CNECTS _Questions_Answers_ 01 May 2026.pdf

CNECTS_ Questions & Answers_ Dated: 5/01/2026 Question Number Question Answer

CNECTS_Q01

Would the Government clarify the acquisition structure for the CNECTS procurement?

The Government's intent is to make a single award contract to a responsible prime contractor 8(a) Small Business to manage and deliver all aspects of the CNECTS services. Government intends to require a Subcontract Plan. **Due to overwhelming interest in this consolidated acquisition, the 8(a) set aside approach is being reviewed by higher levels of leadership. Please monitor Sams.gov for all new developments.

CNECTS_Q02

What contract types are anticipated for this effort (e.g., firm-fixed-price, time-and-materials, hybrid, or cost-type)?

The overarching goal of the CNECTS acquisition is to transition from four fragmented service contracts into a single, cohesive, enterprise-wide service delivery model that enhances the resilience and agility of the 21st Communications Squadron's "NO FAIL" missions. To achieve this, the Government intends to align the contract structure directly with our desired mission outcomes through a hybrid Contract Line-Item Number (CLIN) strategy.

This alignment will be achieved through the following structure: (not all inclusive) Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) for Baseline Stability Separate FFP for Transition Incentivized Modernization under (FPIF) or FFP Level of Effort FP-EPA for flexibility - to handle unpredictable mission surges, specialized projects, or procurement of materials and travels.

CNECTS _Q03

What is the planned award instrument under the CSO approach (FAR/DFARS contract, OTA-like instrument, and applicability of FAR Part 12 commercial procedures)?

CNECTS will be governed by RFO Part 12 and R-DFARS as a fixed price type contract that includes various fixed-price type CLINs.

CNECTS _Q04 Will 24/7 AFNET/NOC-like requirements be priced as surge, optional CLINs, or baseline labor?

The requirement(s) of AFNET/NOC has been removed. There is no N/NC requirement.

CNECTS _Q05 What is the expected timeline for the solicitation and final RFP release?

CSO Approach is a combined synopsis and solicitation. There will not be a former FAR Part 15 RFP released under this acquisition.

Solicitation will include the release of the final:

a. Commercial Solution Opening (CSO) – Guidance and Instructional document for a successful response.

b. Area of Interest (AOI) – Problem statement document that would request a formal White Paper for evaluation under Phase I.

Expected timeline for the CSO release: TBD. Due to the review process addressed under question #1, the milestone has been adjusted to the right. Please monitor Sams.gov for all future updates.

CNECTS _Q06 Will a draft solicitation package (e.g., draft RFP or draft Sections L and M) be released for industry comment prior to the final RFP?

A draft copy of the CSO and AOIs was released on 27 March 2026 for review and comments.

CNECTS _Q07 Will the CSO process utilize phased evaluations (e.g., Phase I and Phase II down select)?

Yes, the CSO will utilize a Phased Evaluation. Currently, the Government has planned to have a 2-phased evaluation.

Government will be considering the following phased approach:

Phase I - Broad Solicitation & White Paper Submission, and Phase III - Proposal Submissions (by invitation only). Note: Due to the time constraints placed on the CNECTS acquisition, the Government has elected to eliminate the Phase II – Pitch Session from this acquisition approach.

CNECTS _Q08 What are the Government’s expectations for Phase I submissions under the CSO, and what criteria will be used for down select?

In short, technical approach is the non-negotiable entry ticket.

Government's strategy is to first identify and select the best possible solution under Phase I [Evaluation process - Technical Merit & Applicability, Funds Availability, and Feasibility]. Under Phase III - Proposal Submission, evaluation process- Technical Merit & Applicability, Importance to Agency Programs, and Price (fair & reasonable per FAR 12.209), plus compliance with the CSO. These are the basic and minimal evaluation criteria for a CSO. Additional criteria may be added, if so, all evaluation criteria will be included in the final CSO release.

CNECTS _Q09 Will there be a structured template for Phase I submissions?

Yes. Government is tentatively considering the basic template for phase I submission. Final CSO will contain the finalized structured template for Phase I submission.

