Question and Answers Updated.xlsx

Sheet1 Question / Clarification Requested VF Response

Slots at installations - rotatation between USAFE and PACAF installations Shared Services Center - not annual Other Commander's Interest Items - ad hoc as requested Please clarify the exact mix of financial statement audits, GAGAS performance audits, and agreed upon procedures by activity and task order, including which require an audit opinion. AFSVC clarifies that Agreed-Upon Procedures (AUPs) are not required or contemplated under this contract. The scope of this agreement is strictly limited to two distinct audit types:

Financial Statement Audit: These require the Contractor to test general ledgers and issue a formal Independent Auditor’s Report (Audit Opinion) per individual fund audit.

Performance/Operational Audits: These are risk-based or ad hoc investigations (such as Commander's Special Interest Audits) that do not require an audit opinion. The final deliverable is a detailed performance report containing actionable recommendations.

The exact mix and frequency of these audits will vary annually based on AFSVC mission requirements, available funding, and DoDI 1015.15 thresholds. The specific audit type, location, and scope for each engagement will be defined in individual Task Orders.

AFSVC will not require or conduct any formal independent IT system assessments, audits, or government-issued security certifications (such as an Authority to Operate / ATO) for Contractor-owned IT networks or platforms.

The Contractor is expected to self-comply with the safeguarding standards set forth in NIST SP 800-171 to secure CUI data on their internal systems.

Please clarify whether the 15–30-day mobilization window is mandatory for all special interest audits and whether task order ceilings or minimum notice will be established. AFSVC confirms that the Contractor is responsible for proposing the on-site fieldwork start dates as part of the initial Audit Plan (Deliverable 1) during the planning phase.

Because ad hoc Commander's Special Interest Audits are subject to formal review and approval by the DAF Services Audit Committee prior to task order authorization, the Government anticipates having ample advance visibility of these requirements.

To ensure the Contractor has sufficient time to coordinate resources and execute the planning phase, the Government will provide the Contractor with a minimum of thirty (30) calendar days' advance written notice (via a formal Task Order or written Call) prior to the required Audit Plan submission deadline.

The Contractor will then propose the specific, on-site fieldwork dates within their Audit Plan, ensuring all travel is booked cost-effectively in accordance with the FTR, and the 15-day advance PBC document list is coordinated with the local installation POCs

The prohibition on subcontractors and teaming partners is a requirement established strictly to ensure robust contract management, individual accountability, and enterprise-level data security.

Because this specialized contract covers highly sensitive, centralized Air Force operations—including the AFSVC Shared Services Center, the Department of the Air Force Gaming/Slot Program, and ad hoc Commander's Special Interest Audits—the Government must maintain a direct, un-broken line of legal and operational accountability with the performing personnel.

Allowing third-party subcontractors introduces unacceptable complexities in contract management, personnel tracking, and base security. Restricting performance strictly to the prime Contractor's direct W-2 employees is necessary to ensure the Government can hold the contracting firm directly accountable for the conduct, qualifications, and security clearances of every individual auditing these critical central programs.

Under federal procurement principles, an agency possesses the legal authority to define its minimum requirements based on legitimate mission and security needs. For this specialized contract, prohibiting subcontractors is directly tied to the following essential Government interests:

Direct Accountability & Privity of Contract: Because this contract audits centralized enterprise programs (the AFSVC Shared Services Center, the Air Force Gaming/Slot Program, and sensitive Commander’s Special Interest Audits), the Government must maintain direct contractual privity and complete supervisory oversight over all personnel performing the work. Subcontracting creates fragmented lines of authority and diminishes direct accountability.

Data Security & Privacy: Accessing centralized general ledgers and employee payroll records involves handling sensitive Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) and Personally Identifiable Information (PII). Restricting access strictly to direct W-2 employees of the prime Contractor preserves a continuous, verifiable chain of custody for all financial data.

GAGAS Quality Control: Under professional auditing standards, the prime CPA firm is directly liable for the integrity of the audit opinions. Direct-hire performance ensures uniform quality control, peer-review compliance, and strict auditor independence.

There are numerous licensed, qualified CPA firms in the commercial marketplace capable of performing this scope of work entirely with their own direct staff. Therefore, competition remains robust, and the requirement stands as written Place of performance (SOO 6.3.1): Will AFSVC authorize remote document inspection and walkthrough interviews, with on-site time reserved for procedures that require physical presence? Yes. AFSVC authorizes and expects the Contractor to utilize remote procedures (such as electronic document inspection) to the maximum extent feasible.

