Questions_and_Answers_-_16PBGC18R0003.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 62 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- APP_2017-0034
- Issued by
-
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
About this file
Answers to all questions submitted
View the file
Other files
Show all 16
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
| Question | Document | Section | Page | Category | Question | Answer | |
| 1 | - | AMS | Is it correct to assume that only those offerors that were deemed viable as part of the preliminary RFI phase are eligible for Prime contract award? | No. The Advisory Multi-Step Process was for informational purposes only. | |||
| 2 | H.6 | Clauses | Section H.6 PBGC 52.216-7000 PRICE/COST (FEB 2013), on Page 99, states "All work performed as direct labor under this contract must be provided with in the specific hours and at the hourly rate established for each labor category herein." PBGC has not provided estimated hours at the IDIQ level, please confirm the intent of this statement. | This clause is incorporated into the IDIQ to flow down to the Task Orders. | |||
| 3 | L.5 PBGC 52.215-7000 OFFEROR'S PROPOSALS (OCT 2004) | 141 | Clauses | On page 141 of 160 in the RFP, PBGC has included Clause PBGC 52.215-7000 “OFFEROR'S PROPOSALS (OCT 2004).” Please confirm that the submission of fully-loaded labor rates is all that is required in our proposal response, as provided for in Section B.4 Sample IDIQ Pricing Schedule. Please also confirm that cost and pricing data is not required for the IDIQ and Attachment B “Price Schedule” for Task Orders 1 and 2. Please also confirm that the column titled “Direct Labor Cost” in Section B of Task Orders 1 and 2 is in fact “Total Labor Price.” | Only fully loaded labor rates are required as outlined in Section B.4 Sample IDIQ Pricing Schedule. Cost and Pricing Data is not required for the IDIQ and Task Orders. "Direct Labor Cost" in Section B of Task Orders 1 and 2 is the "Total Labor Price" | ||
| 4 | Page 106 of 160, I.18 52.212-5 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR EXECUTIVE ORDERS-- COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 2018) | Clauses | The RFP contains clause I.18 52.212-5 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR EXECUTIVE ORDERS-- COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 2018). This clause is multiple pages long and lists a number of additional clauses which may or may not apply to this solicitation (e.g. Service Contract Act (52.222-41 and others), Small Business Set Aside (52.219-6 and others), etc.) We are unsure of the intent of these clauses and whether they apply to this solicitation and believe that typically the Contracting Officer would check off those clauses that apply to this solicitation. Additionally, these clauses appear to only be required for Commercial Items. Please confirm which clauses within this section apply to this solicitation. Please also confirm that the small business set aside clauses and the service contract act clauses specifically do not apply to this solicitation. | An amendment will be issued to include 52.212-5 with the appropriate and applicable clauses selected with a preceding "x." The small business set-aside and SCA clauses do not apply. | |||
| 5 | 18R0003 | M.2.1 VOLUME I – EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL; Factor 3; last bullet | 156 | Communications Plan | “Special emphasis will be placed on how the Offeror’s Staffing Plan and Communication Plan will be effectively implemented to achieve objectives as stated throughout the SOW.” | ||
| Are offerors required to provide a Communications Plan? If so, does it go in the main body of Factor 3 – Staffing and Management Approach (within page count) or would it be provided in an appendix outside of page count? Does the Communications Plan apply to the IDIQ response only, or is it required for each task order as well? | Yes, we are looking for a communications plan minimally at the IDIQ level, within the page count. Offerors may include communications in their management approach responses to the task orders. | ||||||
| 6 | B.2 and F.6 | Contract Type | Section B.2 states “Task Orders will be issued using Firm Fixed Price (FFP), Labor Hour (LH), or hybrid FFP/LH contract types.” However, Section F.6 Contract Type (and G.1) states “Task Orders will be issued on a Firm Fixed-Price (FFP), Time and Materials (TM), or Labor Hour (LH) basis or a hybrid of one or more of FP, LH or TM, depending upon the requirements of PBGC.” These sections each state different contract types can be awarded under the resultant IDIQ contract, please confirm which contract types can be awarded under this IDIQ contract and update the RFP accordingly. | An amendment will be issued to update Section B.2 to align with Sections F.6 and G.1. | |||
| 7 | I.24 FAR 52.244-2 Subcontract, (e), paragraphs 5 & 6 | 112 | Cost or Pricing Data | Item (v). Please confirm subcontractors are not required to provide certified cost or pricing data and Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data. | |||
| Item (vi). Please confirm subcontractors are not required to provide a Cost Accounting Standards Disclosure Statement or Certificate. | Certified cost or pricing data is not requested IAW FAR 15.403-1(b)(3) | ||||||
| 8 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | Section 1.0, CBA_REQ-17 | COTS | For CBA_REQ-17, what COTS product does PBGC currently use for user authentication? | For internal users, PBGC uses Oracle Access Manager (OAM) to authenticate users via single sign on. For external PBGC users a custom coded solution is currently used | ||
| 9 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | Section 1.0, CBA_REQ-16 | COTS | For CBA_REQ-16, what COTS product does PBGC currently use for front-end security? | The customer module uses custom built authentication. The admin module uses Oracle Access Manager for authentication. | ||
| 10 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | Section 1.0, CBA_REQ-20 | COTS | For CBA_REQ-20, does PBGC currently own COTS middleware product such as Oracle SOA? | Yes, Oracle SOA. | ||
