PADELS Recompete_Question Answer Matrix 19 Feb 25.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 14 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Sources Sought: Publicly Available Information (PAI) Alerting Service Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA7014250123
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers matrix document for a DOD Publicly Available Information (PAI) Alerting Service recompete. The document contains 10 questions and responses covering user base details, filtering requirements, and technical specifications. Key clarifications include that the service should support all DOD employees (approximately 3.2 million potential users, with current active users around 200,000), provide pre-defined filters based on topics and geographic areas, and comply with CUI guidelines for user data protection.
The Q&A provides important context about the requirement, including that it will be an enterprise-wide license serving all DOD components including military services, Joint Staff, National Guard, and various commands. The vendor must provide user account management capabilities, annual certification tracking, and the ability to disable accounts when certifications lapse. The current contract ends June 25, 2026, with an RFP planned to be released before that date. Filtering capabilities should support various mission areas including force protection, global crisis monitoring, cybersecurity threats, and regional/geographic-based alerts.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| PADELS Recompete_Question Answer Matrix.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| DRAFT PAI Alerting Services 2026 SOO.pdf | ||
| PAI Alerting Services 2026 RFI.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| # | Document (i.e. PWS) | Paragraph (if applicable) | Comment/Question | Government Response | |
| 1 | RFI | Section 4, Subsection 2, Question 7. | Would the DoD clarify what portion of the 3.2 million users are administrators versus end users receiving messaging alerting service. | The final breakdown of user versus administrator will depend on actual capability details, but respondents should base responses around a total userbase of all DoD employees from every DoD component. | |
| 2 | SOO | Section 5/Peformance Objectives, Question 4. | Would you provide clarification on the nature of the users - are they every single member of DoD, or a what-definition subset? | The intent is for this capability to be available across DoD, including military service members and civilians, within every DoD mission area. The final breakdown of authorized users will depend on actual capability details, but respondents should base responses around a total userbase of all DoD employees from every DoD component | |
| 3 | SOO | Section 5/Peformance Objectives, Question 12. | Would you please provide further insight into this requirement – does this mean pre-defined filters based on roles? Please provide an example. | This requirement would include pre-defined filters based on topic areas of interest or geographic areas of relevance and include the ability to set and customize filters to control alerts received. This filtering is not strictly based on roles; it would be more appropriately understood based on the totality of DoD mission areas. Examples may include (respondents should not interpret these examples as minimum requirements but solely as a potential model for filters): | |
| • | Topical areas of interest | ||||
| o | Force Protection Alerts: Direct threats against U.S. military personnel, installations, or interests | ||||
| o | Global Crisis and Conflict: Military events, terrorist activities, or events promoting or signaling regional instability. | ||||
| o | Disasters and Humanitarian Crises: Natural or manmade disasters, emergency response efforts | ||||
| o | Cybersecurity Treats: Emerging cyber attacks, malware distribution events, data breaches or attempts, newly identified vulnerabilities. | ||||
| o | Emerging Technology and Adversary Capabilities: Claims or demonstrations of major technical advancements, particularly foreign military developments. | ||||
| o | Supply Chain and Infrastructure Disruptions: Global supply chain issues, logistic disruptions, major weather events affecting travel and supply, critical infrastructure failures. | ||||
| o | Space Domain Awareness: Launches, satellite activities, counter-satellite threats, space debris alerts (could be considered regional as well) | ||||
| o | Etc. | ||||
| • | Regional | ||||
| o | Filters aligned to Geographic Combatant Command AORs: USCENTCOM, USINDOPACOM, USNORTHCOM, USEUCOM, USSOUTHCOM, USAFRICOM. | ||||
| o | Country specific filters: China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Mexico, Syria, etc. | ||||
| o | Filters aligned to forward deployed locations: Germany, South Korea, Japan, Middle East, Colombia, etc. | ||||
| o | Maritime and Litoral regions: South China Sea, Persian Gulf, Black and Baltic Seas, Horn of Africa, Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico, etc. | ||||
| o | Major global regions: Levant, East Asia, Eastern Europe, South and Central America, etc. | ||||
| o | Ability to create geofences a plus | ||||
| • | Event based | ||||
| o | Flexible filtering based on major, semi-persistent global events of interest: Gaza-Israel Conflict (2023-present), Russian-Ukraine War (2022-present), Bab al-Mandeb Shipping Crisis (2023-present), Haiti Security Crisis (2024-present), etc. | ||||
| 4 | SOO | Section 5/Peformance Objectives, Question 16. | Please provide clarity on what this guidance is. | This guidance will be provided by DoD and will cover authorized uses of the capability, but depends on the capability's data availability and licensing restrictions. For example, this guidance may instruct users on handling of U.S. Persons Information (USPI) encountered in the capability. As another example, if the vendor's license limits particular uses of the capability, such as creating derivative works, DoD guidance on what users can and cannot do will be required | |
| 5 | General | General | Can the Government provide an estimate for the current number of platform licenses issued across the entirety of the PADELS contract? | One, license is an enterprise license, allowing all enterprise members access to service. | |
| 6 | General | General | Can the Government provide an estimated number of active users of the current platform through PADELS? | Around 200,000 users but is subject to increase at any given moment. The intent is to grow this number substantially. | |
| 7 | General | General | Can the Government provide a list of DoD components utilizing the current platform on the PADELS contract? | No, but in general, all DoD Components will have users of the capability. This includes Secretary of Defense and staff, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Joint Staff, the Military Departments, the National Guard Bureau, and the various commands and Agencies of the DoD. | |
| 8 | General | General | Does the Government have a target release date for the RFP? | The current contract ends 25 Jun 2026, the Government intends to release an RFP in advance of this date | |
| 9 | SOO | V.15. Ensure safeguards are in place to protect user information, in compliance with National Institute of |
Standards and Technology (NIST) SP 800-171 and FAR 52.239-1, DFARS 252.204-7009, DFARS
| 252.2047015, and DFARS 252.239-7010. | Given that the requested capability will process exclusively PAI and CAI data, what CUI content does the Government believe will be included during the implementation of the contract that would align to NIST? | Aggregation of the email addresses, account information, alerts, and other user data are sufficient enough to require protections under CUI guidelines. | |
| 10 | SOO | V.16 Direct users to complete DoD-specific guidance prior to account activation and prevent access if | |
| guidance is not met annually | We have several questions related to this requirement. |
1. How will the Government adjudicate who is a user, this has a security component to it as well?
2. Who does the Goverrnment expect to maintain records of who is authorized to use the tool?
3. Who will be responsible for contacting individuals when they need to renew their certification?
4. Is the certification different or does it have different goals than a typical platform onboarding training?
5. Will the contractor be responsible for removing users when their yearly certification lapses? 1. Typically, access to send and receive emails from a .mil email address has been sufficient to demonstrate who is and is not a government users, but other models for adjudication can and do exist. As this contract is meant to provide for all of DoD, different unit requirements may require additional vetting or record keeping at the unit level.
2. Accounts to access the tool will be maintained by the vendor. As this contract is meant to provide for all of DoD, different unit requirements may require additional vetting or record keeping at the unit level.
3. Vendor should provide warning to users when their account is coming up for annual guidance recertification.
4. This certification should ideally be conducted during onboarding training.
5. Disabling accounts and allowing users the ability to conduct certification training again, including the DoD-specific guidance.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .