DRAFT ELMS Eval Plan _for Industry Review.docx

SECTION I

OVERVIEW

A. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROGRAM

The mission of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Human Capital Services Center (HCSC) is to provide a delightful customer experience and engage VA employees with products and services that will enable them to become role models in serving Veterans and their families. The HCSC believes engaged and developed VA employees will change the lives of Veterans and their families for the better. To deliver on this mission, HCSC strives to provide high- quality, effective, and efficient Information Technology (IT) services to those responsible for providing care to Veterans at the point-of-care as well as throughout all the points of Veterans’ health care, benefits delivery, and memorial services in an effective, timely, and compassionate manner. The VA depends on Information Management/Information Technology systems to meet mission goals.

The HCSC is a catalyst for Department-wide learning initiatives and strategies that develop and sustain a high-performing workforce. As a result of the VA’s large and diverse user population, HCSC’s vision must be aligned to support and meet the VA’s mission, namely, to be recognized as a public sector leader in employee continuous learning within the Federal Government. In order to meet the VA’s strategic and operational goals and objectives, HCSC needs to implement a new enterprise learning management solution.

The future VA Enterprise Learning Management Solution (VA ELMS) shall include a comprehensive, modernized, and intuitive set of tools to support employees and other workforce members in their individual development planning, succession management, career development, competency assessment, skills acquisition, and training goals. This solution will replace the current solution, integrate with VA’s other human capital management and business solutions, and serve as an authoritative data source to facilitate data management and data sharing across the Department.

ELMS is to be a Commercial off the Shelf (COTS) solution as Software as a Service (SaaS) in a cloud hosting environment. Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP) certified action at the moderate level is required to support both the environment and the solution. As part of the overall solution, software, hardware, database, hosting, licensing, and services are necessary to support the enterprise-wide VA talent development and learning management activities. Project management, project management planning, enterprise architecture support, system design and implementation, operation and maintenance support, section 508 accessibility compliance, documentation and activities to support achieving a VA Authority to Operate (ATO), system cloud hosting, system licensing, software maintenance, production support, system integration, application monitoring/program evaluation, transition planning, and data governance support.

ELMS will provide licensed account access to all VA employees and additional support staff to include but are not limited to contractors, volunteers, clinical trainees, residents, interns and fellows, private sector individuals working with VA, individuals without compensation, individuals from other Federal government agencies, and individuals on extended leave without pay.

B. ACQUISITION APPROACH

This is a competitive acquisition for the award of a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) set-aside Single Award Contract. In accordance with FAR 16.202-2, it has been determined that Firm Fixed Price (FFP) is required to meet the needs of this Program and no other contract type is suitable. Award will be made to the best overall proposal, which is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government.

SECTION II

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

1. Any award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the three following evaluation Factors: Technical, Past Performance, and Price. The Technical Factor is significantly more important than the Past Performance Factor, which is significantly more important than the Price Factor. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" must be achieved for the Technical Factor. The Technical Factor is comprised of the two factors, Factor 1 – Written Technical Approach and Factor 2 – Task Demonstration. Technical Factor 1 written Technical Approach is slightly more important than Technical Factor 2 – Task Demonstration. The non-Price Factors when combined are significantly more important than the Price Factor. Technical Factor 2 – Task Demonstration is comprised of four categories, Learning Management, Accreditation, Reporting & Analytics and Virtual Learning. Learning Management is slightly more important than Accreditation. When combined, Learning Management and Accreditation are significantly more important than Reporting & Analytics and Virtual Learning. Reporting & Analytics is slightly more important than Virtual Learning. To receive consideration for award, a combined rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for Technical Factors 1 and 2. Offerors are cautioned that any resulting award may not necessarily be made to the lowest Price offered or the most highly rated technical proposal.

2. The Offeror must be verified in VetCheck database, Veteran Small Business Certification (https://veterans.certify.sba.gov) and be qualified as a small business under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 541519 at the time of proposal submission and at time of award to be considered for evaluation and award. Failure to be verified will render an Offeror disqualified from further consideration.