| 11 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | Section 1.0, CBA_REQ-21 | COTS | For CBA_REQ-21, does PBGC currently own an enterprise Chat product/solution? If not, what is the Government's preferred solution? | PBGC currently uses Skype for Business as an internal instant messaging tool but none currently used for MyPAA solution. Offerors may propose their own recommended solution to meet the requirement. If it is technology that has yet to be approved internally, it will have to presented to the Technical Review Board (TRB). | ||
| 12 | General | COTS | Is there a requirement to protect sensitive data in the non-production environment for Dev/ testing activities for which data masking solution may be required? Please confirm. | Data in PBGC non-prod environments is masked for the identified PII information that the application hosts/processes. Non-PII data should still be handled in accordance with "H.5 PBGC 52.209-7002 HANDLING PBGC DATA (MAY 2017)" clause | |||
| 13 | General | COTS | Is there an existing tool already available and implemented at PBGC for masking sensitive data in the non-production environment? If yes, please share more details as follows: |
a) Product name
| b) Modules implemented | Yes, the PII masking tool is available to the Production O&M DBAs. Application O&M/development teams relay information on any new PII being added to the Production O&M DBAs for updating the corresponding masking templates. Use of PBGC's masking product is out of scope for OM/Development teams. | ||||
| 14 | General | COTS | Are there any packaged Applications (like SAP, Oracle E-Business Suite, etc.) that need to be considered in-scope ? | See system background descriptions. CFS and PPS are based on the Oracle eBusiness Suite with modules as described in the background. This included reporting such as Oracle BI Publisher. TAS is a managed service based on the Eagle Accounting & Data Management System. Finally, for TAS, support is provided for Remote Plus, an excel plug in from Interactive Data Corporation, used to obtain asset prices. | |
| 15 | General | COTS | Is encryption required for both data at rest and data in motion(message level encryption in transit) protection? Is there any existing encryption solution implemented that can be leveraged? If so, please provide details | Encryption is required for data in transit outside the agency. PBGC is migrating towards encryption for data in transit inside the agency. PBGC has not implemented encryption for data at rest. PBGC's infrastructure operations department (ITIOD) is responsible for the selection and maintenance of the encryption tools. | |
| 16 | General | COTS | Please let us know if any existing key management solution for encryption are already in use. If yes, provide details. | PBGC's infrastructure operations department (ITIOD) is responsible for the selection and maintenance of the encryption tools. | |
| 17 | General | COTS | Please confirm if any of the following Security Testing activities are required |
1. SAST - Static Application Security Testing (Source Code Level review of the code)
2. DAST - Dynamic Application Security Testing (UI level testing for identifying vulnerabilities at the runtime)
| 3. Application Penetration Testing | While the team should be conscious of best practices for ensuring security in their software development, the offeror is not responsible for performing these functions. PBGC’s infrastructure Operations Department or outside parties may be used to provide these services. If issues are identified, the contractor will be responsible for remediating these issues. | ||||||
| 18 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | CBA_REQ-1 | COTS | Are we going to use interview(Screens) designed in Oracle policy automation or a separate front end web application needs to be built which will be integrated with OPA rule engine and other security systems? | The Government has not selected a final design for its MyPAA replacement. The front end user interface screens can be developed using a separate technology other than Oracle Policy automation. The web pages must be Section 508 compliant and conform to current usability requirements. The Government looks forward to offeror proposals. | ||
| 19 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | CBA_REQ-2 | COTS | what kind of self-service features we are looking for? | A set of self service features, but not limited to: update password, update address contact information, secure inbox | ||
| 20 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | CBA_REQ-3 | COTS | Are we talking about user input data validations error on the page? | User input validation messages should alert the users with a message at the form field that they should update their value or with a warning to confirm that is the value the practitioner wanted to enter. At the conclusion of the filing, prior to submission, the user should be presented with a summary of any existing validations errors or warnings. | ||
| 21 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | CBA_REQ-6 | COTS | Is this include data migration from existing database? | The final modernized solution will have both My PAA and PPS data on the same database server | ||
| 22 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | CBA_REQ-7 | COTS | What are features available to staff admin? | The My PAA Admin module provides the ability for PBGC users to maintain practitioner My PAA accounts, configure password length requirements, create system status notifications, approve Filing Coordinator requests, generate administrative reports, etc. | ||
| 23 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | CBA_REQ-11 | COTS | CBA_REQ-5 "says single rule engine for Validation and Premium Calculation Rules" | |||
| but CBA_REQ_11 says "Separate business and validation rules from the core filing schema". What does the core filing schema includes? | CBA_REQ-5 is identifying a need to implement a single container to store all Premium validation and Premium calculation rules. This container will be easily configurable to make changes in accordance with ERISA legislative updates. CBA_REQ-11 is identifying the need to develop an approach to maintain filing schemas that may change each year. For various reasons, the data that My PAA collects via the front end user interface may be updated to capture additional plan information. | ||||||