CNECTS _Q10 How will transition be contracted and evaluated? Note: Finalized evaluation criteria will be included in the final CSO release. Since the transition will be a highly critical factor, here is a tentative approach to the contract and evaluation transition process:

Dedicated Transition CLINS: Allows the Government to clearly separate the costs, timeline, and scope of the handover.

Firm-Fixed Price (FFP): To cover contractor proposed total costs for all onboarding and other activities.

Milestone-Based Deliverables: Requirements will include specific deliverables such as finalized Transition Plan, staffing/recruiting matrix, property & inventory transfer actions, etc.

CNECTS _Q11 How does the Government plan to evaluate past performance?

This Q&A release will only address information required in preparation for Phase I – Technical Approach success. Past Performance will be evaluated under Phase III as “Responsibility”.

Government will review it on an acceptable/unacceptable basis.

Verification will be made to ensure the apparent successful offeror has a satisfactory track record and is capable of executing the consolidated Combat Forces Command (CFC) mission requirements.

CNECTS _Q12 What is the Government’s approach to evaluating price reasonableness under the CSO?

Price Reasonableness will be handled in a 2-stage approach.

Phase 1 – Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) to gauge the economic feasibility of the proposed solution.

Phase III – Government will utilize the normal methodologies:

a. Commercial Market Comparisons (published & historical data)

b. Technical -to-Price Tradeoff (Best Value)

c. Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data (labor category breakdowns, Basis of Estimates (BOEs), etc.

CNECTS _Q13 What small business constraints will be enforced (e.g., NAICS size standards and limitations on subcontracting)?

Please review Government’s response to Question #1.

CNECTS _Q14 What is the rationale for requesting information related to CMMC Level 3 for this requirement?

Evidence of CMMC Readiness is a self-assessment of your compliance with the 110 security controls of NIST SP 800-171.

This generates a score that must be posted to the DOD'd Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) less than 3 years old. It is required NOW as a prerequisite for being considered for award and evidence of your cybersecurity readiness. It is required for any contract containing DFARS Clause 252.204-7019.

Formal CMMC Certification is an official assessment conducted by an accredited CMMC Third-Party Assessment Organization.

This results in a formal CMMC level 2 or level 3 certification. In the future, it will be required at time of award. For contracts that include a specific CMMC requirement, which will be phased in over the next few years. Companies must have achieved formal certification by the time of contract award. This will only apply to contracts that explicitly state a CMMC level requirement in the solicitation. This is verifiable in the CMMC eMASS database.

CNECTS _Q15 How will BIM alignment and potential descoping be handled contractually?

Government provided an updated WBS matrix on 27 March 2026 on Sams.gov.

CNECTS _Q16 How does the Government define “commercial” for purposes of this effort (e.g., commercial technologies, operating models, business processes, or a combination)?

As a CSO acquisition, and defined by R-DFARS 212.7001, "Innovative means-

(1) Any technology, process, or method, including research and development, that is new as of the date of submission of a proposal; or

(2) (2) Any application that is new as of the date of submission of a proposal of a technology, process, or method existing as of such date.

(3) Furthermore, DFARS 212.7002(c), Contracting officers shall treat products and services acquired using a CSO as commercial products or commercial services.

CNECTS _Q17 How does the Government distinguish between mission-essential outcomes and value-added outcomes when considering award and option periods?

The distinction is how the Government makes "best value" decisions. Some helpful examples:

Mission-Essential Outcomes: Non-negotiable requirements, "go/no-go" criteria. Failure to achieve is a failure of the contract.

Value-Added Outcomes: "nice-to-have" discriminators.

Performance or technical approaches that go above and beyond the baseline, delivering additional efficiency, innovation, cost savings, or capability that allows one contractor to stand out above others.

CNECTS _Q18 What specific areas of interest should industry focus on during presentations?

Industry should focus on Mission Systems as top priority, Technical Control. Please reference the updated WBS released on 27 March 2026.

CNECTS _Q19 What is the recommended length and format for white paper submissions (e.g., page limit, font type, and formatting requirements)?