3. For purposes of efficiency and in order to reduce the time and cost of source selection, both for the Government and the Offerors, the evaluation will be conducted in two phases, Step One, and Step Two. The phased procedure will be conducted as follows:

In Step One, Offerors shall submit a proposal to Technical Factor 1 – Written Technical Approach, Past Performance, and Price. Offerors must be verified in the VetCheck database as a SDVOSB and qualify as a SDVOSB in the System for Award Management (SAM) under the NAICS 541519 at the time of Step One Volume submission and prior to award. The Government will not evaluate Step One proposal submissions from ineligible Offerors and those Offerors will be eliminated without further consideration. Following the evaluation of Technical -Factor 1 – Written Technical Approach, Past Performance, and Price, the Government will establish a competitive range and select the most highly rated Offerors to proceed to Step Two based on the following evaluation criteria for Step One: Technical Factor 1 – Written Technical Approach, Past Performance, and Price. Technical Factor 1 – Written Technical Approach is significantly more important than Past Performance Factor, which is slightly more important than the Price Factor. In order to be eligible to participate in Step Two, and receive consideration for award, Offerors must receive no less than an “Acceptable” rating in Technical Factor 1 – Written Technical Approach. The Government will not further evaluate proposal submissions from offerors found ineligible in Step One. The Government may elect to conduct discussions before, at time of, and/or following the establishment of the competitive range. If discussions are deemed necessary for Step One, the Government may set an additional competitive range(s) prior to proceeding to Step Two. For Offerors eligible to proceed to Step Two the evaluation results from Step One will carry over to Step Two and be included in the overall evaluation results. The final rating for the Technical Evaluation will comprise of Technical Factors 1 and 2.

Offerors remaining in consideration for award following the Step One competitive range(s) will be eligible to participate in Step Two. Offerors not selected to proceed to Step Two will be notified by the Government that their proposal has been eliminated from award consideration. In Step Two, Offerors shall conduct a demonstration under Technical Factor 2 – Task Demonstration which will consist of a structured real-time demonstration. This demonstration will be used to aid in the assessment of the Offeror’s ability to provide an ELMS specifically designed to meet the unique needs of VA. In order to receive consideration for award, offerors must receive a combined rating of no less than “Acceptable” in Technical Factors 1 and 2 and must be verified in the VetCheck database as a SDVOSB and qualify as a SDVOSB in SAM under the NAICS 541519. Discussions will NOT be held as part of or during the Technical Factor 2 - Task Demonstration as defined by FAR 15.306. The Government does reserve the right, however, to conduct discussions after all task demonstrations have been conducted.

In Step Two of the evaluation, if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals in accordance with the FAR. The Government’s intent is that only those Offerors which receive the highest rating as a result of the Step One evaluation and determined to be in the competitive range will receive invitation to Step Two.

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

1. TECHNICAL (Factor 1 is slightly more important than Factor 2)

i. -Factor 1 – Written Technical Approach

ii. Factor 2 – Task Demonstration

2. PAST PERFORMANCE

3. PRICE

C. EVALUATION APPROACH - All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by a team of Government personnel. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions based upon the initial evaluation of proposals. The proposal will be evaluated strictly in accordance with its written content. Proposals which merely restate the requirement or state that the requirement will be met, without providing supporting rationale, are not sufficient. Offerors who fail to meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation will be rated Unacceptable and thus, ineligible for award.

1. TECHNICAL EVALUATION APPROACH. Technical Factor 1 will evaluate the proposals strictly in accordance with the written content. Proposals which merely restate the requirement or state that the requirement will be met, without providing supporting rationale, are not sufficient. Offerors who fail to meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation will be rated Unacceptable and thus, ineligible for award.

A. Technical Factor 1 - Written Technical Approach, the evaluation process will consider the following:

i. Understanding of the Problem - The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which it demonstrates a clear understanding of all features involved in solving the problems and meeting and/or exceeding the requirements presented in the solicitation and the extent to which uncertainties are identified and resolutions proposed.

ii. Feasibility of Approach - The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the level of confidence provided the Government with respect to the Offeror's methods and approach in successfully meeting and/or exceeding the requirements in a timely manner.

Only Offerors who are determined to be among the most highly rated in Technical Factor 1 will be invited to participate in Technical Factor 2 - Task Demonstration.

B. Technical Factor 2 – Task Demonstration, consists of a structured real-time demonstration. This demonstration will be used to aid in the assessment of the Offeror’s ability to provide an ELMS specifically designed to meet the unique needs of VA. The final rating for the Technical Evaluation will comprise of Technical Factors 1 and 2. Discussions will NOT be held during the Technical Factor 2 - Task Demonstration. However, the Government does reserve the right to conduct discussions after all task demonstrations have been concluded. The evaluation process will consider the following:

i. Understanding of the Problem: The demonstration will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror demonstrates a clear understanding of all features involved in solving the problems and meeting and/or exceeding the requirements presented by the solicitation; and the extent to which uncertainties are identified and resolutions proposed during the live real-time demonstration.

ii. Feasibility of Approach: The task demonstration will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror's methods and approach to meeting the Technical Demonstration requirements provide the Government with a high level of confidence that the proposed solution can be integrated into the VA’s architectural environment, provide scalability and performance, and demonstrate the security of the proposed solution as it relates to VA requirements. The Offeror will also be evaluated as to how well the proposed ELMS performs the Use Cases during the live real-time demonstration.

2. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION APPROACH.

The Past Performance evaluation will assess the relative risks associated with an Offeror's likelihood of success in fulfilling the solicitation's requirements as indicated by that Offeror's record of past performance. In this context, “Offeror” refers to the proposed prime contractor and all proposed major subcontractor(s).

A major subcontractor is defined as one who will be providing critical services or a major component of the overall system solution and/or subcontract is for more than 10% of the total proposed price. In either case, the prime contractor and proposed major subcontractor(s) will be assessed individually and the results will then be assessed in their totality to derive the Offeror’s Past Performance rating.

The Government will conduct a performance risk assessment based on the quality, relevancy, and recency of the Offeror's past performance, as well as that of its major subcontractors, as it relates to the probability of successful accomplishment of the required effort. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will review available past performance data available in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). The Government reserves the right to obtain past performance information from any available source and may contact customers other than those identified by the Offeror when evaluating past performance. Since the Government may not necessarily interview all of the sources provided by the Offerors, it is incumbent upon the Offerors to explain the relevance of the data provided and ensure the information clearly addresses risk and the appropriate mitigation steps taken for each risk. Offerors are reminded that the burden of proving low performance risk rests with the Offerors.

The Government will review aspects of cost, schedule, and performance. Areas to be evaluated may include, but are not limited to, quality of product or service, timeliness of performance or adherence to delivery schedules and controlling project cost in program management.

In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on Past Performance.

3. PRICE EVALUATION APPROACH.

The total overall evaluated price will be the sum of the total evaluated FFP line items, including all options and optional tasks. The Government will verify the Offeror’s calculation of the total overall evaluated price. The Government will adjust the Offeror’s proposed total overall evaluated price if mathematical errors are identified.

0. Firm Fixed Price: The Total Evaluated FFP will be the sum of the Total Evaluated FFP Line Items, including all options and optional tasks. The total evaluated price for each line item will be calculated by multiplying the quantity/unit (e.g., 3 EA) by the proposed unit price.

The total evaluated price shall be based on the information provided in Section B, Price Schedule.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. INTRODUCTION

