Questions and Answers as of 05OCT26.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 29 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Broad Agency Announcement (BAA): Cost Estimating Modeling Data, Analytics Research (CEMDAR)
- Solicitation number
- FA701426SCS02
About this file
This file is a Questions and Answers document addressing inquiries related to the SAF/FM Cost Estimating Modeling Data Analytics Research (CEMDAR) Broad Agency Announcement (BAA FA7014-26-S-CS02). The Q&A clarifies numerous provisions of the two-step solicitation, including facility clearance requirements, teaming arrangements, key personnel, task scope alignment, and cost estimation guidance.
The document resolves critical ambiguities in the BAA and Performance Work Statement through 108 numbered questions and government responses. Key clarifications include: the governing NAICS code is 541715 (not 541745 as initially stated), with a 1,000-employee small business size standard; the prime contractor or joint venture entity must independently hold an active TOP SECRET Facility Security Clearance (FCL) at white paper submission, which the Government will verify in DCSA NISS using the submitted CAGE code; cleared entities must perform at least 50 percent of total direct labor/technical effort; and the white paper Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) must cover the full 60-month potential period of performance within the $24 million ceiling, inclusive of all options, surge support, fee, travel, and other direct costs. The Government clarifies that no Government platforms are available before award, but will furnish VAULT cloud-based platform access, associated licenses, and Government laptops post-award; contractor development will occur within the Government environment using synthetic or publicly available data only, with no Government data in contractor environments. The 30-page white paper limit includes the cover page and all sections (A-D), with an optional unlocked Excel ROM workbook submitted separately; Government-furnished equipment and platforms eliminate anticipated contractor-furnished data infrastructure costs. Additional responses defer numerous detailed requirements—including contract type, fee structure, accounting system adequacy determination, final task alignment, key personnel specifications, and ATO boundary details—to Step 2 proposal evaluation. The document clarifies that no incumbent contractor currently performs this work, no pre-award personnel clearances are mandated at white paper submission (though attestations to security readiness are required), and only responses submitted by the October 19, 2026 deadline to the identified contracting officers will be evaluated.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| CEMDAR PWS - Informational OCT2026.pdf | ||
| Questions and Answers as of 01OCT26.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| PWS - CEMDAR.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Comment | Reference | Page | Paragraph | Question/Comment | Government Response |
| Number | (PWS, Clause No, etc.) | Reference | Reference | ||
| 1 | Must the prime itself hold a TOP SECRET FCL at Step 1, or can a prime holding a Secret FCL submit when a cleared teaming/JV member holds the required Top Secret FCL and performs at least 50% of the direct technical effort? | Yes. Refer Solicitation para. 5.3. This applies to teaming arrangements and joint ventures: the prime (or JV entity) must hold the TOP SECRET FCL itself; a teaming partner's FCL does not satisfy the requirement. The reference to a SECRET FCL in BAA Section 5.3 is a typographical error and IS corrected by amendment. (Replaces the existing response, which incorrectly stated SECRET.) | |||
| 2 | May an entity that does not currently hold an FCL participate only as a subcontractor/team member under an otherwise eligible cleared prime, provided all applicable personnel/access requirements are satisfied? | An entity without an FCL may participate as a subcontractor/team member provided all personnel security requirements are met. | |||
| 3 | Is there any acceptable Step-1 path for a small business with relevant unclassified prototype evidence but no current FCL, or should such a company refrain from submitting as the respondent? | Refer Q1 & 2. | |||
| 4 | Section 5.3 first states that only respondents with an active, verifiable TOP SECRET facility clearance in DCSA NISS at white-paper submission will be reviewed, then states that a team or joint-venture prime must independently hold an active SECRET facility clearance. What facility-clearance level must the prime hold at white-paper submission? | Refer Q1. | |||
| 5 | Does the requirement that cleared entities perform at least 50 percent of direct labor apply to total direct labor or only to direct labor requiring classified access? May an uncleared subcontractor perform unclassified Task 3 or Task 4 work if its personnel meet all applicable suitability and access requirements? | The cleared entity must perform at least 50% of the total direct labor/technical effort. | |||
| 6 | May a prime rely on subcontractor corporate experience, past performance, and proposed key personnel to demonstrate automated data-pipeline engineering and predictive cost-modeling capability? If so, how will the Government evaluate the relative contribution of prime and subcontractor experience? | See Solicitation para. 5.2. | |||
| 7 | SAM.gov classifies the notice under NAICS 541715, while the announcement text references NAICS 541745. Please confirm the governing NAICS code and small-business size standard. | This should be NAICS 541715. Refer amended Solicitation. | |||