| 24 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | CBA_REQ-11 | |||||
| CBA_REQ-12 | COTS | what is the filing schema? How does this differ from rule engine? | The filing schema is basically the collection of fields or data that the My PAA front end interface collects via a practitioner screen prepared filing, or via a practitioner created XML file imported to My PAA, or via a practitioner created XML file uploaded to My PAA. A business rules engine would be a separate container that stores premium business rules, validations, and premium calculations. The validations would ensure that the data that is collected via My PAA is accurate. The premium calculations provide the mathematical formulas to generate premium amounts owed, etc. | ||||
| 25 | Sample_Development_Task_Scenario | CBA_REQ-14 | COTS | Is MyPAA sending/ receiving any data from ACH system? If yes, which system takes care of web services for data transfer? | Currently, My PAA consumes a Pay.gov web service for the submission of batch ACH data. Pay.gov replies with an acknowledgement that the weekday ACH submission was received. | ||
| 26 | Sample Development Task Scenario | My PAA application architecture Diagram - Page 4 | COTS | This diagram has Oracle Service Module as a component, kindly confirm if this mentioned module is "Oracle Service Cloud(RightNow)" which is a customer service CRM solution | The diagram contains a label for Oracle Service Module as a component. The final solution for this sample task must include a core set of Oracle components, but the final architecture is not limited to just Oracle products. | ||
| 27 | Sample Development Task Scenario | My PAA application architecture Diagram - Page 4 | COTS | Which Channels(Email, Phone, Web, Chat) needs to be supported by contact center. Are you looking for an enterprise grade contact center solution which should uniquely take care of all these channel as a unified desktop solution? | The call center is already equipped with phone and e-mail support capability. A complementary call center solution could also incorporate chat capability with My PAA practitioner web users. In addition, the CRM component could provide web users with a secure inbox to allow for secure email communication between call center staff and My PAA users. Statistics could be captured for call center efficiency and frequency of common questions from users. These statistics could allow PBGC to make various tweaks to improve the customer experience for the user. | ||
| 28 | Sample Development Task Scenario | My PAA application architecture Diagram - Page 4 | COTS | Do your agents have a unified view of all the communication across each channel? | No | ||
| 29 | Sample Development Task Scenario | My PAA application architecture Diagram - Page 4 | COTS | What are the key contact center areas are you looking to improve through this product implementation. For example - Service Request/ incident management process, Self Service, Knowledge Management, Self help portal etc.? | The contact center solution should provide capability to minimize or completely decommission the need for the sending of letters to the My PAA practitioners. Submitted premium filings could be validated internally with an immediate secure inbox e-mail to notify the practitioner what updates or amendments would be needed to a filing. Also premium plan account statement information should be communicated in a secure fashion. | ||
| 30 | Sample Development Task Scenario | My PAA application architecture Diagram - Page 4 | COTS | How does a customer start their support experience or support activity? Where is this located ? How does the customer begin to find information? | A My PAA practitioner user starts their customer call center support experience either by calling the 1-800 phone number or sending an e-mail for support. This contact information is found on the login screen or on the PBGC.gov web site. | ||
| 31 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-25 | COTS | Please share some details on the major functionalities / business processes which are looking from the CRM system | Secure inbox, Change of address, phone number, etc., | ||
| 32 | General | COTS | Please provide list of Oracle modules used by PPS System | See system background discussion in solicitation. PPS primarily uses two Oracle eBusiness Suite modules: Trading Community Architecture (TCA) and Customer Relationship Management Teleservice (CRM). However functionality is tied to other EBS components such as interface with GL and use of AP processes. | |||
| 33 | General | COTS | Is there any specific functionality that is being planned to replace with Oracle out of the box modules/features in PPS? | No, there is no specific functionality in PPS being planned to replace with Oracle eBusiness Suite modules/features at this time. | |||
| 34 | General | COTS | Has Oracle COTS module has been identified for replacing My PAA? | The Sample Development Task Scenario has requested that the proposal submitted for this sample task be architected using Oracle COTS to maximum extent possible. | |||
| 35 | General | COTS | Please provide list of Oracle customization currently used by MY PAA System | The current My PAA application currently utilizes the following core Oracle components. Oracle Database, Oracle BPEL, Oracle Access Manager for single sign on for Admin Module | |||
| 36 | General | COTS | We understand that you are currently using Oracle TCA architecture. Please provide some more insight on that. | The TCA module is a data model that allows for management of complex information about inter-related parties. PPS uses TCA to store, track, and maintain information about pension plans and the complex relationship between plans specific to each filing year. |
It supports plan transfers, mergers, spin-offs, etc.
