Attachment 7 - Questions and Answers v2.pdf

Attachment 7

Questions and Answers v2

1. We would like to know if this is a brand new contract OR if there is (was) an incumbent performing these services.

- This requirement is considered a new initiative, evolving from the current contract FA680021C0001. The classification as "new" is due to significant changes in the scope of work when compared to the predecessor contract.

A primary driver for this distinction is the substantial growth in the user base that these services will support. The number of users has increased from 18,000 to 28,000, and the number of associated groups has risen from 450 to 500. In addition to this expansion, the requirement incorporates a different scope of performance, indicating further additions and modifications to the services being rendered.

2. Who is the current incumbent company?

- D7, LLC

3. What is the incumbent’s full contract price?

- $9,008,458.92

4. The Evaluation Criteria in the Provisions and Clauses document lists Factor 2: Past Performance, but there are no instructions for a Past Performance volume. Is there a desired number of past performance references for Offerors to provide and are there any restrictions on length, recency, value, etc.?

- Attachment 1 Provision and Clauses has been updated to reflect the additional information For Factor 2 Past Performance. Please see Attachment 4 Provision and Clauses v2

5. The Evaluation Criteria in the Provisions and Clauses document lists Factor 3: Price, but there are no instructions for the Price volume nor is there a Price spreadsheet provided with the solicitation. In what format does the government desire the Price factor?

- Attachment 1 Provision and Clauses has been updated to reflect the additional information For Factor 3 Price. Please see Attachment 4 Provision and Clauses v2 and Attachment 5 Pricing Schedule

6. The PWS discusses a Contract Manager and alternate. Are these positions meant to be corporate personnel of the Offeror or are the proposed Key Personnel meant to serve dual-hatted as Contract Manager/alternate.

- IAW PWS 5.8, Contract Manager, the contractor is responsible for appointing the contract manager and alternate. We entrust the contractor with this decision, as they are best positioned to select an individual with the appropriate authority to make decisions and act on the contractor's behalf in all daily operational matters related to the contract

7. The instructions for Sub-factor 2: Personnel Qualifications asks for resumes for all proposed Key Personnel, but the PWS does not define Key positions. Is the Offeror meant to propose Key Personnel? If so, is each Key Personnel required to meet the experience requirements and possess understanding of the items listed in the table in PWS 3.3.2.7?

- The designation of 'Key Personnel' was not specified, as the contractor is expected to assign personnel appropriately to fulfill all Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements. Regarding section 3.3.2.7, a foundational understanding of these processes is essential, as they are integral to daily interactions on NMC2.

8. Are personnel meant to be remote or on-site? If remote, will equipment be provided by the government or the contractor?

- 5.1 Place of Performance Place of performance shall be determined by the contractor and remote access into NMC2 is permitted. The contractor shall utilize their own equipment if not on-site.

9. Can the government please confirm contracting pricing structure? (FFP, LH, etc.)

- Attachment 1 Provision and Clauses has been updated to reflect the additional information For Factor 3 Price as well as the CLIN Structure. Please see Attachment 4 Provision and Clauses v2 as well as Attachment 5 Pricing Schedule

10. The PWS references SharePoint/M365 as the hosting environment for NMC2. We are aware that DoD-level guidance identifies ADVANA as the Department’s enterprise data environment and that the Air Force uses BLADE within ADVANA. Would the Government be open to considering solutions that leverage ADVANA/BLADE if they meet all security, performance, and mission requirements? We want to ensure our proposed approach aligns with current DoD enterprise data direction while fully supporting NMC2 needs.

- We welcome innovative solutions and upgrades. However, to guarantee uninterrupted daily operations, all proposals will be rigorously vetted before they are implemented.

11. What is the historical total number of FTEs used to perform this requirement (by year), and can the Government provide a rough FTE-by-task / functional area breakout?

-We do not want to constrict contractors from creative solutions in fulfilling the mission. The contractor is expected to assign personnel appropriately to fulfill all Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements.

12. How does the government define a ‘Classified Messaging Incident’ risk in this context, and do you have example patterns (fields/aggregations) that previously triggered concern so we can design guardrails correctly?

-The unauthorized or improper handling, transmission, or disclosure of classified information through a messaging system — whether electronic, voice, or other communication medium — that is not designed or authorized for that purpose. We currently don’t have any examples.

13. Who approves creation/modification of the ~500 permission groups and major permission architecture changes, and what is the expected turnaround/SLA for access requests?

- AFGSC/A4B is the final approval authority. The standard turnaround time for approvals is 24 hours; however, delays are permissible with proper communication.

14. Which deliverables are ‘hard’ acceptance items (CDRLs, monthly reports, change logs, release notes), and what are the acceptance criteria (quality gates, testing evidence, documentation)?

- Any deliverable when requested would be considered a “hard” acceptance item. The Acceptance Criteria can be found within the Performance Work Statement under the Service Summary.

15. Must all solutions stay entirely within M365 Gov + SPFx (COTS), or are there any approved adjacent services/tools (e.g., DevOps toolchain, analytics, data services) you’ll accept if they’re secure and don’t disrupt operations?

- We welcome innovative solutions and upgrades. However, to guarantee uninterrupted daily operations, all proposals will be rigorously vetted before they are implemented.