| 8 | Must an offeror demonstrate a Government-adequate cost-accounting system at the white-paper stage, or only if invited to submit a full proposal and before award of a cost-reimbursement contract? | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 9 | Will VAULT, Envision, and other named Government environments be Government-furnished, and may unclassified prototypes be developed in a contractor-controlled commercial cloud before deployment to Government environments? | No Government platforms are available prior to award. Determined in Step 2. Howerver, after award, the Government anticipates furnishing the cloud-based platform(s) of choice (currently VAULT, with Envision and other DAF Data Fabric tools as required), associated licenses, and Government laptops; Government platforms are accessible only on Government-furnished equipment. Contractor development and staging will occur within the Government environment (e.g., the VAULT contractor staging tenant). The contractor may use its own environment only for work with synthetic or publicly available data; no Government data may reside in contractor environments, and no deployments to or from contractor environments are planned. All code shall be maintained in the Government-designated repository per Task 3. | |||
| 10 | How should offerors identify and protect pre-existing commercial/background intellectual property and open-source components while meeting the Government's unlimited-rights requirements for Government-funded technical data and software? | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 11 | BAA | BAA 1, Overview Information & Two-Step Solicitation Structure; BAA 5.4, Step 2: Full Proposal Preparation & Evaluation. The supplied BAA does not state a document-order-of-precedence clause. | Which document controls if the BAA , PWS, attachments, and subsequent RFP contain inconsistent requirements? | Determined in Step 2. | |
| 12 | PWS | PWS Task 5, lines 633–656; PWS Task 6, line 657 | Tasks 5 & 6 are listed as Option CLINs; can the Government please confirm these are Core Tasks? | The PWS is posted for informational purposes only to aid in white paper submissions. The work statement utilized for Step 2 may be substantially different. Utilize Solicitation Section 3 to guide white paper submissions. | |
| 13 | BAA / PWS | BAA 3.4–3.5; PWS Tasks 5–8, pp. 16–19 | The BAA identifies Task 6 as RDT&E surge support. The PWS identifies Task 6 as O&M-funded CSDR support, Task 7 as RDT&E surge support, and Task 8 as O&M surge support. Please provide a reconciled task-to-CLIN crosswalk and confirm which tasks must be addressed and priced in the white paper. | Refer Q 12. | |
| 14 | BAA | BAA 3.5 Core Competency 5; PWS Task 6, line 657, PWS Task 7, lines 691–706, PWS Task 8, lines 707–716 | The BAA on SAM.gov and the Government-provided PWS are inconsistent. The scope of work outlined in the BAA on SAM.gov does not align with the PWS, specifically Tasks 6, 7, & 8. Will the Government please confirm and update the BAA language to accurately reflect the scope of work in the PWS? | Refer Q 12. | |
| 15 | BAA | BAA NAICS Code & Size Standard | The SAM.gov BAA posting references both NAICS 541715 and 541745. We do not see NAICS 541745 in the NAICS listing. Can you please confirm that NAICS 541745 is an error? Can you please confirm the correct NAICS for CEMDAR is 541715? | Refer Q 7. | |
| 16 | BAA | BAA 5.3 | Beyond the mandatory gate, how will technical relevance, Government interest, and fiscal viability be used to select white papers for Step 2? Will papers be comparatively ranked or assessed independently, and how will personnel qualifications, past-work examples, proposed scope, and ROM cost affect advancement? | Selection of papers will use the identified critera in the Solicitation. All papers will be assessed independently. | |
| 17 | BAA | BAA Para #3 (Section II - Technical Description & Core Competencies), PWS Page 27, lines 1050 - 1053 | The BAA states that Offerors must explicitly summarize the core technical competencies, relevant project experience, and security clearance/access readiness of proposed Key Personnel - specifically the Contractor Program Manager (PM), the Chief Cost Data Scientist (governing Task 2 Level 1 architectural decisions and CADOM pipelines), and any designated Technical / Data Science Task Leads." Per the PWS (page 27), the following positions are listed as Key: Program Manager, Chief Cost Data Scientist, Expert Cost Estimators/Analysts, and Journeyman Data Scientists. Can the Government please clarify/specify the required key positions? | Refer Q 12. | |
| 18 | PWS | PWS Page 27, lines 1050 - 1053 (Key Positions) | Per the PWS (page 27), the following positions are listed as Key: Program Manager, Chief Cost Data Scientist, Expert Cost Estimators/Analysts, and Journeyman Data Scientists. The Expert Cost Estimators/Analysts and Journeyman Data Scientists indicate requirements for multiple personnel/FTEs for these specific categories. Can the Government please specify the number of key personnel required for each key position? | Refer Q 12. | |
| 19 | BAA | BAA Para 1.3 (Communication & Contracting Points of Contacts) | Per Para 1.3, "Dialog between prospective offerors and Government representatives is strongly encouraged prior to proposal submission." Please advise on the mechanisms for engaging Government representatives for direct dialog. | Inquiries should be directed to the Contracting POCs identified in BAA 1.3 (Eric Moss, primary; Joseph Spear, alternate). No technical POCs are designated for Step 1; questions are answered through this Q&A. Offerors selected for Step 2 will receive further direction on communication. | |
| 20 | PWS | PWS page 19, lines 721 - 1047 (Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSA)) | Per the listing of labor categories in the KSA, 17 unique labor categories have been defined. Is there a Government planning baseline for labor hours, FTEs, labor mix, or minimum staffing required by task? | Refer Q 12. | |