| 37 | 18R0003 | L.1.7, Para. 2 (after bullets) | Cover Letter | Section L.1.7 requires a cover letter to be included with the proposal submission. In which volume should an offeror include the cover letter (letter of transmittal)? | The cover letter shall be provided as a separate independent document. | ||
| 38 | 18R0003 | L.1.7 | 119 | Cover Letter | Reference: Section L.1.7 states, “The cover letter (letter of transmittal) shall identify all enclosures being transmitted and shall be used only to transmit the proposal and shall include no other information. | ||
| Question: Is cover letter to be provided as separate file or within Volume 1? | The cover letter shall be provided as a separate independent document. | ||||||
| 39 | 18R0003 | L.1.7 | 119 | Cover Letter | Reference: Section L.1.7 states, The cover letter (letter of transmittal) shall identify all enclosures being transmitted and shall be used only to transmit the proposal and shall include no other information. |
Questions: In addition to identifying all enclosures being transmitted, should the cover letter also include:
| • | acknowledgement of any amendments received? | |||||
| • | the statement required by L.6 that the proposal is valid for 120 calendar days from the closing date of the solicitation? | Yes to both. | ||||
| 40 | 18R0003 | 3.8 DATA QUALITY MANAGEMENT | Data Warehousing | What is the number of applications & databases currently under scope of “Systems Development and Engineering | The applications to be considered under scope are addressed in section 1.2 of Section C of the IDIQ. Beyond the production environments, each application will have one or more database instances in non-production environments. | |
| 41 | 18R0003 | 3.8 DATA QUALITY MANAGEMENT | Data Warehousing | What are the current data base platforms used for these applications ? Is there any legacy platform exists | All applications use an Oracle database. There is no legacy database platform. | |
| 42 | 18R0003 | 3.8 DATA QUALITY MANAGEMENT | Data Warehousing | Is there any plan to build new data warehouses for strategic reporting purpose? | In Section 3.8 of the IDIQ, Data Quality, there is no reference to a data warehouse. Data warehouse solutions are not included within the scope of either Work order 1 or 2. PBGC’s current data warehouse solutions are the CPS and CDMS data warehouse solutions which are outside of scope for the FMS ITS contract except for data feeds from the PPS application outlined in Section 1.2. | |
| 43 | 18R0003 | 3.8 DATA QUALITY MANAGEMENT | Data Warehousing | What is the total number of entities across all applications which needs to be considered for migration | We are not anticipating a migration to a data warehouse at this time. There may, however, be a migration related to the Sample Development Task Order. | |
| 44 | 18R0003 | 3.8 DATA QUALITY MANAGEMENT | Data Warehousing | How many data ware houses now currently exists? Are they need to be migrated new platform as well | In Section 3.8 of the IDIQ, Data Quality, there is no reference to a data warehouse. Data warehouse solutions are not included within the scope of either Work order 1 or 2. PBGC’s current data warehouse solutions are the CPS and CDMS data warehouse solutions which are outside of scope for the FMS ITS contract except for data feeds from the PPS application outlined in Section 1.2. | |
| 45 | 18R0003 | 3.8 DATA QUALITY MANAGEMENT | Data Warehousing | Do we have data models available all databases currently exists? | For non-COTS components PBGC maintains a logical data model using ERWin. | |
| 46 | 18R0003 | 3.8 DATA QUALITY MANAGEMENT | Data Warehousing | What is the Enterprise Data Modeling tool? Please provide the version as well. | Erwin v9.64 | |
| 47 | 18R0003 | 3.8 DATA QUALITY MANAGEMENT | Data Warehousing | What is the existing data volume for each of the application databases ? | Since data warehouse is not in scope, this question, if we understand correctly, does not seem relevant. | |
| 48 | 18R0003 | 3.8 DATA QUALITY MANAGEMENT | Data Warehousing | What is the current archival and retention strategy for the warehouses? | In Section 3.8 of the IDIQ, Data Quality, there is no reference to a data warehouse. Data warehouse solutions are not included within the scope of either Work order 1 or 2. PBGC’s current data warehouse solutions are the CPS and CDMS data warehouse solutions which are outside of scope for the FMS ITS contract except for data feeds from the PPS application outlined in Section 1.2. | |
| 49 | TO-01 | Statement of Objectives, Page 3 of 22 | Definition | The SOO states "Task Order Type: Severable, Firm Fixed Price" We are not familiar what the word "severable" means when used in this section. Please clarify what this statement means. | Severable. A service is severable if the service is continuing and recurring in nature and can be completed within a single fiscal year or may be separated into individual tasks spanning multiple fiscal years to meet an agency’s ongoing needs. | |
| 50 | TO-02 | Statement of Objectives, Page 3 of 20 | Definition | The SOO states "Period of Performance (POP): Severable, One year from Date of Award." We are not familiar what the word "severable" means when used in this section. Please clarify what this statement means. | Severable. A service is severable if the service is continuing and recurring in nature and can be completed within a single fiscal year or may be separated into individual tasks spanning multiple fiscal years to meet an agency’s ongoing needs. | |
| 51 | (1) Section C, Description/Specifications/Work Statement, Section 3.1.1 (Project Management) |
(2) Page 104 of 160, H.15 PBGC 52.239-7001 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT (MAR 2016)H.15, (e)(3)
| (3) Task_Order_Request-_TO-02 Section 3.2 Performance Standards | EVM | All three of these sections in the RFP reference Earned Value, in particular Task 2 contains performance metrics for CPI and SPI, however we are unable to locate any contract clauses in the RFP related to Earned Value requirements. We do not believe that Earned Value applies to this contract. Please confirm whether Earned Value will apply to this effort and update the RFP accordingly. | Earned Value is expected to be used as a performance metric. Section C 3.1.1 in the SOW mentions earned value management. PBGC does not have standard clauses proscribing earned value processes. However, detailed processes and tools are available through PBGC’s Project, Program and Portfolio Management (P3M) toolset and guidance. Finally, while earned value management is applicable to this contract, PBGC understands that CPI for fixed price contracts will not be meaningful. | ||||
| 52 | Executive Summary | Is acceptable for offerors to include an Executive Summary with our response, which is not bound by the 20-page limitation for the IDIQ Response? | Yes | ||||
| 53 | - | Extension | Please extend the due date for this submission to July 9, 2018 (15 additional business days) to allow offerors sufficient time to incorporate the Government's answers to questions. | The due date for proposals is not extended at this time. PBGC will consider requests for an extension after Offerors have reviewed the Q&As and determined a reasonable impact to their proposal response. | |||
