EUS Industry Day Jun182026 - Final.pptx

Jun 18, 2026

Defense Healthcare Management Systems Enterprise End User Services Industry Day

Welcome & Introductions

Copyright © 2023 by Boston Consulting Group. All rights reserved.

Sonya, sheets, nikki, Questions via QR Code

Executive Summary:

Bottom Line Up Front

The Government is moving healthcare IT end user support from a legacy, labor-intensive model to a modern, outcome-based service — uniting garrison Military Treatment Facility (MTF) support (DHMSM) and tactical operational support (JOMIS) under one enterprise vehicle to drive cost-efficiency, synergy, and a unified user experience.

One enterprise vehicle

Outcome-based delivery

Built to scale

Background

DHMSM Program Office Services Deployment End User Support Help Desk Tier 1/ Tier 2 Working Relationship Contractual Relationship

Technical

Product Management Human Centered Design Solutions Oracle Health Millennium Health Data Intelligence Patient Portal Henry Schein Dentrix Solventum Health Information Systems Phillips eCare Converge Additional Solutions

Objective:

Why we are here today Reclaim Clinical Time & Reduce Burden: Eliminate and/or reduce the reliance on traditional classroom training and keeps medical professionals focused on patient care.

Enterprise-Wide, Unified Delivery: Provide a single point of accountability across 11 User Domains. Ensure seamless transitions, high user satisfaction, and consistent support from the clinical facility, to the patient digital experience, all the way to the tactical edge (DIL environments) Predictive Support & Ticket Deflection: Leverage cross-platform data (Service Intelligence) to identify friction points and resolve system anomalies before they impact the end-user, driving high First Contact Resolution (FCR).

Accelerated "Day One Readiness": Orchestrate a seamless, centralized onboarding journey so users are fully equipped and trained to support mission operations and clinical care

The above is influenced by on the following from the RFI

Core Operational Strategy:

The Government intends to reduce the administrative burden on clinical staff, eliminate or minimize traditional classroom training, proactively identify and resolve system anomalies before they impact the end-user, enforce workflow compliance, and deflect routine tickets.

Scope & Service Pillars:

The contractor will be responsible for orchestrating support across 11 distinct User Domains, unified by a centralized governance and shared services model. The effort is structured around core Service Pillars:

ITSM Service Desk: Providing rapid, centralized support with strict Service Level Agreements (SLAs) for incident resolution and First Contact Resolution (FCR).

Adoption & Training: Guaranteeing a "Day One Readiness" user journey by orchestrating rapid intake, provisioning, and targeted training (targeting a 3-day net onboarding pipeline).

Disconnected Enablers: Certifying and equipping uniformed "Field Maintainers" to provide organic, offline IT support in Disconnected, Intermittent, and Limited (DIL) tactical environments.

Service Intelligence: Ingesting cross-platform data (ServiceNow, LMS, EHR) to visualize user adoption and identify workflow friction.

Change Communication & Beneficiary Experience: Ensuring seamless transitions and high user satisfaction across both clinical staff and the beneficiary population.

RFI Purpose The RFI seeks feedback in two areas:

Refine the requirements

Determine the optimal acquisition framework

The above is influenced by the following section in the RFI

The Government is seeking industry feedback in two primary areas:

Refining the technical parameters and metrics to ensure they are clear, achievable, and aligned with the best commercial practices.

2. Determining the optimal acquisition framework—specifically evaluating the benefits and risks of a Single Award contract versus a Multiple Award Contract (MAC)—to support a scalable, multi-agency enterprise.

PART 2

Requirements Clarification & Refinement Help us define these requirements so industry can scope and price them accurately.

Operational integration

SLAs, metrics & incentives

Training & onboarding

Outcome-based PWS

Operational Integration & Centralized Services

THE OFFICIAL ASK

The Government envisions combining garrison (DHMSM) and tactical (JOMIS) support using centralized shared services. What operational boundaries and shared-service parameters should the solicitation clarify so industry can propose lean staffing and price the integration without assuming excessive performance risk?

WHAT WE'RE REALLY ASKING

Where should the lines be drawn between shared services while maintaining an outcomes-based acquisition and a price model with a reasonable risk tolerance that delivers value.