| 21 | PWS | PWS page 19, lines 1007 - 1030 (Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSA)) | Per the listing of labor categories, the Government has identified a "CSDR Subject Matter Expert". The PWS requirement for DAF CSDR Support is not currently listed as a Core Competency in the BAA . Can the Government please clarify the requirement for the CSDR Subject Matter Expert and the alignment to the required Core Competencies? | Refer Q 12. | |
| 22 | BAA | BAA Para 5.2, Section C (ROM) | The requirement states the need for a "Comprehensive ROM cost estimate reflecting labor, data infrastructure, and travel necessary to execute the proposed research." In order to prepare an adequate comprehensive ROM, please provide additional information on the anticipated required Level of Effort, data infrastructure needs, and anticipated travel needs. | Refer Solicitation and Q 12. | |
| 23 | BAA | BAA Para 5.2, Section C (ROM) | Can the Government please provide any specific instructions on the required information/detail for the ROM? For example, does the Offeror need to break out by the BAA core capabilities, PWS tasks, and/or Labor Categories? | Refer Q 12. | |
| 24 | BAA | BAA 4.1, 5.2 Section C (ROM) | Pricing period and ceiling: What period should the white-paper ROM cover: the base period, the full potential 60 months, or an offeror-proposed duration? Please confirm the anticipated base/option structure, performance start date, and whether the $24 million ceiling includes all options, surge support, fee, travel, and ODCs. | Per BAA 4.1, the anticipated period of performance is 12 to 60 months. The white paper ROM shall cover the full potential 60-month period (base plus all options). The $24M estimated ceiling is inclusive of all options, Task 6 surge, fee, travel, and ODCs; per BAA Section III, the ceiling may be increased by within-scope modification. | |
| 25 | BAA / PWS | BAA 4.2, 5.3; PWS Security Instructions, p. 38, lines 1343–1354 | Personnel clearances: The BAA announcement requires Secret clearances for key personnel and an adjudicated Tier 2 investigation or higher for non-key personnel. The PWS requires a minimum Secret clearance for all personnel. Please clarify the personnel security requirements. | Refer Q1 & Q 12. | |
| 26 | BAA / PWS | BAA 3.2; PWS Task 3, pp. 5–11 | Which technologies and architecture features are mandatory? Please identify the available platform services, approved development tools, repositories, and required Bronze/Silver/Gold implementation. Will the Government provide an inventory of existing pipelines, applications, databases, and models showing maturity and remaining development needs? | Determined in Step 2. See also Q9. | |
| 27 | BAA /PWS | BAA 3.1, Core Competency 1 - Task 1; BAA 3.2, Core Competency 2; BAA 4.2, Security, OPSEC, and Export Control Compliance; PWS lines 55–61 and 1170–1178 | What support-contractor access limitations are currently implemented within VAULT, Envision, and other DAF Data Fabric environments? | Determined in Step 2. See also Q1. | |
| 28 | BAA | BAA 4.3, Logistics, Base Support, and Intellectual Property Rights | The BAA states that the Government will provide cloud-platform tenant environments but does not expressly identify separate test and development environments. Will the Government provide separate test and development environments, or must they be contractor-furnished? | Determined in Step 2. See also Q9. | |
| 29 | BAA | BAA 4.4, Data Rights and Commercial Software Licensing | What data rights apply to preexisting tools, commercial software, open-source components, trained models, model weights, and derived data? E.g., the Contracts Database (KDB). | Determined in Step 2. | |
| 30 | BAA | BAA 4.2, Security, OPSEC, and Export Control Compliance | The BAA does not identify a specific ATO boundary. Is there any requirement for the vendor regarding the accreditation or ATO boundary as it currently applies to cloud-based systems and analytical applications? | Determined in Step 2. | |
| 31 | BAA | BAA 3.4, Core Competency 4 - Task 5; PWS lines 646–655 | The PWS requires one combination virtual and in-person course for KDB users. What training audience, course duration, delivery format, and number of attendees are expected? | Determined in Step 2. | |
| 32 | Can the government please confirm the NAICS code listed in the BAA and Section 1 should be 541715? | Refer Q 7. | |||
| 33 | Section 1.3 of the BAA states that “Dialogue between prospective offerors and Government representatives is strongly encouraged prior to proposal submission. Technical discussions shall not constitute a commitment by the Government to fund or award any proposed effort. Only warranted Contracting Officers possess the legal authority to commit the Government.” Can the government please confirm that conversations can occur between firms and both Technical and Contractual POCs? | Refer to Q 19. | |||
| 34 | Section 4.2 states that “Technical information generated or utilized may be subject to ITAR (22 CFR 120-131) and EAR (15 CFR 710-774). Where applicable, a Certified DD Form 2345 (Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement) must accompany formal proposals.” Can the government please confirm that submitting the DD2345 is not required for the Step 1 white paper submission, but may be required with Step 2 formal proposal submission? | Confirmed. Per BAA 4.2, a certified DD Form 2345 must accompany formal proposals where applicable; it is not required with the Step 1 white paper. | |||