| 54 | 18R0003 | Page 118 of 160, Section L.1.4 "Electronic Submission" | File Size | Section L.1.4 "Electronic Submission" states that offerors are to submit our proposals via the PBGC Secure Proposal site. What are the file size limits for electronic submission on this site? | There is no file size limitation | ||
| 55 | 18R0003 | L.1.4 ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION | 118 | File Size | Is there a file size limitation for online submission? | There is no file size limitation | |
| 56 | 18R0003 | L.1.7 | Font Size | The General Instructions, described in Section L.1.7 do not describe expectations for tables, graphics, charts, or other proposal art. Will the Government consider allowing a smaller font size for this type of content so the PBGC can see illustrations of an offeror's approach, as long as the content is relevant to the requirements and does not circumvent the page restrictions of Section L.1.8? Will PBGC consider allowing size 8 font for chart/art titles and 10 for table text, etc.? | Offerors may use size 10 point font for graphics and tables | ||
| 57 | General | Font Size | Is 10 point font acceptable for tables, graphics and figures? | Offerors may use size 10 point font for graphics, figures and tables | |||
| 58 | 18R0003 | L.1.7 PROPOSAL FORMAT AND COMPOSITION; General Instructions | 119 | Font Size | The RFP instructions ask for proposals to be written in “12 pitch print or larger, Times New Roman style font.” | ||
| Does this requirement apply to graphics and tables? May offerors use size 10 font for graphics and tables? | Offerors may use size 10 point font for graphics, figures and tables | ||||||
| 59 | 18R0003 | L.1.7 | 119 | Font Size | Reference: Section L.1.7 states, “12 pitch print or larger, Times New Roman style font.” |
Questions: Can the PBGC allow:
| • | 10 pitch print or larger for tables? | ||||||
| • | 8 pitch print or larger for graphics? | Offerors may use size 10 point font for graphics, figures and tables | |||||
| 60 | L.1.7 | Font Size | Is it acceptable for offerors to use a standard font (i.e. Arial family) smaller than 12 point, for tables and graphics, as long as it is easily readable? | Offerors may use size 10 point font for graphics, figures and tables | |||
| 61 | 18R0003 | H.8, Para. 6 | Foreign Nationals | In Section H.8, Paragraph 6: "Foreign Nationals who are legal residents must possess a minimum of three consecutive years of residential history within the US or its territories." In order to increase the size of available resources to provide the best people, will the Government consider permitting Foreign Nationals to work on the contract, if they have resided within the United States less than 3 years? | No | ||
| 62 | 18R0003 | H.8, (c)(1) | Foreign Nationals | Section H.8 (c)(1) states "When contractor employees providing services to PBGC are located outside the US or its territories, and do not possess US Citizenship or a US Alien Registration Number, their background investigation must be completed by a reputable third party background investigation vendor acceptable to PBGC." Does the Government envision allowing contractors to deliver services from outside the US or its territories? | No | ||
| 63 | TO-02 | 6 | General | Please comment on the level of adoption of DevOps, Continuous Integration & Agile at PBGC today? |
- Are there any tools being used for Continuous Integration?
| - What are the % of Agile and DevOps adoption target for next 2 years? | At present, FMS applications are not using Dev Ops or continuous integration for development and support. Some Agile techniques have been piloted with FMS applications. We anticipate further adoption in consultation with the FMS ITSS Contractor. There are no set targets across PBGC for adoption of Agile over the next two years. | ||||||
| 64 | TO-02 | General | Is there any other Web Applications/Web Services/Interfaces need to be included in scope of performance testing other than My PAA , PPS & TAS | Please see section 1.2 for scope. | |||
| 65 | TO-02 | General | Are there any existing performance issues/bottlenecks currently being observed from MyPAA ,PPS & TAS systems in production? | No | |||
| 66 | General | General | Whether performance testing done in the past? If so are the performance benchmarks or baselines available? | Performance is tested on an annual basis and statistics are kept for a variety of services. Please see Task Order 01 section 2.1.7 for a description of the PPS and MyPAA annual performance test. | |||
| 67 | General | General | Does PBGC own any Monitoring tools to measure WEB.APP.DB servers? | PBGC has internal performance monitoring tools such as HP RUM to measure server bandwidth | |||
| 68 | General | General | Are Mobile applications considered to be in scope for Security Testing | At present, mobile applications are not in scope | |||
| 69 | General | Integration | Is it possible for you to share the Enterprise Architecture view/artefacts, if any. This is to better understand the Program goals and the enterprise level business and technology view of the PBCG landscape before going into the task order level work requested in the document | Section 1.2 of the SOW provides program and system level views. | |||
| 70 | General | Integration | Will there be SME available for clarifications and source/target systems mapping for each Business area from PBCG in the engagement? | Section 3.1.8 of the SOW describes the Integrated Project Team (IPT) that provides expertise and guidance. | |||
| 71 | General | Integration | Are there Oracle SOA/Integration design, coding and implementation guidelines defined? | Yes, PBGC has the following relevant standards: Design Document Standard, Development Standard, and Software Service Standard. | |||
| 72 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-1 | Integration | Will the Interface to premium calculations logic will be through SOA Suite or will it be P2P. Is there any existing interface available? | The interface to the premium calculations logic has yet to be determined for this sample task. Industry standard service oriented architecture principles should be considered. My PAA currently interfaces with PPS logic via web services. | ||
| 73 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-1 | Integration | Can you please provide insights to various types common validation rules which needs to implemented?. We believe this will be implemented using Oracle Business Rules | Common validations: User account information, Locked account, blank fields, invalid filing method, ein/pn no match, invalid ACH routing number, filing past due date, uvb valuation date outside plan year, standard segment rates warning, alternative segment rates warning, etc. | ||
| 74 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-1 | Integration | Is Filling into PPS needs to be implemented using Oracle BPEL as a System driven Business process? | The premium filing submission to PPS is not required to be implemented using Oracle BPEL. However, please keep in mind the requirement on Page 4 of the Sample Dev Task Order SOO - "The replacement solution will be based on Oracle COTS to the maximum extent possible. " | ||