The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically by the date and time indicated in the solicitation via email to Contract Specialist, Kawana Tyler-Simms, Kawana.Tyler-Simms@va.gov, and Contracting Officer Patrick Hamilton, Patrick.Hamilton2@va.gov in the files set forth below by the date and time indicated in the solicitation. The Offeror’s proposal shall consist of four (4) volumes. The Volumes are I -Technical, II – Past Performance, III – Price and IV – Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations. Of Volume I – Technical, Volume I(a) Factor 1 – Written Technical Approach is required with initial proposal submission; Volume I(b) is not required with initial proposal submission. Volume I(b) will be required for those vendors who are invited to participate in the live real-time Task Demonstration. The use of hyperlinks or embedded attachments in proposals is prohibited. Accordingly, any hyperlinks or embedded attachments included with a proposal will neither be accessed nor viewed by the Government and thus, not evaluated as part of the Offeror’s proposal submission. Total submitted file size shall not exceed 100MB. NOTE: Due to file size limitations, not all emails may be received, please request a receipt response to ensure files have been delivered; multiple emails may be required due to size limitations (10MB per email). If more than one email is needed to be submitted, please number emails as appropriate, for example1 of total emails to be received (e.g., 1 of 4, 2 of 4 etc.). Proposals submitted by any other method will not be considered. WARNING: Please do not wait until the last minute to submit your proposals! Late proposals will not be accepted for evaluation. To avoid submission of late proposals, we recommend the transmission of your proposal file 24 hours prior to the required proposal due date and time. Please be advised that timeliness is determined by the date and time an Offeror’s proposal is received by the Government not when an Offeror attempted transmission. Offerors are encouraged to review and ensure that sufficient bandwidth is available on their end of the transmission.

2. PROPOSAL FILES. Offeror’s responses shall be submitted in accordance with the following instructions:

a. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date, and solicitation number in the header and/or footer. Proposal page limitations are applicable to this procurement. The Table below indicates the maximum page count (when applicable) for each volume of the Offeror’s proposal.

All files will be submitted as either a Microsoft Word 2010 (.doc) [if allowing Word documents] Microsoft Excel (.XLS) file or an Acrobat (PDF) file or compatible as indicated in the table. Page size shall be no greater than 8 1/2" x 11" with printing on one side, only. The top, bottom, left and right margins shall be a minimum of one inch (1”) each. Font size shall be no smaller than 12-point. Arial or Times New Roman fonts are required. Characters shall be set at no less than normal spacing and 100% scale. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size not less than 8-point and may be landscape. Line spacing shall be set at no less than single space. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. Page numbers, company logos, and headers and footers may be within the page margins ONLY and are not bound by the 12-point font requirement. Footnotes to text shall not be used. All proprietary information shall be clearly and properly marked. If the Offeror submits annexes, documentation, attachments or the like, not specifically required by this solicitation, such will count against the Offeror’s page limitations unless otherwise indicated in the specific volume instructions below. Pages in violation of these instructions, either by exceeding the margin, font, printing, or spacing restrictions or by exceeding the total page limit for a particular volume, will not be evaluated. Pages not evaluated due to violation of the margin, font or spacing restrictions will not count against the page limitations. The page count will be determined by counting the pages in the order they come up in the print layout view.

b. File Packaging. All the proposal files may be compressed (zipped) into one file entitled “proposal.zip” using WinZip version 6.2 or later version or the proposal files may be submitted individually.

c. Content Requirements. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The Offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal and provide an adequate basis for evaluation. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. The Volume Number, Factor, File name and Page Limitation requirements (if applicable) for each file are specified in the table below:

***All Volumes under Step 1 are due at time of solicitation closure***

Step 1 Initial submission should include all Volumes and Factors below

Volume IV

Step 2 Volume I(b) is not required with initial proposal submission. Volume I(b) will be required for those vendors who are invited to participate in the live real-time Task Demonstration.

A Cover Page, Table of Contents and/or a glossary of abbreviations or acronyms will not be included in the page count of the Technical Volume. However, be advised that any and all information contained within any Table of Contents and/or glossary of abbreviations or acronyms submitted with an Offeror’s proposal will not be evaluated by the Government.

See also FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items.

