93 Can HUD share how many people currently staff the CCAP Help Desk?

A93 No.

Q94 Item #2 requires the awardee to "write and publish a CCAP Portal Users Guide to familiarize users with the Portal." Is CCAP currently live and operational with users accessing it but no user guide?

A94 It is the intent for the CCAP Portal Users Guide to have been developed by the Transition-In period.

Q95 Will the results of the most recent model IV&V be shared with the contractor (if the awardee is not the incumbent) during the Transition In period?

A95 Yes.

Q96 For Task 5.7.2, Deliverable A014 Test Plans and Results is stated in the Performance Standards. As the model developers it is not typical that the developers would create the IV&V test plan and results. Can HUD confirm if Deliverable A014 Test Plans and Results is expected for Task 5.7.2?

A96 The Test Plans and Results deliverable relates to Task 5.7.1 and is regarding CCAP testing, not IV&V testing that is discussed in 5.7.2.

Q97 Deliverable A010 OPIIS Support Services is "ongoing until full cutover to the CCAP platform". When does HUD anticipate the full cutover to occur?

A97 Unknown at this time.

Q98 Will HUD consider extending the due date of the proposal to 14 days after Q&As are published?

A98 No. However the proposal due date is changed to 8/21/2023 at 2:30 PM EST

Q99 Can HUD confirm if tables, graphs, and images are included in the page count?

A99 Yes.

Q100 Is the project schedule included in the page count or can it be placed in an Appendix?

A100 The project schedule is part of the 25-page limit for the technical approach. The project schedule must be submitted with the Offeror's technical approach and placed in an Appendix.

Q101 Following the experience requirement for the SAS EG and Viya Support Lead, the PWS states “Key Personnel must possess the following expertise: 1. SAS software – experience…. through 7. Commercial real estate to include….” It is unclear which key personnel or if ALL the five key personnel are required to possess the seven areas of expertise. Please clarify.

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2

A101 All seven areas of expertise shall exist between all key personnel at all times, regardless of distribution.

Q102 Can the Government please confirm the email size limitations since we are required to email our proposal? If we need to send multiple emails to meet the size limitations, is it acceptable to indicate the email number in the subject line and body of the email (e.g., Email 1 of 3, 2 of 3, etc.)?

A102 Proposal shall be submitted in two parts, Technical Volume I and Price Proposal Volume II. The Offeror can send multiple emails to meet the size limitations, it is acceptable to indicate the email number in the subject line and body of the email (e.g., Email 1 of 3, 2 of 3, etc.)?

Q103 The Technical Approach lists only PWS 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7 as the required sections to discuss in our 25-page technical. Can the Government please confirm that the Offeror does not need to also respond to PWS 5.1, 5.5, 5.6, and 5.8

A103 Tasks 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7 are to be evaluated for the logical and feasible. All tasks

Q104 The PWS discusses Transition-in Section 1.12 and Section 5.1; however, the instructions and evaluation factor do not describe where and if the Offeror should address this PWS requirement in our proposal response. Can the Government, please clarify if we should address these sections as part of our 25-page Technical, 15-page Management, or is it excluded from the page limits?

A104 Tasks 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.7 are to be evaluated for the logical and feasible. All tasks

Q105 Two key personnel (Project Manager and Alternate Project Manager) are listed in section 2452.237-70. However, the PWS lists five key personnel. Can the Government please clarify which is correct?

A105 Please see attachment 3 “Update to clause 2452.237-70 Key Personnel chart” for the

Q106 Section (e) discusses multiple offers; however, page 62 states the Government intends to award only a single contract. Can the Government please clarify which is correct?

A106 Section (e), (page 57) instructions provide an opportunity for Offerors to submit multiple proposals with alternative terms and conditions including alternative line items, or alternative commercial items to meet this requirement.

Page 62, (a) states that the Government anticipates awarding one (1) contract as a result of this solicitation based on the proposals received in conjunction with instructions provided in Section (e), page 57.

The Government is making a single award. Both statements above are correct: multiple proposals from one Offeror are authorized as long as the additional proposals

Solicitation 86615723R00004 / Amendment 0001 Attachment 2 submitted by the Offeror meets the criteria of Section V 52.212-1 (e). However, The Government will make a single award, per page 62 (a).