| 35 | Section 5.3 of the BAA states that “Only white papers submitted by respondents possessing an active and verifiable Facility Security Clearance (FCL) at the TOP SECRET level (issued and recorded in the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency [DCSA] National Industrial Security System [NISS].” Can the government please confirm that offerors need only to submit their CAGE code for the government to verify? | Offerors must include the CAGE code in Section A and in page headers (BAA 5.2). The Government will verify FCL status in NISS using the CAGE code. For teaming arrangements and JVs, provide the CAGE code for each member. | |||
| 36 | Section 5.3 of the BAA states that “In any contractor teaming arrangement or Joint Venture (JV), the Prime Contractor must independently hold an active Secret FCL at submission.” However, the prior paragraph states that respondents must have an “active and verifiable Facility Security Clearance (FCL) at the TOP SECRET level” can the government please confirm that this should read “In any contractor teaming arrangement or Joint Venture (JV), the Prime Contractor must independently hold a Top Secret FCL at submission.” | Refer Q1. | |||
| 37 | Section 5.3 of the BAA states that “Technical Relevance: Is the proposed technical approach rigorously consistent with the research domains and technologies listed in this BAA?”. Can the government please clarify if the research domains they are evaluating against are the Core Competencies 1-5 or a another ser of criteria? | Refer Solicitation Section 3 3. Section II — Technical Description & Core Competencies & Q12. | |||
| 38 | The PWS section 10.1 identifies four (4) key roles: Program Manager, Chief Cost Data Scientist, Expert Cost Estimator/Analysts, and Journeyman Data Scientists, while section 3 of the SAM.gov record states that the Program Manager and the Chief Cost Data Scientist are key. To ensure consistency with the solicitation's can the government please confirm that just the Program Manager and the Chief Cost Data Scientist are key. | Refer Q12. | |||
| 39 | Section 10.1 of the PWS identifies multiple key roles that are plural (i.e. ending in s), can the government please confirm that offerors need to only submit 1 individual per key labor category? | Refer Q12. | |||
| 40 | Section 3.4 of the BAA, is titled “Specialized Acquisition Databases and Statutory Cost Reporting Administration” and only references PWS Task 5. Given the scope, can the government please confirm that "Task 6 DAF CSDR Support” should also be included in this section? | Refer Q12. | |||
| 41 | Section 3.5 of the BAA is titled “Core Competency 5: Mission Augmentation and Surge Analytical Capabilities”, can the government please confirm that the PWS references for this section should be “ask 7 – Surge Support (RDT&E, Option CLIN)” and “Task 8 – DAF Surge Support (O&M, Option CLIN)”? | Refer Q12. | |||
| 42 | Section 5.2 of the BAA requests “Section D Associate Contractor Agreements (ACAs): Identification of anticipated ACA frameworks required to exchange proprietary technical data, software code, and research assets among multiple defense contractors.” Can the government please provide the contract IDs and prime contractors that are anticipated to require ACAs with the CEMDAR Awardee? | Section D of the white paper is for vendors to identify ACA they are considering, if applicable. | |||
| 43 | Section 5.2 of the BAA requests “Section D Associate Contractor Agreements (ACAs): Identification of anticipated ACA frameworks required to exchange proprietary technical data, software code, and research assets among multiple defense contractors.” Can the government please clarify what the government expects to ensure all offerors can be evaluated fairly? Is the government looking for a template ACA? | No template is required. White papers should describe the offeror's approach to executing ACAs and protecting proprietary data under COR-directed exchanges; all offerors are evaluated against the same evaluation criteria. | |||
| 44 | Incumbent: Please identify the incumbent contractor(s) currently performing this work and the associated contract number(s). | There is no existing contract or incumbent. | |||
| 45 | NAICS Code: The SAM.gov classification lists NAICS 541715, while Section 1 of the announcement references 541745. Please confirm the governing NAICS code and size standard. | Refer Q 7. | |||
| 46 | Facility Clearance Requirement: Section 5.3 requires an active Top Secret FCL at white paper submission, while the teaming paragraph requires the prime to hold an active Secret FCL. For a teaming arrangement, please confirm whether the prime must independently hold a Top Secret FCL. | Refer Q1. | |||
| 47 | Limitations on Subcontracting: Please confirm that FAR 52.219-14 applies, and that work performed by similarly situated small business subcontractors counts toward the prime's 50 percent requirement. | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 48 | Accounting System: If the anticipated award is cost-reimbursement, must the offeror's accounting system be determined adequate at white paper submission, at Step 2 proposal submission, or prior to award? Will other instrument types (e.g., FFP, T&M/Labor-Hour, or OT) be considered? | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 49 | Task Alignment: Core Competency 5 references "PWS Task 6" as RDT&E surge support, while the PWS defines Task 6 as DAF CSDR Support (O&M) and Tasks 7 and 8 as surge support. Should white papers address PWS Task 6 (CSDR Support) and Task 8 (O&M Surge)? | Refer Q12. | |||
| 50 | Key Personnel: The PWS designates the Program Manager, Chief Cost Data Scientist, Expert Cost Estimators/Analysts, and Journeyman Data Scientists as key, while Section 3 of the BAA references the PM, Chief Cost Data Scientist, and Technical/Data Science Task Leads. Which positions must be named in the white paper? | Refer Q12. | |||
| 51 | ROM and Pricing Template: Does the 30-page limit include the Section C ROM? Should the ROM follow the Attachment 1 Price Template, or is that template reserved for Step 2? | Yes. | |||
