CORHQ-26-Q-0073-P0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF AWARD

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicble)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

FDIC 3700/56 (3-08)

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICIATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment by signing in Block 15b below and including the signed amendment with the offeror's proposal.

12. N/A

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO THE CHANGE ORDERS CLAUSE

B. THIS MODIFICATION IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE FDIC CONTRACTING OFFICER

C. THIS MODIFICATION IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO MUTUAL AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

CORHQ-26-Q-0073 / 0001

Questions and Answers for REQ#22542

CORHQ-26-Q-0073

This requirement is for licenses only. There will be no services.

1.Can the government provide additional insight into why FDIC is interested in a new tool? Or any additional background information on the goals of this RFI?

The FDIC is conducting market research to better understand available budget formulation products. We would like to explore functionalities and capabilities of different tools.

2. Does a Cover page and cover letter count against the 5 pages or is it exempt.

The cover page does not count against the 5 page limit. A Cover Letter is not necessary (but would count against the 5 pages). To assist we have increased the page limit to 7 pages.

3. May we submit our Customer & POC list as a separate attachment? OneStream has 1,700+ customers worldwide with more than 80 federal customers. This would obviously put us over the 5 page threshold, let me know if it'd be helpful to provide all.

Yes. The Customer and POC list can be a separate attachment which will not count against the 5 pages. However, in the list please include only the federal customers using your budget product.

4.In terms of Demo logistics, can we expect to hear back from FDIC after submissions are sent to schedule time?

Yes.

5.The RFI specifies a requirement for a FedRAMP-certified system currently used by other federal agencies. Would FDIC consider a solution that has received an Authority to Operate (ATO) at another federal agency and is operating within a federal enclave, but is not FedRAMP-authorized as a SaaS offering?

The vendor must be able to adhere to the FDIC’s security-related terms and conditions. In addition, the solution must be Fed-RAMP certified.

6.Would FDIC consider deployment of a budgeting system within an FDIC-managed hosting environment (e.g., FDIC tenant or internal infrastructure), subject to FDIC security review and authorization?

The FDIC would find FDIC Cloud management or Software as a Service hosting method acceptable however, the vendor must be able to adhere to the FDIC’s security-related terms and conditions (See attached updated RFI). In addition, the solution must be Fed-RAMP certified.

7. Can FDIC provide a high-level overview of its current budget formulation environment (e.g., Excel-based process, internally developed tool, or commercial solution) and anticipated data migration scope?

The FDIC currently uses a cloud-based commercial tool that has been configured to support the FDIC’s budget process. It includes the ability to combine historical expenses, current budgets, staffing, and salary information, with Graphical User Interface-based user inputs to formulate future year budgets. The tool has configurable calculation logic and standardized and ad hoc reporting functions.

8. Following this RFI, does FDIC anticipate issuing a competitive solicitation in FY26, and if so, what is the estimated timeline for procurement and implementation?

The FDIC will be better positioned to consider this question after reviewing the RFI responses.

9.Is the intent of this market research for a new COTS to replace Oracle EPM?

The intent of the RFI is to develop an up-to-date understanding of budget formulation solutions available on the market.

10. Can the Government provide reference documentation that defines the FDIC terms and conditions pertaining specifically to Budget Formulation solutions?

Yes. Please see the clauses in the updated RFI.

11. Will the system demo be invite-only for vendors that submit an RFI response?

Yes.

12. For the 60-minute demo, are there specific functional areas FDIC would like emphasized (e.g., scenario modeling, staffing-to-budget linkage, business rule configuration, reporting)?

We would like a general overview of the functionality of the system, with a focus on high-level business functions, such as data modeling, staffing, budget formulation, reporting, and automation, etc.

13. Should the demo focus primarily on out-of-the-box capabilities, or would FDIC prefer to see configurable/custom features?

Please include configurable features which are commonly used. As part of the demo, please be prepared to discuss the typical time taken for system implementation, including standard configuration activities.

14. Does FDIC prefer a real client example (sanitized) or a mock FDIC-specific use case for demonstration purposes?

The demo does not need to be FDIC-specific, but a (mock or real-life) federal example is preferred (e.g. do not include profit scenario modeling).

15. Is FDIC more interested in SaaS subscription models or license plus services models?

The FDIC plans to review the RFI responses to help determine whether a particular model better suits the Corporation’s needs.

16. Is FDIC intending to replace an existing tool, or build capability where none currently exists?

FDIC has an existing budget tool.

17. What is the anticipated acquisition vehicle (e.g., GSA MAS, BPA, standalone procurement)?

The plan is to post this requirement on SAM.gov but this could change based on guidance from FDIC leadership.

18. What is the anticipated timeline from RFI to potential RFP issuance?

The FDIC will be better positioned to consider this question after reviewing the RFI responses.

19. What are the top three pain points FDIC is seeking to resolve with this tool?

The FDIC is seeking a tool that can create efficiency formulate budgets and staffing authorizations, provide transparency for multiple users simultaneously, and perform scenario modeling. The solution must also be able to comply with FDIC’s legal and security terms and conditions.

20. Is FDIC prioritizing configurability, speed of deployment, cost control, analytics depth, or integration flexibility?

The FDIC will weigh tradeoffs among these criteria after it evaluates RFI responses.

21. Is a government-hosted deployment model being considered or preferred?

The FDIC will evaluate different deployment models upon review of RFI responses.

22. Are there existing systems this tool will be expected to interface with? If so:

Currently, there are not any API’s, however at some point it could be useful.

• What is the maturity level of those systems?

If there was API the systems would mature Enterprise Resource Platforms like Corporate Financials and HR Systems, but again this is not currently in place or required.

• Are APIs currently available?

No, API interfaces are not required but would be beneficial if available.

23. Would the tool be expected to migrate data from legacy systems?

The tool is not expected to migrate data from a legacy system. However, the FDIC would need the ability to load prior year data to the system.

24. Is there a desire for predictive analytics or advanced forecasting capabilities?

Analytics and forecasting capabilities are beneficial but not required.

25. Would the tool be expected to manage its own budget formulation workflows?

We don’t expect the current Commercial Off The Shelf tool to support FDIC’s budget process but the tool should be able to be configured to the FDIC’s budget formulation process.

26. Is there an expectation of embedded analytics or robust ad hoc reporting tools?

Yes. Robust ad hoc reporting tools are needed for system admins and power users.

DOA/ASB

3501 Fairfax Drive, E-4003 Arlington, VA 22226 ellismith@fdic.gov

(703) 562-6255 ellismith@fdic.gov