| 75 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-10 | Integration | Currently, Oracle Business Rules provide an OOTB adminsitration screen to manage the rules, is there any ask to build customized adminsitration screen for configuring the rules. | CBA_REQ-10 is identifying a requirement to make My PAA less of a custom code application and much more of a COTS, configurable application to the greatest extent possible. The business rules admin interface will be dependent on the approach or technology selected for the container that hosts the business rules, validations, and calculations. | ||
| 76 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-16 | Integration | What are the Wesbervices Security requirements related to Authentication and Authorization?. What is the identity management product tools currently used. | Webservices security requirements related to authentication and authorization. Web services consumed and hosted at PBGC should conform with NIST 800-53 cybersecurity requirements, including M-15-13 | ||
| 77 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-17 | Integration | What are the envisioned mode for multifactor authentication for additional security? | Multi-factor may include, but not limited to, the use of strong passwords and a follow up token id sent to the customer via email, voice, or text message. The use of token hardware or a mobile app that can be used to display randomly generated token ids may also be considered. However, they must be reviewed for compliance with DHS and NIST cybersecurity requirements. | ||
| 78 | General | Integration | Can you please provide the list of Oracle Suite of Products currently licensed? | Here is a core list of Oracle products at PBGC: Oracle Database, BPEL, Webcenter, BI Publisher, Access Manager, Weblogic, e-Business suite | |||
| 79 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-19 | Integration | Do you have licenses for the Oracle Business Insights (Oracle BAM ) for Business Monitoring? | No | ||
| 80 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-1: | Integration | Is the development of a modernized practitioner facing front-end within scope and what technology is planned for this UI development? | A modernized practitioner facing front end user interface is within scope of this sample task. A specific technology has not yet been selected. We look forward to proposed solutions from offerors. | ||
| 81 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-1: | Integration | The integration with the common validation rule engine/premium calculations: what type of integration is it? | |||
| Is the rule engine in house developed or a COTS product? | CBA_REQ-1 has identified a need to implement a common My PAA/PPS business rules validation and premium calculations repository. The future state container of validations and calculations is recommended to be a configurable COTS product. | ||||||
| 82 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-2: | Integration | The Redesign MyPAA screens - is it within scope and what technology is planned for this UI development? | Redesign of My PAA user interface screens is within scope of this sample task. The specific technology has not yet been selected. We look forward to proposed solutions from offerors. | ||
| 83 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-4: | Integration | Keep the latest draft version of the filing - Is this to be stored in a DB or file system? | CBA_REQ-4 is identifying a need to save the current filing input data so that it may be reviewed by the practitioner at any stage during the filing process. The filing input data should be stored in the database or offerors may propose another approach that takes into consideration cybersecurity, performance, and usability. | ||
| 84 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-7: | Integration | Does this include UI changes, functionality change or changes related to performance? | CBA_REQ-7 is identifying a requirement to improve the accessibility and usability of the current My PAA Admin Module user interface. Usability of this java based application will include intuitiveness and performance into the final proposed solution. | ||
| 85 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-8: | Integration | Does the dashboard have to be implemented using the Oracle technology (ADF/BAM) and is it within scope? | CBA_REQ-8 dashboard does not have to be implemented using Oracle ADF/BAM. However, please keep in mind the requirement on Page 4 of the Sample Dev Task Order SOO - "The replacement solution will be based on Oracle COTS to the maximum extent possible. " | ||
| 86 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-15: & CBA_REQ-16: | Integration | What are the expected security requirements? | CBA_REQ-15 is identifying a requirement to secure web service data while in transit through the use of https and TLS v1.2+ protocol. CBA_REQ-16 is identifying a requirement to implement multi-factor authentication for My PAA's external practitioner customers. Multi-factor may include, but not limited to, the use of strong passwords and a follow up token id sent to the customer via email, voice, or text message. | ||
| 87 | Sample Development Task Scenario | CBA_REQ-17: | Integration | Is the multifactor authentication already decided upon or open to vendor to selection & decision? | No, the decision for multifactor authentication technology and vendor is open for consideration | ||
| 88 | General | Integration | Is there any service/API/Interface Catalog which has been identified so far? | PBGC has no defined internal service catalog for APIs or interfaces | |||
| 89 | 18R0003 | M.2.1 Factor 2 | Key Personnel | The Government identified Key Personnel as the second most important evaluation factor in Section M.2.1. As such, would the Government consider incorporating offeror oral presentations that would provide the Government the opportunity to meet perspective Key Personnel and assess in person their aptitude and ability to serve PBGC in the identified role. | An amendment will be issued to indicate that all evaluation factors are equally important but when combined are significantly more important than price. Oral presentations will not be allowed. | ||
| 90 | 18R0003 | L.2.1, Factor 3 | LCATS | Are the labor category descriptions included in the 20 page limit for the Volume I, Part A, Factor 3 section? | The LCAT table in H.1 shall be included in the proposal response Volume I, Part A, Factor 3. This table is excluded from the page limitations and may be included as an appendix. | ||
| 91 | 18R0003 | 67 | LCATS | “Descriptions (minimum to be included in proposal, additional categories may be proposed). Offerors should propose minimum experience and education/certification requirements for all proposed labor categories. Offerors should indicate to what extent experience may substitute for education/certification. Offerors are encouraged to add additional labor categories that may not be represented in the list below…” |
Sections L and M do not reference the inclusion of the table identified in H.1.