| 52 | The BAA states that only respondents possessing an active Top Secret FCL at white-paper submission will be reviewed, while the teaming/JV provision states that the Prime Contractor must independently possess at least a Secret FCL. Please clarify whether the prime itself must possess a Top Secret FCL at white-paper submission, or whether a Secret-cleared prime may satisfy the requirement through a Top Secret-cleared team/JV member. | Refer Q1. | |||
| 53 | For the requirement that cleared entities perform at least 50% of direct labor/technical effort, please clarify whether the 50% threshold is measured across the total contract, by task/CLIN, by period of performance, or by individual research effort. | Refer Q5. | |||
| 54 | SAM.gov identifies NAICS 541715, while the BAA identifies NAICS 541745. Please confirm the controlling NAICS code and applicable size standard. | Refer Q 7. | |||
| 55 | Does the Government expect Step 1 white papers to demonstrate an integrated approach across all five Core Competencies, or may respondents emphasize areas offering the greatest technical advancement while demonstrating the ability to support the remaining competencies? | Refer Q12. | |||
| 56 | Among the operational gaps identified in the BAA (data fidelity, enterprise data integration, pipeline automation, predictive modeling, analytical workflow optimization, and related capabilities) which represent AFCAA's highest-priority research needs for the initial period of performance? | Refer Q12. | |||
| 57 | Task 3 describes an existing portfolio containing operational pipelines, pipelines under development, and pipelines not yet initiated. Can the Government provide additional information regarding the approximate number, maturity, principal data domains, existing architecture, and technology stack of the capabilities the awardee will inherit or support? | Refer Q12. | |||
| 58 | Does the Government anticipate that the successful contractor will transition existing contractor-developed pipelines, applications, analytical models, source code, schemas, or other CADOM artifacts? If so, will the awardee receive the source code, documentation, data dictionaries, configuration information, backlog, and transition assistance necessary to assume responsibility for those capabilities? | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 59 | The BAA references environments including DAF VAULT, Envision, Data Fabric, GenAI.mil, and CADE. Does AFCAA consider direct prior experience in these specific environments materially important to Step 1 evaluation, or will comparable experience developing secure enterprise data architectures and analytical capabilities elsewhere within DoD be considered equally relevant? | Refer Solicitation Evalation Criteria. | |||
| 60 | For the Chief Cost Data Scientist, does the required five years of cost-estimating experience require direct performance in a cost-estimator/analyst role, or may experience leading data-science, affordability, lifecycle-cost, sustainment-cost, or similar quantitative efforts satisfy this requirement? | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 61 | Must respondents identify named SMEs covering each listed commodity/domain at Step 1, or may the white paper demonstrate an established ability to rapidly furnish qualified SMEs as individual research efforts are defined? | Refer Solicitation Evalation Criteria. | |||
| 62 | The PWS identifies Task 5 as “Contracts Database (Option CLIN?)” while Task 6 is expressly identified as an Option CLIN. Please clarify whether Task 5 is contemplated as a core requirement, an option, or an effort to be activated based on annual research priorities/funding. | Refer Q12. | |||
| 63 | The BAA states that awards are generally anticipated to be cost-reimbursement. In light of Executive Order 14402 establishing fixed-price contracting as the default and preferred procurement method, does the Government currently anticipate CEMDAR being primarily cost-reimbursement? If so, what aspects of the contemplated research effort are considered sufficiently uncertain to warrant cost reimbursement, and is the Government considering a hybrid structure using fixed-price or performance-based arrangements for more mature or definable portions of the effort? | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 64 | Section 5.3 makes an active TOP SECRET facility clearance at white-paper submission a mandatory evaluation gate. The following teaming/JV paragraph states that the prime must independently hold an active SECRET facility clearance at submission. For a prime-led contractor team or joint venture, which facility-clearance level must the submitting prime or JV itself hold, and what evidence should accompany the white paper? | Refer Q1. | |||
| 65 | The same teaming paragraph requires cleared entities to perform at least 50% of the direct labor/technical effort. How will that share be measured, and may an uncleared subcontractor perform a clearly separated, unclassified work package under an otherwise eligible cleared prime, provided its personnel satisfy the applicable vetting and access requirements? | Refer Q 5. | |||
| 66 | SAM.gov lists NAICS 541715, while the BAA narrative identifies 541745 with a 1,000-employee size standard. Please confirm the controlling NAICS code and size standard. | Refer Q 7. | |||
| 67 | Prior submission. XXXXXXXXXXX submitted a white paper on 17 September 2026 in response to the presolicitation notice. Please confirm that the Government will evaluate only white papers submitted under FA7014-26-S-CS02 by 19 October 2026 and that no action is required to withdraw or supersede the earlier presolicitation submission. | Confirmed. Only responses to the Solicitation will be considered. | |||