(i) VOLUME I – TECHNICAL FACTOR. Offerors shall propose a detailed written approach that addresses the following:

0. Volume 1(a) - Technical Factor 1 - Written Technical Approach: For this Factor

I. Describe in detail your company’s approach and ability to meet the functional requirements of a COTS SaaS solution as referenced in the PWS Section 5.1 to 5.15, including all subparagraphs. The Offerors shall specifically address the following:

a. FedRAMP/ATO: Describe your approach to obtain Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP) moderate certification for your proposed SaaS solution and environment and your approach to obtain VA Authority to Operate (ATO) IAW PWS section 5.6.1. While Offerors will not be penalized during the evaluation process for not having its SaaS Solution and Environment FEDRAMP Moderate authorized at time of award/proposal submission, please be advised that Offerors that can affirmatively demonstrate its entire proposed SaaS Solution and entire Environment are FEDRAMP Moderate authorized at time of proposal submission, may receive an assessed strength or significant strength, through the evaluation process.

b. Section 508: Offerors shall submit their company’s most recent Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) in accordance with Section 508 Accessibility Compliance of the American Disabilities Act IAW the PWS, section 5.4.1.2. **Note the ACR submission shall not count toward the total page limit of proposal submission.

c. Describe the technical approach to accomplish systems integration and interoperability in accordance with PWS Section 5.10.

d. Describe the technical approach in providing maintenance and subscription licensing to support the Government’s need as well as the five Enterprise-wide instances (Customer Testing, Sandbox, Train, Pre-prod, and Production) in accordance with PWS Section 5.7.

e. Provide a high-level Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) of the overall Project Management Plan in accordance with PWS Section 5.2.1.

f. Describe the technical approach to support the Data Migration requirement in accordance with PWS Section 5.4.2.1.

II. Describe in detail your company’s approach and techniques to implement a fully compliant Section 508 Accessibility Compliance of the American Disabilities Act Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Software as a Service (SaaS) Talent Development Solution in a Cloud-Based environment and all associated services as identified in PWS paragraph 5.16, including all subparagraphs. The Offeror shall specifically address the following:

a. Describe in detail your company’s technical approach and ability to implement a COTS SaaS Solution in a Cloud-Based environment that incorporates capabilities that can automate the ability to recommend talent development opportunities in accordance with PWS Section 5.16.1.13.

b. Describe in detail your company’s technical approach and ability to implement a COTS SaaS Solution in a Cloud-Based environment that can manage user attributes in a single profile that synchronizes data across the solution and uses that data to manage learning and development in accordance with PWS Section 5.16.2.

c. Describe how the solution can support the Government’s need for permissioned administrators to use any user attribute to automatically manage assignments of courses, curricula, and content libraries accordance with PWS Section 5.16.2.21

d. Describe in detail your company’s technical approach and ability to implement a COTS SaaS Solution in a Cloud-Based environment that can emulate the Federal Authorization, Agreement, and Certification of Training Form SF-182 in accordance with PWS Section 5.16.2.24.

e. Describe in detail your company’s technical approach and ability to implement a COTS SaaS Solution in a Cloud-Based environment that can manage clinical accreditations for users of accredited training, developers of accredited training, and providers of accredited training in accordance with PWS Section 5.16.3.7 and 5.16.3.8.

f. Describe in detail your company’s technical approach and ability to implement a COTS SaaS Solution in a Cloud-Based environment that can support the ability to create, configure and deliver dashboard reporting in accordance with PWS Section 5.16.4.2.

g. Describe in detail your company’s technical approach and ability to implement a COTS SaaS Solution in a Cloud-Based environment that enables administrators to manage competency and skills assessments, profiles, and development roles in accordance with PWS Section 5.16.7.3.

h. Describe how the solution can support the Government’s need for an integrated virtual classroom environment that will automatically record completions and attendance in accordance with PWS Section 5.16.6.3 and 5.16.6.4

i. Describe in detail your company’s technical approach and ability to implement a COTS SaaS Solution in a Cloud-Based environment that enables the Government to implement and manage electronic Individual Development Plans in accordance with PWS Section 5.16.8.

j. Volume 1(b) -Technical Factor 2 - Task Demonstration:

1. Only Offerors who are determined to be among the most highly rated in Technical Factor 1, Written Technical Approach, will be invited to participate in Technical Factor 2 -Task Demonstration. Offerors shall provide a live, real-time, demonstration of their ELMS solution as described in its proposal, in accordance with Appendix G. The demonstration will consist of a live, real-time demonstration of the solution. Note: Vendors are expected to demonstrate each of the use cases identified in Appendix G of this document.