| Please clarify if the table identified in H.1 should be included in our proposal response. If so, please identify where (e.g. Volume #, Part #, Factor “#”) in our proposal response the completed table should be provided. | The LCAT table in H.1 shall be included in the proposal response Volume I, Part A, Factor 3. This table is excluded from the page limitations and may be included as an appendix. | |||||
| 92 | 18R0003 | L.2.1 - PART A – IDIQ RESPONSE; Factor 3 – Staffing and Management Approach; last paragraph | 122 | LCATS | “The contractor shall also propose labor categories, labor category descriptions and associated credentials required for each labor category and level. At a minimum the offeror shall include the labor categories included with the labor category template included with the solicitation.” |
There are no attachments listed in Section J for a labor category template. Should offerors use the Labor Category Descriptions list and format from section H.1 (p67)?
| Is this list to be included in the page count for Part A, Factor 3? | The LCAT table in H.1 shall be included in the proposal response Volume I, Part A, Factor 3. This table is excluded from the page limitations and may be included as an appendix. | ||||
| 93 | L.1.8 | LCATS | The Government has requested that offerors include the labor categories, descriptions, and associated credentials within their Staffing Approach response. However, the list of labor categories from the RFP spans 24 pages of text. | ||
| Please confirm that the labor category information being request can be provided in an appendix, which is not bound page the 20-page limitation for the IDIQ response. | The LCAT table in H.1 shall be included in the proposal response Volume I, Part A, Factor 3. This table is excluded from the page limitations and may be included as an appendix. | ||||
| 94 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Please confirm that Operation and Maintenance support services are required for below 4 aplications and only for mentioned duration. |
• MyPAA O&M Period: January 1, 2019 to October 31, 2019
• TAS O&M Period: February 18, 2019 to October 31, 2019
• PPS O&M Period: April 1, 2018 to October 31, 2019
| • CFS O&M Period: October 1, 2019 to October 31, 2019 | PPS O&M Period is April 1, 2019 to October 31, 2019. All other dates are correct. | |||||
| 95 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | One of the application in-scope (CFS) has support window of only 1 month. So, please confirm if the supplier should provide the support solution considering Base+4 years of contract duration or restrict to the support duration mentioned for each applications as mentioned in the proposal document. | For the pricing and task proposal response, restrict to the support periods outlined in the task order for each application. However, the Government anticipates that all systems will be supported continuously going forward as future option periods are exercised. | |
| 96 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Please specify current FTE/resource count for Operations and Maintenance Services. | No. Offerors should make their own proposal based on their understanding of the work to be performed as outlined in the solicitation and task orders. | |
| 97 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Please specify the environments to be supported? Viz - Production, UAT, Disaster Recovery etc. | PBGC supports the following five environments for our applications: Development (CDET), System Integration Test (CDEI), User Acceptance Test (ITC), Production (PROD), and COOP/Disaster Recovery (COOP). | |
| 98 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Kindly specify the level of documentation available such as SOP's Interface details documents,(Standard Operating Procedures), Quick Run Book, look up run books, known errors and standard resolutions? | Each of the FMS systems has a log of tickets with their resolutions, as well as Operations and Support Manuals, and System Design Documents. | |
| 99 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Please specify the number of system enhancement (Minor/Major)/ CRs per month under Operations and Maintenance Services. | System Change Requests are addressed through releases covered in Task Order 2. | |
| 100 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Please specify the effort up to which system enhancements/Change requests will be considered in scope of Operation & Maintenance services. | System Change Requests are addressed through releases covered in Task Order 2. | |
| 101 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Please confirm if batch job scheduling and execution in scope of Operation/maintenance services. If so, please provide the current Batch Job details as below: |
- Total Batch Jobs - Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Special runs
- Batch window - Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Special runs
| - Critical batch window | Batch job scheduling and support of execution are in scope. Normal, on-going production batch processing is the responsibility of the Infrastructure Operations Department (or for TAS, the Eagle Access Managed Service Provider) and not in scope. | ||||
| 102 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Has PBGC implemented automation for Support landscape? |
If so, what is the level of automation and the tools in use? Can those tools be leveraged for the current scope of services?