| 68 | NAICS code. The BAA text cites NAICS 541745 with a 1,000-employee size standard, while the SAM.gov classification lists NAICS 541715. Please confirm the governing NAICS code and size standard. | Refer Q 7. | |||
| 69 | PWS task alignment. BAA Core Competency 5 references "PWS Task 6" for RDT&E surge, while the PWS designates Task 6 as DAF CSDR Support (O&M) and Task 7 as RDT&E Surge Support. Please confirm whether PWS Task 6 (DAF CSDR Support) and Task 8 (DAF Surge Support, O&M) are within the scope of this BAA and should be addressed in the white paper and ROM. | Refer Q12. | |||
| 70 | Referenced attachments. The PWS references attachments that were not posted: the Notional Plan of Action and Milestones ("No attachment at this time"), the AFCAA Nondisclosure Agreement, and the CADE Nondisclosure Agreement. Please confirm whether these will be provided before the white paper due date. | Refer Q12. | |||
| 71 | Key Personnel roster. BAA Section II identifies the Contractor Program Manager, the Chief Cost Data Scientist, and any designated Technical / Data Science Task Leads. The PWS Key Positions paragraph designates the Program Manager, Chief Cost Data Scientist, Expert Cost Estimators/Analysts, and Journeyman Data Scientists. Please confirm which list governs, and how many Expert Cost Estimators/Analysts and Journeyman Data Scientists the Government anticipates as Key Personnel. | Refer Q12. | |||
| 72 | Naming at white paper stage. Please confirm whether the Government expects named Key Personnel in the white paper, or whether qualifications, experience, and clearance status of proposed personnel, with names and resumes provided at Step 2, are acceptable. | Refer Solicitation. | |||
| 73 | Senior commodity SMEs. The PWS requires the contractor to have identified individuals for six Senior Cost Estimator/Analyst commodity areas (Aircraft, Space and Launch, Tactical Missiles, Ballistic Missiles, Software, and O&S), while the BAA lists Aircraft, Space and Launch, Missiles and Munitions, C4ISR, Cyber and Software, and O&S. Please confirm which set governs, whether these SMEs are expected as full-time staff or on-demand resources, and whether they must be identified by name in the white paper. | Refer Q12. | |||
| 74 | Anticipated staffing level. Performance Threshold SS-1 measures staffing against Day 1 levels. To support a consistent ROM, can the Government share an estimated annual level of effort (FTEs or labor hours) by task, or the number of Appendix A-type projects expected to be active concurrently in the base period? | Refer Q12. | |||
| 75 | Clearance level for non-key personnel. BAA Section 4.2 requires non-key personnel to hold, at minimum, an adjudicated Tier 2 investigation on Day 1, while the PWS Security Instructions state that performance "requires that all personnel have a minimum SECRET clearance." Please confirm which requirement governs for non-key personnel at award. | Refer Q1 & 12. | |||
| 76 | Timing of personnel requirements. Please confirm that Key Personnel SECRET clearances are measured at contract award, non-key requirements at Day 1 of performance, and TOP SECRET/SCI at the time of task assignment, and that none of these are measured at white paper submission. | Refer Q1 & 12. | |||
| 77 | Classified performance location. Please clarify the Government's requirements for the location and handling of classified performance under this effort, including whether classified work will be performed at Government facilities or through Government-authorized classified environments, or whether the contractor will be required to provide an approved cleared facility for classified storage, processing, or performance. If available, please provide the draft DD Form 254. | Refer Q1. | |||
| 78 | Teaming and clearances. For teaming arrangements, please confirm whether a subcontractor without a Facility Clearance may perform unclassified work using personnel with favorably adjudicated Tier 2 investigations, provided cleared entities perform at least 50 percent of the direct labor. | Refer Q1. | |||
| 79 | Period of performance. Please indicate the period of performance and structure the ROM should assume (for example, a 12-month base period and four 12-month option periods), and the anticipated award date. | Refer Q24. | |||
| 80 | Contract type and fee. The PWS performance thresholds reference reductions of fixed fee. Please confirm whether the anticipated instrument is cost-plus-fixed-fee, and whether the ROM should show fee separately. | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 81 | Option CLINs and appropriations. Please confirm whether Tasks 5, 6, 7, and 8 should each be priced as separate option CLINs, and whether the ROM should separate RDT&E-funded and O&M-funded effort. For the surge CLINs (Tasks 7 and 8), please indicate whether offerors should assume a not-to-exceed level of hours. | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 82 | Data infrastructure costs. BAA Section C asks the ROM to reflect data infrastructure, while PWS Section VI states the Government will furnish laptops, software licenses, and the cloud platform, and the PWS Other Direct Costs paragraph states that no Other Direct Costs are anticipated. Please clarify which data infrastructure costs, if any, the Government expects offerors to include. | Determined in Step 2. Howver, refer also Q9. | |||
| 83 | Travel. Please provide planning assumptions for travel to include in the ROM, such as the expected number of trips per year, typical destinations (for example, program offices and test wings), and travelers per trip. | Refer Solicitation Section 5.2. Travel should be consistent with the white paper's proposed research. | |||