2. Offerors will be notified a minimum of five (5) business days in advance of the specific date/time of their demonstration which will be determined at random. The demonstration will be conducted virtually utilizing Microsoft TEAMs. All costs associated with the demonstration shall be borne by the Offeror and will not be reimbursed by the Government. The demonstration will occur over a period not to exceed two hours. Offerors do not have to use the entire two-hour time period allotted but cannot exceed the allotted time period. Interactions between Offeror and Government personnel shall be limited to opening remarks and greetings during the demonstration. Discussions, to include questions and answers, will NOT be held during the Task Demonstration.

(ii) VOLUME II – PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR. Offerors shall submit a list of all contracts (including Federal, State, and local government and private) (prime contracts, task/delivery orders, and/or major subcontracts) in performance at any point during the three (3) years immediately prior to the proposal submission date, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Areas of relevance include Enterprise Learning Management System, COTS implementation and SaaS, including support for client business process re- engineering, large scale software integration and providing maintenance and licensing to support a single customer for up to 700,000 profiles as well as the five Enterprise-wide instances (Customer Testing, Sandbox, Train, Pre-prod, and Production) in accordance with PWS Section 5.7. Data concerning the prime contractor shall be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in alphabetical order. This volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1 – Contract Descriptions. This section shall include the following information:

(a) Contractor/Subcontractor place of performance, CAGE Code and DUNS Number. If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and Point of Contact (POC) within the prime contractor organization (name, and current address, e-mail address, and telephone and fax numbers).

(b) Contracting activity, and current address, Procuring Contracting Officer's name, e-mail address, telephone, and fax numbers.

(c) Technical representative/Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), and current e-mail address, telephone, and fax numbers.

(d) Contract administration activity and the Administrative Contracting Officer's name, and current e-mail address, telephone, and fax numbers.

(e) Contract Number and, in the case of Indefinite Delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase Agreements, include Delivery Order Numbers also.

(f) Contract Type (specific type such as Fixed Price (FP), Cost Reimbursement (CR), Time & Materials (T&M), etc.) In the case of Indefinite Delivery contracts, indicate specific type (Requirements, Definite Quantity, and Indefinite Quantity) and secondary contract type (FP, CR, T&M, etc.)).

(g) Awarded price.

(h) Final or projected final price.

(i) Original delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

(j) Final or projected final, delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

(2) Section 2 - Performance. Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed in Section 1 describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirements of this solicitation. For any contract(s)/task order(s) that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcoming(s) and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence. The Offerors shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary. The Offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

(3) Section 3 – Subcontracts. Offerors shall provide an outline of how the effort required by the solicitation will be assigned for performance within the Offeror’s corporate entity and among the proposed subcontractors. The information provided for the prime Offeror and each proposed major subcontractor must include the entire company name, company address, CAGE Code, DUNS Number and type of work to be performed by citing the applicable Government PWS paragraph number.

(4) Section 4 – New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its officers and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the Offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above.

Customer/Client Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaire - A Past Performance Questionnaire prepared by the Offeror’s Government customer/client for each of the Offeror’s contract citations is required. The Offeror shall send the questionnaire electronically to the POCs for each Government contract/subcontract cited. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to prepare and issue instructions with the questionnaire requesting that each customer/client complete their response and send it electronically directly to the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer identified below by time of proposal due date. The Offeror shall specifically request that the Government customer/client prepared questionnaire response NOT be provided back to the Offeror, either as an original or as a copy. The Government POC(s) completed questionnaire shall be sent via e-mail to the Contract Specialist, Kawana Tyler-Simms, Kawana.Tyler-Simms@va.gov, and Contracting Officer Patrick Hamilton, Patrick.Hamilton2@va.gov. The Offeror shall request that the Government POC(s) maintain the original completed/signed questionnaire as a record of their response.

(iii) VOLUME III– PRICE FACTOR

The Offeror shall complete the Price Schedule found in solicitation, Section B4. Proposed unit prices shall be no more than two (2) decimal places. The Offeror shall include all items that are part of the technical solution. The list of items contained there will form the Contractor’s Price List to be incorporated in any resulting contract and will serve as the basis for prices for the IT Hardware/Software/Services, warranties, and installation for each of the ordering years specified in the Contract Schedule in Section B. These prices are binding as ceiling prices for each of the applicable ordering periods, regardless of the quantity being ordered. Consistent with the Technology Refresh requirements of the ELMS PWS, the Contractor cannot submit an ECP for Technology Refresh of an IT Hardware Commodity Product that reflects a price higher than that proposed in Section D and incorporated into the contract. Calculation of the Total Evaluated FFP will be done by adding all items contained in the Price Schedule to arrive at the total FFP for the base, all option periods, and optional tasks. All Offerors should propose using an estimated award date of MONTH, DAY, YEAR.

(iv) VOLUME IV – SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS.

Certifications and Representations - An authorized official of the firm shall sign the Standard Form (SF) 1449 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission. This Volume shall contain the following:

a. Solicitation Section A – SF1449 and Acknowledgement of Amendments, if any.

b. Any proposed terms and conditions and/or assumptions upon which the proposal is predicated.

Offerors are hereby advised that any Offeror-imposed terms and conditions and/or assumptions which deviate from the Government’s material terms and conditions established by the Solicitation, may render the Offeror’s proposal Unacceptable, and thus ineligible for award.

APPENDIX G – TASK DEMONSTRATION

Demonstration Agenda:

1. Introductions

2. Vendor Demonstration System Description

3. Relationship of Demonstration System to Proposed Solution

4. Configuration Overview

5. Use Cases – Four Categories (A. Learning Management, B. Accreditation, C. Reporting & Analytics and D. Virtual Learning)

1. Introductions:

The vendor demonstration team will introduce itself to the Government evaluation team.

1. Vendor Demonstration System Description:

Display and describe the demonstration system. Include hardware, operating system, server containers (database server, application server, web server, etc.), client containers, and show the configuration, including any clustering or caching mechanisms.

1. Relationship of Demonstration System to Proposed Solution:

Display and describe how the demonstration system models the proposed production system. Include how the demonstration system configuration and capabilities relate to the proposed solution in terms of architecture, design, and system level capabilities.

1. Configuration Overview: Display and describe how all major components of your proposed solution integrate with one another.

1. Use Cases:

A. Learning Management IAW PWS sections 5.16.1 and 5.16.2 B. Accreditation IAW PWS sections 5.16.3 C. Reports & Analytics IAW PWS sections 5.16.2, 5.16.4, and 5.16.7 D. Virtual Learning IAW PWS section 5.16.6

Offerors will be expected to complete each of the steps outlined in the demonstration requirements in the order as outlined below. Offerors shall clearly announce each Use Case by corresponding letter and number prior to demonstration so there is no confusion as to what is being demonstrated. As each of the steps reflects one or more requirements outline in the performance work statement, offerors are expected to demonstrate every step. All demonstrations will be evaluated on:

A. Learning Management

1. Demonstrate the administrator’s ability to:

a) Enter the record for a web-based course

b) Make the course listing available to learners

c) Assign that course to specific learners to be completed at a specified date.

2. Demonstrate the learner’s ability to search for a course using a specific key word (title, description, and metadata), add the course to a list of content the learner wants to take, and on that list find that course.

a) Show the ability to launch the course.

b) Show the ability to exit and resume the course at the point they left it at a later date.

3. Show how a learner would complete a solution-generated pre-test, post-test, and course evaluation. Show how a learner/user would find their score on a test.

4. Demonstrate how a learner could enroll in a course that is scheduled for a future date. Show how the learner could cancel the registration, if needed.

5. Demonstrate how the learner can view current, past, and future training requirements. Display how the learner can access their transcripts and show the options available to the learner for exporting, saving, or printing them.

a) Demonstrate how a learner could generate a certificate for a completed course.

b) Demonstrate how a learner will be able to manage or upload training transcript/ certificate data from external courses or conferences attended.