In accordance with the SOO, the Contractor shall perform all preliminary data gathering, general ledger reviews remotely.

The physical, on-site fieldwork standard is strictly reserved for procedures that require physical presence, such as:

Physical inventory counts.

Staff interviews Independent cash counts and locked-drawer inspections.

Direct observation of physical internal controls.

Formal on-site Entrance (In-Brief) and Exit (Out-Brief) presentations.

2. On-Site Observations and Drop Schedules: Physical observations of electronic gaming machine drop and count procedures are not required at every single location for every audit.

Where physical observations are required for testing, they must be conducted in strict coordination with the installation's pre-scheduled, existing NAF cash drop and count schedules.

The prohibition on subcontractors and teaming partners is a mandatory requirement established strictly to ensure robust contract management, individual accountability, and enterprise-level data security.

Because this specialized contract covers highly sensitive, centralized Air Force operations—including the AFSVC Shared Services Center, the Department of the Air Force Gaming/Slot Program, and ad hoc Commander's Special Interest Audits—the Government must maintain a direct, un-broken line of legal and operational accountability with the performing personnel.

Allowing third-party subcontractors introduces unacceptable complexities in contract management, personnel tracking, and base security. Restricting performance strictly to the prime Contractor's direct W-2 employees is necessary to ensure the Government can hold the contracting firm directly accountable for the conduct, qualifications, and security clearances of every individual auditing these critical central programs.

Subcontracting: contractor model: Does AFSVC have a specific contractor profile or delivery model in mind for this requirement? Knowing the intended model allows industry to propose the teaming structure that best fits AFSVC's needs. AFSVC has no pre-determined contractor profile in mind (all qualified, licensed CPA firms in good standing that meet the technical requirements are encouraged to bid).

However, the use of subcontractors, teaming partners, or joint ventures is strictly prohibited under this contract. All audit services, fieldwork, and reports must be performed entirely by the prime Contractor’s direct, W-2 employee staff.

Firm-Fixed-Price by Deliverable: Performance is priced and invoiced strictly against the approved, flat-rate deliverables (CLINs) established on ATCH 05 per engagement.

To maximize cost efficiency and minimize base disruption, the Contractor shall utilize a hybrid audit model. This involves conducting the vast majority of planning, data-extraction, transaction testing, and report drafting remotely, while conducting on-site fieldwork to conduct physical counts, observations, and key face-to-face interviews.

Sequential / Coordinated Scheduling: The Contractor is expected to manage their staffing pool to execute these audits sequentially throughout the 12-month performance year, in accordance with the collaboratively developed Audit Plan (Deliverable 1) Subcontracting: auditor independence: If subcontracting is restricted, how will AFSVC preserve the independent auditor's authority to determine the audit plan, materiality, staffing, and specialists needed to support each opinion, consistent with GAGAS independence in fact and in appearance? AFSVC confirms that the prohibition on subcontractors does NOT impair or restrict the independent auditor's authority under GAGAS standards.

The Contractor retains complete, independent professional authority to establish the audit plan, determine materiality thresholds, design transaction testing sample sizes, and assign qualified direct-hire staff to support each engagement, in strict accordance with GAGAS and AICPA standards. Requiring all audit personnel to be direct W-2 employees of the contracted prime firm is a standard contractual, privity, and data-security control, which does not interfere with the firm's professional auditing judgment.

Furthermore, the Government’s intent is for the awarded prime Contractor to execute both the financial statement audit and any scheduled performance audits at the same installation. Under GAGAS, performing both audit types for the same client does not impair independence, as the performance audit is strictly an advisory evaluation of operational efficiency, and the Contractor does not perform management functions or design internal controls. Conducting both scopes under a single prime firm maximizes operational continuity, shared travel efficiencies, and comprehensive oversight for the installation Subcontracting: concurrent execution: If subcontracting is excluded, how does AFSVC expect a single firm to staff simultaneous financial statement, Shared Services Center performance, Venture Gaming, Cadet Dining, and Commander's Special Interest audits across the United States, Europe, Greenland, and the Pacific? AFSVC does NOT expect or require simultaneous, concurrent execution across all worldwide locations.

The Contractor will not be required to deploy audit staff to multiple domestic and overseas installations at the same time; The Government seeks sequential/staggered scheduling across the contract performance period.