| 84 | Accounting system. BAA Section 1.2 notes that cost-reimbursement contracts require an accounting system determined adequate by the Government. Please confirm whether adequacy must be demonstrated at white paper submission or will be assessed during Step 2 or pre-award, and what evidence the Government will accept. | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 85 | Existing pipeline and application inventory. PWS Task 3 states the pipeline portfolio exists at varying levels of maturity. Can the Government share the current inventory of operational, in-development, and planned pipelines and enterprise applications, and whether any current contractor supports them? | Refer Q12. | |||
| 86 | Current work under Appendix A. Several Appendix A projects "continue development" of existing databases and tools. Please indicate whether this work is currently performed under an existing contract and, if so, the contract number. | Refer Q44. | |||
| 87 | Remote access. PWS Section VI states VAULT access requires a .mil network or .mil VPN, and the place of performance is the contractor facility. Please confirm that Government-furnished laptops will include VPN access that supports remote performance from contractor facilities. | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 88 | Generative AI services. PWS Task 3 identifies GenAI.mil among candidate platforms. Please confirm whether GenAI.mil or other Government-authorized large language model services may be used with proprietary (PROPIN) and CADE data under this effort. | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 89 | Pre-existing software. Where an offeror proposes to integrate pre-existing, privately funded software with Government-funded development, consistent with the PWS Data Rights segregability paragraph, please confirm that DFARS 252.227-7017 assertions should be identified at Step 2, and indicate whether the white paper should include a preliminary assertion list. | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 90 | Associate contractors. For Section D, can the Government identify the associate contractors (for example, those supporting AFCAA, OSD CAPE, and DCARC) with which the awardee is expected to interface, and confirm that AFFARS 5352.217-9010 is the governing ACA clause? | Determined in Step 2. Note that the AFFARS no longer exists. | |||
| 91 | Page count. Please confirm that the 30-page limit includes the cover page and all front matter (cover letter, crosswalks, acronym list, references), and that the optional Excel ROM workbook does not count against the limit. | Refer Solicitation. | |||
| 92 | Can you expand on the anticipated amount of work/meetings that will occur at the primary government facilities versus the expectation of contractor facility support? | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 93 | Can you provide any additional insight on the amount of anticipated travel? | Refer to Q83 | |||
| 94 | Is there any indication that a proposed shorter period of performance (PoP) would be considered favorable at this time? | Determined in Step 2. | |||
| 95 | What if any kinds of appendix can we provide with the whitepaper format beyond the 30 page limit? | Refer to Solicitation. | |||
| 96 | Which AI tools may touch contractor-proprietary data? | Refer to Solicitation. | |||
| 97 | Several example Projects need LLMs: Project 3 (contracts database), Project 10 (AI tool for EVM variance reports) and Project 12 (AI-generated code). Is there a Government policy for AI assurance or responsible use that deliverables must meet? | Refer to Solicitation. Any deliverables will be determined in step 2 | |||
| 98 | BAA Instructions | Header/Footer Information: Headers and footers may fall within margin boundaries and must include the BAA number (FA7014-26-S-CS02), company name, CAGE code, and sequential page numbering ("Page X of Y"). | Would the government clarify if the requested information must be in BOTH the header and footer or is one location acceptable? | Either or Both | |
| 99 | BAA Instructions | Page Limitations: Pages shall be numbered starting with the cover page being Page 1, and the last page being no greater than Page 30. The Government may remove and not evaluate any pages that exceed the established limitations | Would the government please confirm if the Cover Page is included in the overall 30 page limitation? | Refer Q91 and solicitation | |
| 100 | BAA Instructions | MANDATORY EVALUATION GATE: Submissions lacking verification of an active Top Secret FCL at the time of submission will be rejected without consideration | Would the government please clarify if proof of Top Secret FCL is required or will the government research companines in DCSA NISS? If proof is required what are the acceptable forms of documentation and will this documentation go against the 30 page limit? | Refer to Solicitation. And Q1 and Q2 | |
| 101 | BAA Instructions | MANDATORY EVALUATION GATE: Submissions lacking verification of an active Top Secret FCL at the time of submission will be rejected without consideration | Would the government please clarify what are the acceptable forms of documentation to show proof of a TS FCL and will this documentation go against the 30 page limit? | Refer to Solicitation. And Q1 and Q2 | |
| 102 | BAA Instructions | Day-1 Vetting Readiness Attestation: Offerors must certify in Section A of their white paper that: |
All proposed Key Personnel hold active SECRET security clearances at contract award.
-All labor planned for Day-1 contract performance possesses, at a minimum, a favorably completed and adjudicated Tier 2 (T2) background investigation (or higher); and -The offeror possesses verified access capability to deploy appropriately cleared TOP SECRET / SCI analysts as required for classified projects and studies (e.g., representative efforts identified in PWS Appendix A or subsequent POA&M task directives).
Technical Relevance: Is the proposed technical approach rigorously consistent with the research domains and technologies listed in this BAA?