6. Demonstrate the ability to enable supervisors to manage their teams:

a) Demonstrate that a supervisor can view all learners assigned to them

b) Demonstrate that a supervisor can assign and unassign learning to all their subordinates

c) Demonstrate that a supervisor can approve learning and development request from all subordinates

d) Demonstrate that a supervisor can generate reports on all their subordinates’ learning and development activities

e) Demonstrate that a supervisor can review, comment on, and indicate acceptance of their subordinates’ individual development plans

B. Accreditation

1) Demonstrate the ability to manage courses as an accredited provider of clinical training by:

a) Managing course and content metadata identifying specific accreditations and accreditation-related information

b) Demonstrating the ability to manage workflows for approved accreditation managers to assign clinical accreditations to specific clinical content

c) Demonstrating the ability to create custom accredited certificates of completion for clinical accredited training (e.g., ACCME and ANCC)

d) Demonstrating the ability to generate reports for all accredited activities recorded in the system. Demonstrate the ability for administrators to report by accreditation type within the system to generate reports according to the accreditation source, learner, supervisor, Government agency audiences and course, and demonstrate a sample report

e) Requiring the completion of a survey to receive an accredited completion

f) Tracking delivery of and reporting on use of courses and content per accrediting body requirements

2) Demonstrate the ability to support learner requirements associated with clinical accreditations:

a) Demonstrate the ability for the learner to select a preferred accreditation

b) Demonstrate how a learner can document accreditation-related unique accreditation provider identifiers on their profile

c) Demonstrate how a learner would search for and track progress in, and record completion of, content offering specific accreditations

d) Demonstrate how a learner would generate certificates of completion conforming to individual accrediting body requirements (e.g., ACCME, ANCC)

3) Demonstrate the ability for a learner to record completion of external accredited training, including the ability to attach an associated document.

C. Reporting & Analytics

1) Demonstrate the creation of an ad-hoc reporting tool that will meet an emergent need, i.e., the number of nurses who completed or did not complete an assigned learning activity.

a) Demonstrate the different report output formats available

2) Demonstrate the ability to deliver drill down dashboards at the enterprise level, enabling the head of a 700,000-person organization to see the department’s compliance and deficiency rate on a mandatory training assignment and then drill down to the lowest organization level to show the same data.

3) Demonstrate the out of the box reporting & analytics capabilities of the Learning Record Store (LRS).

a) Demonstrate the ability to receive, store, and return data about learning experiences, achievements, and employee development

b) Demonstrate the ability to define and apply access permissions to read and write data

c) Demonstrate the ability to provide reporting, dashboards, and analytics functions that are designed to interpret and analyze the data

4) Demonstrate the ability to assess competency skill gaps and deliver associated reports.

a) Demonstrate an administrator’s ability to implement the competency model with all associated pieces e.g., proficiency levels

b) Demonstrate the system’s ability to assign competency models to individuals

c) Demonstrate a learner’s ability to complete a competency self-assessment

d) Demonstrate the system’s ability to compare the individual’s self-assessment with the expected proficiency levels for the position they occupy and show the competency skill gaps that result in the solution

e) Demonstrate the system's capability for routing and approving an employee competency or skills assessment to another user, e.g., manager, in order to generate an official rating

D. Virtual Learning

1) Demonstrate how an administrator sets up the virtual classroom.

2) Demonstrate the virtual classroom’s ability to deliver breakout rooms, multi-dimensional polls, moderated chats, host and presenter staging, interactive content, and interactive whiteboards.

3) Demonstrate how an instructor can manage all aspects of the virtual classroom

4) Demonstrate how a learner can find the time-based virtual classroom offering in the learning platform

5) Demonstrate how the learner’s ability to access the virtual classroom environment from the learning platform with no second login requirement

6) Demonstrate how the learner’s participation in the virtual classroom gets recorded in the learning platform automatically

Source Selection Information-See FAR 2.101 and 3.104