4-6 pages was a common recommendation if a single, integrated white paper is required. Finalized requirements will be in the final released CSO.

CNECTS _Q20 How does the Government envision standardization across Peterson, Schriever, and Cheyenne Mountain?

AFNET would be standardization and NOR and NORTHCOM is a special requirement.

CNECTS _Q21 Where is consistency across locations most important, and where are site-specific approaches expected?

AFNET would be standardization and NOR and NORTHCOM is a special requirement. In addition, The Government expects industry to review the CSO and the Bidders Library to identify opportunities for consistency across locations and propose a solution or approach for Government evaluation.

CNECTS _Q22 Should industry assume the Government is seeking commercial alternatives to legacy Government-unique systems, or will those systems largely remain in place with improved operations around them?

The Government at the level of the CNECTS acquisition does not have authorization to implement AI into the government systems.

CNECTS _Q23 Will the technical evaluation criteria reward offerors who demonstrate the capability to implement Continuous

The Government at the level of the CNECTS acquisition does not have authorization to implement AI into the government systems.

Authority to Operate (cATO) through automated DevSecOps pipelines?

CNECTS _Q24 Will the evaluation criteria include an assessment of key personnel retention and workforce stability?

High turnover in personnel is a direct and significant risk to the Government's mission. Under Phase III, Government can assess retention planning through evaluation of but not limited to: (1) Key Personnel (2) Management Approach, (3) Past Performance, (4) Staffing Plan, and (5) Benefits Package.

CNECTS _Q25 Is there a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) associated with any of the contracts being consolidated?

No CBA's operating under current contracts, so no CBA's will be on CNECTS

CNECTS _Q26 Will the solicitation be evaluated using a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) approach?

No. This acquisition will be solicited as a CSO with phased approaches and not the traditional FAR 15 processes.

CNECTS _Q27 With the consolidation of existing contracts into a single vehicle, is the Government’s intent to reduce the number of FTEs and overall costs, or is the consolidation primarily intended to simplify contract administration?

The primary intent of the consolidation is to streamline contract administration, improve integration across mission areas, and increase operational efficiency. While consolidation may create opportunities to identify efficiencies, including potential reductions in duplicative functions or management layers, the Government has not established a predetermined target for reducing FTEs or overall costs.

CNECTS _Q28 Can you list mission critical systems? Mission critical positions were identified in the latest release of the updated WBS Matrix on 27 March 2026 with an "*".

CNECTS _Q29 Would cross utilization of personnel be viewed as a Single Point of Failure risk?

The Government expects the potential offerors to propose a staffing approach that would support and sustain mission needs, as well as mitigation of risk.

CNECTS _Q30 CSO states “The Government reserves the right to fund all, some, one, or none of the proposals submitted.

Durning one-on-one sessions, it was relayed that only one offeror will be selected to develop a proposal under Phase III. Explain the statement.

There will be only one award. The CSO allows the Government the flexibility to negotiate under Phase III. If there is a path of no-flexibility/no-win, the Government is free to move to the best potential offeror for negotiations.

CNECTS _Q31 Question was posed regarding funding of the CNECTS contract.

Q&A is focused on Phase I information to assist in Industries success technical approach. Funding is not a Phase I topic and will not be addressed.

CNECTS _Q32 Question was posed regarding types of incentives under the FPIF CLINS.

This was a question the Government requested from Industry.

Under Phase III, based on the PWS, technical approach, etc. after the down select to a single Offeror, this will be a point of negotiations.

CNECTS _Q33 Will the Government consider establishing a separate CLIN for "Special Projects" or "Surge Support" to provide a flexible mechanism for handling urgent, out-of-scope requirements without needing full contract modification?

The Government is open to "Special Projects" and Surge Support" CLINs under CNECTS. Again, this would be a point of negotiation under Phase III.

Recommendation: Combine the AOIs into a single, integrated PWS to eliminate ambiguity.