PART 2 · QUESTION 1

SLAs, Metrics & Incentives

The Government is considering strict SLAs (e.g., 30-minute Tier 1 resolution, 75% FCR). Do these align with commercial standards or inflate costs? What are the top three XLAs your firm tracks? How should incentives and disincentives be structured, and which metrics drive adverse behavior or inflated pricing?

Partner with us to define metrics that deliver outcomes. How would you recommend structuring it to achieve value that also drive contractor behavior?

PART 2 · QUESTION 2

Training, Readiness & Onboarding

To achieve 'Day One Readiness' via a 3-day Net Onboarding SLA, and to equip uniformed 'Field Maintainers' for DIL environments, what workflow definitions, baseline competencies, and Government-Furnished Information (GFI) must the solicitation explicitly detail?

Tell us exactly what workflows, baseline skills, and government-furnished information you need from us to hit 3-day onboarding for end users and certify uniformed field support. How can we ensure end users are ready to deliver and support healthcare operations?

PART 2 · QUESTION 3

Outcome-Based PWS & Service Intelligence

PART 2 · QUESTION 4

The Government intends to use an outcome-based PWS. How do highly prescriptive 'how-to' checklists affect your ability to innovate and assume performance liability? What data or technical prerequisites must the Government provide to enable near real-time Service Intelligence dashboards tracking enterprise user adoption?

How does transitioning from a prescriptive Level-of-Effort (LOE) to an outcome-based Performance Work Statement (PWS) impact your ability to deploy innovative technologies and drive value?

PART 3

Acquisition & Contracting Strategy Your input here directly informs whether this is a Single Award or a Multiple Award Contract.

Contract structure

Accountability & integration

Multi-agency scalability

Contract Structure & Economies of Scale

Given diverse operational tempos (clinical MTF, tactical DIL) and the expectation for continuous innovation under a Firm-Fixed-Price model, what are the primary benefits and risks of a Single Award vs. a MAC? Do you prefer Prime/Subcontractor teaming (Single Award) or Task Order competition (MAC) to optimize cost, risk, and delivery speed — and why?

Which structure best covers both clinical and tactical work under fixed price to achieve defined outcomes — one prime team, or multiple awardees competing at the task-order level?

PART 3 · QUESTION 5

Accountability & Multi-Vendor Integration

The Government intends to use end-to-end XLAs (e.g., the 3-day onboarding pipeline). Under a MAC, how can the Government define data-sharing mandates, operational boundaries, and transition SLAs to prevent 'finger-pointing,' avoid duplicated overhead, and ensure seamless 'warm handoffs' between different prime contractors?

How would you recommend governance structure given the complexity of the outcome base work based upon your recommended contractual approach?

PART 3 · QUESTION 6

Multi-Agency Scalability & Customization

Other federal agencies (e.g., USCG) with distinct cybersecurity architectures and unique tactical environments (e.g., maritime DIL) may leverage this vehicle. Does a Single Award (pre-priced Enterprise CLINs) or a MAC (tailored Task Orders) better enable rapid, secure agency onboarding? How should multi-agency XLAs adapt to different baselines while keeping a unified standard of care?

Based upon your recommended contract approach, how could other federal agencies or Services leverage this enterprise contract effort for identified requirements?

PART 3 · QUESTION 7

Submission instructions — recap

Cover page (required) Company name, address, phone, POC(s), email UEI and CAGE code Business size under NAICS code If small: identify your SB program Grant or deny release to support contractors BCG, Swingtide, Andrew Morgan Consulting, Greenlight Analytic, Monterey Consultants

Response format Word / PDF: max 10 pages — OR —PowerPoint / PDF: max 20 slides Minimum 10-point font Cover page excluded from the limit Cover all questions in one submission

This RFI is for planning only — not a solicitation. Responses are voluntary; the Government will not reimburse response costs.

Questions via QR Code image4.jpeg image2.png oleObject1.bin image3.emf image5.png image6.png image7.png image8.png image9.png image10.png image11.jpeg image12.jpeg image13.jpeg image14.jpeg image15.jpeg image16.jpeg image1.png