| If no then would PBGC be open for additional investment in Automation tools/solutions? | No, currently PBGC has not implemented automation for FMS application support. | ||||
| 103 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Please list down the tools available for below Services |
1) Batch scheduling
2) Application health checks
| 3) Monitoring of logs | My PAA incorporates the use of HP Sitescope to review system status on a daily basis. Reviews of generated application status messages are reviewed regularly to confirm system health. Other monitoring tools that are utilized include Oracle ADDM, AWR, and ASH database diagnostic reviews on a recurring basis, but on a daily basis during the peak premium filing season (September 15th - October 31st) The Eagle Automation Center is used for job scheduling within TAS. The Concurrent Manager is used for job scheduling within CFS. The infrastructure Operations Department and Eagle Access Managed Services are primarily responsible for monitoring system health and logs. | ||||
| 104 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Please list down the automation tools available for Problem and Change request Services |
1) Log analysis
2) Debugger
| 3) Impact Analysis | 1) Log Analysis - Splunk is used by Infrastructure 2) Debugger - Provided by Development Tool IDE | ||||||
| 105 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Please share the list of SOP based activities that are not tracked as tickets. | For a description of the processes not tracked as tickets, but included under the Operations and Maintenance scope, see section 2.0 of Task Order 01. | ||
| 106 | TO-01 | 2.1 Operations and Maintenance | Operations and Maintenance | Are there any restrictions (security, validation, audit requirements) in implementing tools for automation solution? | All new tools are reviewed and approved by the IPT and PBGC's Technical Review Board | ||
| 107 | 18R0003 | L.1.8 | Page Count | Will the Government allow Glossary of Terms and will they be excluded from the page limits in Section L.1.8? | Yes | ||
| 108 | 18R0003 | L.1.8 | Page Count | Will the Government allow a Cross Reference Matrix and will it be excluded from the page limits in Section L.1.8? | Yes | ||
| 109 | 18R0003 | L.2.1 – PART A – IDIQ RESPONSE, Factor 2 – Key Personnel | 121 | Page Count | Can the government please confirm that Section L.2.1 – PART A – IDIQ RESPONSE, Factor 2 – Key Personnel on page 121 is excluded from the 20-page limit for the IDIQ response? Is it the government’s expectation that full key personnel resumes are to be included in this section? | ||
| On page 120, Section L.1.8, PBGC states that “Cover pages, table of contents, resumes, PWSs with QASPs, Quality Control Plans and tabs are not included in the count.” | Factor 2 - Key Personnel on page 121 is included in the 20 page limit of the IDIQ response, however, the supporting resume(s) are not included in the page limitation. | ||||||
| 110 | 18R0003 | L.2.2 – Part B – Task Order One Response, Factor 2 Key Personnel | 124 | Page Count | Can the government please confirm that Section L.2.2 – Part B – Task Order One Response, Factor 2 Key Personnel on page 124 is excluded from the 15-page limit for the Task Order One response? Is it the government’s expectation that full key personnel resumes are to be included in this section? | ||
| On page 120, Section L.1.8, PBGC states that “Cover pages, table of contents, resumes, PWSs with QASPs, Quality Control Plans and tabs are not included in the count.” | Factor 2 - Key Personnel on page 124 is included in the 15 page limit of the Task Order One response, however, the supporting resume(s) are not included in the page limitation. | ||||||
| 111 | 18R0003 | L.2.3 – Part C – Task Order Two Response, Factor 2 Key Personnel | 126 | Page Count | Can the government please confirm that Section L.2.3 – Part C – Task Order Two Response, Factor 2 Key Personnel on page 126 is excluded from the 15-page limit for the Task Order Two response. Is it the government’s expectation that full key personnel resumes are to be included in this section? | ||
| On page 120, Section L.1.8, PBGC states that “Cover pages, table of contents, resumes, PWSs with QASPs, Quality Control Plans and tabs are not included in the count.” | Factor 2 - Key Personnel on page 126 is included in the 15 page limit of the Task Order Two response, however, the supporting resume(s) are not included in the page limitation. | ||||||
| 112 | 18R0003 | L.2.4 – Part D – Sample Development Task Scenario Factor 2 Key Personnel | 129 | Page Count | Can the government please confirm that Section, L.2.4 – Part D – Sample Development Task Scenario Factor 2 Key Personnel on page 129 is excluded from the 15-page limit for the Sample Development Task Scenario Response. Is it the government’s expectation that full key personnel resumes are to be provided for this task order and included in this section? | ||
| On page 120, Section L.1.8, PBGC states that “Cover pages, table of contents, resumes, PWSs with QASPs, Quality Control Plans and tabs are not included in the count.” | Factor 2 - Key Personnel on page 129 is included in the 15 page limit of the Sample Development Task Scenario response, however, the supporting resume(s) are not included in the page limitation. | ||||||
| 113 | General | Page Count | Is there a page limit for each individual resume? | Resumes are limited to 2 pages | |||
| 114 | 18R0003 | L.1.8 PAGE COUNT LIMITATION |
M.2.1 VOLUME I – EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL; Factor 2 – Key Personnel 120,155 Page Count “Below are the page limits associated with each section of the contractor proposal. PBGC will not evaluate or consider any pages that exceed the page limits listed for each item in the table below. Cover pages, table of contents, resumes, PWSs with QASPs, Quality Control Plans and tabs are not included in the count…” (L.1.8) “Letters of commitment are mandatory for proposed individuals that are not currently in the employment of the offeror or subcontractor.” (M.2.1)
| Given page count restrictions for each proposal response Part A, B, C, and D, please consider excluding “Letters of Commitment” from page count. | Letters of Commitment are excluded from the page limitations. | ||
| 115 | 18R0003 | Section G Ordering Procedures; G.1.4. |
L.2.2 PART B – TASK ORDER ONE RESPONSE; Factor 1 L.2.3 PART C – TASK ORDER TWO RESPONSE; Factor 1 L.2.4 PART D – SAMPLE DEVELOPMENT TASK SCENARIO RESPONSE; Factor 1 p61, p121, p123, p126, p129, p155, p156 Page Count “Technical proposals submitted will include the offeror’s understanding of the work, a proposed delivery and performance schedule, Performance Work Statement with performance measures, any special assumptions, personnel/staffing plan, a breakout of…
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.