While the draft AOIs posted on 27 March 2026 were topic templates used for examples of how information will be requested for a white paper response. The Government heard Industry and will streamline the AOI to only one to request White Papers and provide the Offerors with the ability to show integration effectively in their technical approach.

CNECTS _Q34 Questions were posed regarding past performance evaluations, will the Government give more weight to a single, highly relevant large-scale consolidation project than to multiple smaller, less complex contracts?

CNECTS contract’s primary purpose is to consolidate efforts from 4 contracts to 1. Multiple contract approach is outside the scope of this effort.

CNECTS _Q35 Draft CSO listed five key personnel positions but suggests that a Deputy PM and Chief Engineer as also critical. Will the Deputy PM and Chief Engineer be included in the mandatory key personnel list?

The draft CSO did not reflect the final "key personnel" list. This "key personnel" list may look different in the final CSO.

Remainder, draft CSO and AOIs were to solicit information back from industry and not to be viewed as the Government's final position.

CNECTS _Q36 Are Quad Chart, PowerPoint Brief and White Paper submitted for each AOI or is there one to cover all AOIs in our response?

Government will be releasing only ONE (1) AOI (Area of Interest) for Industry to respond back with a White Paper.

CNECTS _Q37 Does the government want CNECTS offerors and subs to be OCI free, or can potential OCIs be mitigated through an OCI Plan?

OCI mitigation plan will be requested with submission of Phase I - Technical Approach and submission of white papers.

CNECTS _Q38 PEDS recent document was un-assessable. Will the government please provide a document that can be accessed?

Yes, an updated version has been posted with the Q&A document at time of this release today 01 May 2026.

CNECTS _Q39 Will the Government restructure the CLINs to separate the non-recurring transition activities from the recurring operational services?

Yes, based on the successful offeror’s proposed PWS and technical approach under Phase III. This would be a negotiation point.

CNECTS _Q40 How should offerors price the base year, given that it includes the full cost of transitioning Contracts 1 & 2 but only partial costs for Contracts 3 & 4, which transition in Option Year 1? This structure could lead to an unbalanced pricing evaluation

Pricing should be based on the offeror's technical approach with rationale to support the decision and explanation of methodology used in the pricing solution

CNECTS _Q41 Within the Technical evaluation factor, will the Government give the Transition Plan more weight than other elements, or will all aspects of the technical approach be weighed equally? How will you signal its importance to offerors?

Ultimately, the Government is seeking the Best Value for the CNECTS requirement, which can only be achieved through a solid, holistic, and technically sound approach. While a smooth transition is essential, it is only the first step. The Government will evaluate how seamlessly the Transition Plan integrates with ongoing Operations & Maintenance (O&M), cybersecurity, and modernization efforts to ensure long-term mission success across Combat Forces Command (CFC).

CNECTS _Q42 To ensure clarity and reduce the risk of scope gaps between the four consolidated work areas, will the Government issue a single, integrated Performance Work Statement (PWS) in the final solicitation?

Again, this is the CSO. The offerors will write the PWS under Phase III in collaboration with the Government to ensure the reduced risk of scope gaps on the CNECTS contract. Under Phase I only the technical approach will be addressed and evaluated as a response to the AOIs. No PWS will be provided with the final solicitation.

CNECTS _Q43 How should the white paper be structured? Functional Area and/or Integrated Narrative was the requested flow. Finalized CSO will provide the established criteria.

CNECTS _Q44 Are there formatting standards that hinder your ability to respond effectively?

Majority response back from Industry. (Finalized CSO will direct)

* Font Size for Visuals: A critical point of consensus is that applying the same font size requirements from the narrative to graphics and tables is overly restrictive. Industry strongly recommends allowing a smaller font size (8-10 point) for all visual elements.

* Page Limit Exclusions: It must be explicitly clear whether cover pages, tables of contents, and other administrative elements are excluded from the page count.

CNECTS _Q45 Are there formatting standards that facilitate your ability to respond effectively?

Majority response back from Industry. (Finalized CSO will direct)

*Clear Instructions: Standard templates with clear page limits, section headers, and font/margin guidance (e.g., 12-point font, 1-inch margins) are highly desired.

*Alignment with Evaluation: The format should directly align with the evaluation criteria.

*Allowance for Visuals: Respondents unanimously agree that the Government must allow graphics, tables, and diagrams to explain complex technical concepts.

CNECTS _Q46 For a potential Phase II, would a live pitch day provide enough insight to narrow the selection down to 1 company?

Yes, the CSO will utilize a Phased Evaluation. Currently, the Government has planned to have a 2-phased evaluation.

Government will be considering the following phased approach:

Phase I - Broad Solicitation & White Paper Submission, and Phase III - Proposal Submissions (by invitation only). Note: Due to the time constraints placed on the CNECTS acquisition, the Government has elected to eliminate the Phase II – Pitch Session from this acquisition approach.

CNECTS _Q47 What demonstration scenarios would best showcase your team's capabilities?

Demonstration Scenarios: This question received the most detailed feedback. Industry overwhelmingly rejects static "product demos" in favor of dynamic, integrated, mission-focused scenarios. The most recommended scenarios include:

End-to-End Incident Lifecycle: A scenario that begins with a user ticket at the Communications Focal Point (CFP), moves through automated triage (AIOps), requires cross-domain (cyber, network, engineering) troubleshooting, and concludes with service restoration.

High-Risk Transition: A scenario focused on the first 30-90 days of the contract, demonstrating how the offeror would handle incumbent knowledge transfer, staffing, and asset discovery, potentially with an uncooperative predecessor.

Technology Modernization: Demonstrations of advanced capabilities like a Digital Twin for infrastructure modeling, an AI-powered Network Operations Center (NOC) for predictive maintenance, or the implementation of a Zero Trust security architecture.

Strategic Warning: Multiple vendors (MSM, Five Rivers) cautioned that structuring the scenarios around the four legacy contracts (the current AOIs) is counterproductive. They strongly recommend the Government provide a single, integrated scenario that forces offerors to demonstrate how they will break down silos and operate as a unified enterprise.

CNECTS _Q48 Given your understanding of the requirement, what CLIN structures would you recommend?

There is a very strong industry consensus for a hybrid CLIN structure organized by functional area, not by the legacy contracts.

Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP): Recommended stable, recurring, and well-defined services. (Examples: Program Management, Core O&M, Help Desk / CFP Operations.)

Incentive Fee (FPIF/AF): Recommended for areas where performance quality and innovation are critical. (Examples:

Mission Systems Support (uptime/availability), Cybersecurity (posture improvement), Enterprise IT & Mission Operations.)

Cost-Reimbursable or T&M: Recommended for variable or undefined work. (Examples: Technology Refresh/Modernization, Surge Support, Special Engineering Projects.) – New release under the RFO guidance, COs discretion to use Cost CLINs for Travel. Government is seeking allowance for materials as well under this CSO.

Separate CLINs: A strong consensus emerged for creating separate, dedicated CLINs for Transition (as a one-time FFP effort) and Materials/Travel/ODCs (as a Cost-Reimbursable CLIN) to ensure cost visibility and transparency.

CNECTS _Q49 What CLINs or functional areas might benefit from incentive fee structures? What performance metrics should drive incentive fee determinations?

Incentive Fee (FPIF/AF): Recommended for areas where performance quality and innovation are critical. (Examples:

Mission Systems Support (uptime/availability), Cybersecurity (posture improvement), Enterprise IT & Mission Operations.)

CNECTS _Q50 What risks, from the contractor's perspective, do you perceive in the requirement?

Contractor's Greatest Risk: The most cited contractor risk is "Scope ambiguity and incomplete baseline data." Pricing a firm-fixed-price consolidation is extremely risky without clear data.

CNECTS _Q51 What risks should the government be aware of in structuring the acquisition?

Government's Greatest Risk: Industry identified the Government's biggest risk as "Over-consolidation without sufficient structural visibility." If the CLINs are too aggregated and the AOIs remain siloed, the Government will not achieve the desired efficiencies and will simply be "stapling together" four old problems under a new contract.