Subcontracting: safeguards: Would clear prime accountability for audit leadership, independence, supervision, and reporting—combined with appropriate specialist qualifications and Government consent where required—meet AFSVC’s objective without imposing a blanket subcontracting prohibition? AFSVC has evaluated the proposed oversight model and has determined that a blanket prohibition on subcontractors and teaming partners remains a mandatory security and operational control requirement for this contract.

While 'prime accountability' is a standard contracting framework, the specialized nature of these enterprise-level audits—specifically involving centralized general ledgers at the Shared Services Center, automated electronic gaming systems, and ad hoc Commander's Special Interest investigations—demands a direct, un-broken relationship of privity and physical security control with every individual auditor.

Allowing third-party subcontractors, even with Government consent, introduces unacceptable administrative complexities in security-clearance vetting, DISS adjudication, and physical base access tracking. To ensure uncompromised data integrity, protect sensitive CUI/PII on direct systems, and maintain clear, single-point accountability for the Air Force, all work must be performed exclusively by the direct W-2 employee staff of the prime Contractor. The requirement stands as written.

Past performance: Will past performance on audits of public entities and hospitality, food service, entertainment, or gaming operations be considered relevant, and will subcontractor past performance count toward the prime's assessment? 1. Relevance of Commercial Past Performance: Yes, past performance involving audits of commercial entities, public agencies, or enterprises operating in the hospitality, food service, recreation, entertainment, or gaming sectors will be considered directly relevant.

In accordance with SOO paragraphs 3.1 and 3.3, experience auditing entities similar in nature to Air Force Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities (NAFIs) directly demonstrates the necessary technical capabilities to execute this contract.

2. Subcontractor Past Performance: No, subcontractor past performance will NOT be evaluated or considered.

Because the use of subcontractors, teaming partners, or joint ventures is strictly prohibited under this contract, all submitted past performance references must demonstrate the direct past performance of the bidding prime Contractor. Any past performance references submitted for third-party entities or subcontractors will be deemed non-responsive and excluded from evaluation.

Financial Statement Audits: Each ordered financial statement audit will require one (1) Independent Auditor's Report (Audit Opinion) and one (1) Management Letter per individual fund.

Performance Audits : Each ordered performance audit engagement requires one (1) consolidated Final Performance Audit Report (with recommendations).

All audits will be ordered on an as-needed basis via individual Task Orders, and no minimum or maximum quantities of opinions are guaranteed.

All submitted questions will be answered formally and distributed to all potential offerors via a written solicitation amendment to ensure a fair, transparent, and equal procurement process.

In accordance with GAO implementation guidelines, the Contractor shall utilize their GAGAS 2024-compliant Quality Management systems and reporting formats for all deliverables.

For the historical fiscal years in scope (e.g., FY24), the Contractor shall evaluate the installation's financial transactions and compliance against the specific Air Force and NAF regulations that were active during those respective fiscal periods.

The Contractor is responsible for booking and paying for commercial travel to JB MDL, which will be reimbursed under the Travel CLIN in accordance with the FTR.

The COR and Pituffik POCs will coordinate the flight sponsorships and scheduling during the Audit Plan phase (Deliverable 1).

2. Clear Space Force Station (Alaska): The Government will NOT provide military transportation to Clear SFS. Clear is accessible by road.

The Contractor is responsible for booking commercial travel to Fairbanks, Alaska, and securing a commercial rental car to drive to Clear SFS, which will be reimbursed under the Travel CLIN in accordance with the FTR

While gaming/slot locations and the Shared Services Center are known and fixed, an ad hoc Special Interest Audit may be requested for any activity or installation across the Air Force for reasons that cannot be predicted in advance.

2. Mobilization & Pricing Assumptions: Quoters shall not assume a guaranteed quantity of Special Interest Audits. To size mobilization capacity and price ATCH 05:

Quoters shall utilize the general baseline estimates provided in Attachment 012 - Historical Workload and Estimated Quantities to scale their administrative overhead.

Typical Duration: When a Special Interest Audit is ordered, quoters shall assume a typical on-site fieldwork duration of five (5) consecutive business days (one week) for standard activities, with the four (4) week limit serving strictly as a contract ceiling for complex multi-activity investigations.

All ad hoc audits will be ordered and invoiced against the flat-rate deliverable CLINs established in Section B of ATCH 05 upon formal Task Order issuance.

To ensure a fair and open competition that fosters independent pricing and operational efficiency, all quoters must develop their own Level of Effort (LOE) estimates based on the specific requirements of the SOO and the workload metrics provided.