Government Interest: Does the proposed technical methodology address urgent analytical gaps and provide high-value decision support to SAF/FM and AFCAA?
| Fiscal Viability: Is appropriate research and operational funding available to support the proposed scope and period of performance? | Is it the government's intent that Offerers must attest to all items within this section? Specifically, the "Technical Relevance," "Government Interest," and "Fiscal Viability" questions? Or does the attestation apply only to the security clearances? If so, could the government please provide instructions on where offerors should provide answers to the three questions? | Refer Solicitation Section 3 3. Section II — Technical Description & Core Competencies & Q12. | |||
| 103 | PWS | On-Demand Subject Matter Expert (SME) | What is the anticipated timeline for onboarding any potential On-Demand SMEs? | This will be determined in step 2. | |
| 104 | PWS | On-Demand Subject Matter Expert (SME) | Do the On-Demand SME's require TS/SCI elegibility? | Refer to Solicitation. And Q1 and Q2 | |
| 105 | BAA 5.2, Step 1 White Paper Submission Format – Page Limitations and Electronic File Formats; Government Q&A (01 Oct 26) Q51, Q91, Q95 | BAA 5.2 states the total of all sections (A–D) shall be no more than 30 pages, with the cover page counted as Page 1, and that the Cost ROM “may also include an optional, unlocked Microsoft Excel (.xlsx) workbook showing active formulas.” Q&A Q51 asked both whether the 30-page limit includes the Section C ROM and whether the ROM should follow an “Attachment 1 Price Template”; the Government response was a single “Yes.” Q91 (whether the optional Excel workbook counts against the limit) and Q95 (appendices) were answered “Refer Solicitation.” No Attachment 1 Price Template is identified in the amendment’s attachment list. | The response to Q51 answers two questions with a single “Yes.” Can the Government please confirm (a) that the optional Excel ROM workbook is a separate file that does not count against the 30-page limit, (b) whether an “Attachment 1 Price Template” exists for Step 1 and, if so, where it is posted and whether its use is mandatory, and (c) that no appendices, attachments or exhibits beyond the single 30-page PDF and the optional Excel workbook will be accepted or evaluated at Step 1? | Refer Q91 and solicitation | |
| 106 | BAA 5.2, Section C – Cost & Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM); BAA 4.1 Period of Performance; BAA 4.3 GFP/GFE; Government Q&A Q9, Q22, Q23, Q24, Q80, Q82 | Section C requires a “comprehensive ROM cost estimate reflecting labor, data infrastructure, and travel.” Q24 confirmed the ROM should cover the full potential 60 months and that the $24M ceiling is inclusive of options, surge, fee, travel and ODCs. Q9 confirmed the Government will furnish the cloud platform(s), licenses and laptops after award. However, Q23 (breakout by competency/task/labor category), Q80 (fee shown separately) and Q82 (which data infrastructure costs to include) were deferred to Step 2. | To ensure ROMs are comparable across offerors, can the Government please indicate the minimum structure expected for the Section C ROM at Step 1 — e.g., by BAA Core Competency and contract year, with labor hours and labor categories shown — and confirm whether fee should be displayed as a separate line? In light of Q9 (Government-furnished platform, licenses and GFE), can the Government also confirm that offerors should assume no contractor-furnished data infrastructure costs unless specifically proposed as part of the research approach? | Refer Q9, 16, 24 | |
| 107 | BAA 3 (Section II) – “concrete examples of relevant past work”; BAA 5.2, Section B – “concrete examples of past work demonstrating automated pipeline engineering and predictive cost modeling”; Government Q&A Q6, Q59 | The BAA requires concrete examples of past work in pipeline engineering and predictive cost modeling within defense or similarly regulated environments. Q6 asked whether a prime may rely on subcontractor experience and how relative contribution would be evaluated; the response was “See Solicitation para. 5.2,” which does not address the question. Q59 confirmed comparable DoD experience is evaluated per the stated criteria. The BAA does not specify required data elements (contract number, customer, period, value, POC), a maximum number of examples, or whether references will be contacted. | For the past-work examples in Section B, can the Government please specify the information expected for each example (e.g., customer, contract number, period of performance, dollar value, role as prime or subcontractor, and a Government point of contact), whether there is a preferred number of examples, and whether the Government intends to contact references at Step 1? Can the Government also confirm that past work performed by proposed teaming partners or subcontractors may be submitted and will be considered, provided the role of each entity is clearly identified? | Refer to Solicitation. | |
| 108 | BAA 1 (Overview – “white papers on the research effort described herein”); BAA 3 (Section II – Technical Description & Core Competencies 1–5); BAA 5.2 Section B; BAA 5.3 Technical Relevance and Government Interest criteria; Government Q&A Q12, Q37, Q55, Q56, Q83 | The BAA solicits white papers on “the research effort described herein” and evaluates “Technical Relevance” and “Government Interest.” Section B calls for a statement of task objectives and a detailed technical methodology aligned with Core Competencies 1–5. Q12 directs offerors to use Section 3 of the BAA. Q83 states travel should be consistent with “the white paper’s proposed research.” Q55 (integrated approach across all five competencies vs. emphasis areas) and Q56 (AFCAA’s highest-priority research needs) were answered “Refer Q12.” It is not clear whether offerors are expected to propose their own specific research efforts and sequencing, or to describe an approach to executing the Government-defined scope. | The BAA refers to “the white paper’s proposed research,” while Section 3 describes Government-envisioned tasks. Can the Government please clarify whether Section B should (a) propose specific research efforts, priorities and a notional sequence that the offeror recommends under each Core Competency (e.g., drawing on the representative projects in PWS Appendix A), or (b) describe the offeror’s methodology and approach to executing the Government-defined Core Competencies 1–5 as written? If both are acceptable, can the Government indicate which it considers more useful for the Step 1 evaluation of Technical Relevance and Government Interest? | Refer to Solicitation. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .