DC3 TABO RFI QA.pdf

Question TABO Section RFI/PWS Language RFI Questions Government Response

Could you clarify whether interested vendors are required to submit capability statements addressing all five draft PWSs, or if we may respond to one or multiple PWSs based on our capabilities?

Interested vendors are required to submit capability statements that address all five draft Performance Work Statements (PWSs). If a vendor cannot fulfill all five on their own, they should detail teaming arrangements that would cover all five PWSs.

The posting indicates that the government plans to utilize a single IDIQ/Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type for this effort. Does this imply the contract will be a single award?

The government's decision on whether to make a single or multiple awards is determined during the acquisition planning process and will be specified in the final solicitation.

3 RFI Section 2, Question 1

For Section 2, Question 1 of the RFI states, “Approach: Describe your approach for accomplishing all the requirements outlined in the five (5) PWSs based upon your experience performing under similar efforts.”

Would the government please confirm that by approach, it means capability statements demonstrating vendors’ experience delivering the type of work in each PWS?

The term “approach” refers to providing capability statements that demonstrate relevant experience delivering the work described in each

PWS.

Are the requirements in the draft PWSs a new effort for DC3, or are these services currently being performed under an existing contract? If there is an incumbent, could you please provide the details.

This is a follow-on effort, the current contract is 47QFCA22F0025. The incumbent contractor is Peraton Enterprise Solutions, LLC.

5 Can the government provide past surge LOE? If so, recommend the Government provide expected surge LOE to support accurate pricing?

Surge requirements will change from current contract and information will be incorporated into the Request for Proposal (RFP).

6.1 Please let me know when this RFP will be projected to come out. RFP is projected to be released mid June 2026.

6.2 Also, please let me know if there is an incumbent and a Point of Contact for the incumbent so we may pursue a teaming relationship. See Answer 4.

7 General Will there be an Industry Day or Due Diligence Day for this opportunity prior to the release of the RFP? AFDW Industry Day is anticipated for May 2026.

8 General What is the anticipated RFP release date? See Answer 6.1.

9 General When is the expected award date? Anticipted award date is February 2027.

10 Subtask 9 in all PWSs All DRAFT PWSs Is it anticipated that a separate Program Manager (PM) will be required for each PWS/Task Order or can a single Program Manager (PM) be assigned as a KP to more than one task order?

The government would like to see one (1) Program Manager (PM) per PWS.

Subtask 9 in all PWSs except DRAFT_PWS_4_Tabo_2027_ER_XE.

DC3.pdf

All DRAFT PWSs EXCEPT DRAFT_PWS_4_Tabo_2027_ER_XE.DC3.pdf

Key personnel requirements for PWSs 1, 2, 3, and 5 do not have years of experience or education requirements. Can the government confirm these requirements are being left up to the offeror to propose?

Education may be added. Offerors should propose the experience and qualifications they deem most suitable to meet the requirements of the PWSs.

PWS 1 lists three Key Personnel under section 2.17.9 (experience listed for all three) – education may be added.

PWS 2 lists two Key Personnel under section 2.12.9 (experience is listed for all two) – education may be added.

PWS 3 lists one Key Personnel under section 2.14.9 (experience listed for Program Manager) – education may be added.

PWS 4 lists five Key Personnel under section 2.13.9 (experience listed for all five) - education may be added for Program Manager and XE Senior Policy Analyst.

PWS 5 lists one Key Personnel under section 2.14.9 (experience listed for Program Manager) – education may be added.

12 PWS 5, Section 2.0 DRAFT_PWS_5_Tabo_2027_Sec_HR_JA.DC3.pdf Several of the task names in this section do not match the names in the sub-task headings. Would the government please review and revise? Yes, the DRAFT PWSs will be reviewed and revised if necessary.

13 Paras 2.1.1, 2.2 (particularly 2.2.1), all of 2.3 DRAFT PWS_4_Tabo_2027_ER_XE.DC3_1.7.26_REV1.pdf Will the Government confirm there is no known Organizational Conflict of Interest across any/all anticipated task orders under this IDIQ?

Correct, there will be no known Organizational Conflict of Interest across any/all anticipated task orders under the anticipated IDIQ.

14 General

To ensure adequate understanding of future requirements and expectations across industry partners, as well as to support the contemplated FFP order(s), will the Government post a Bidder's Library for Offerors that includes detailed documentation (e.g., tools, networks, network architectures, users, end-points, systems, # of ATOs, # of tickets, # of incidents, SOPs, # of GFE assets, current metrics, # of vulnerability reports, SLAs, etc.) to allow Offerors to effectively estimate costs to achieve the desired outcomes/deliverables for each PWS/PWS tasks

Additional information; i.e. Bidder’s Library will be provided when the government releases the RFP.

Clarification on items 3 and 9 (Section 4, “Instructions and Response Guidelines”) - Both items ask for industry suggested improvements to the PWS. Should we treat them as separate responses, or is a single set of recommendations sufficient for both?

Please keep as separate responses.

Do you want vendors to embed recommended PWS edits directly in their capability statements, or should we submit the edits separately (e.g., Word with Track

Changes or comments on a PDF)?

Please provide separately as a word document with Track-Changes.

Can you please clarify what is meant by “if an interested party has previously responded please state as such” within area 4 (Instructions and Response Guidelines) of the RFI?

Please provide feedback on whether your company has submitted a proposal for the existing and/or previous TABO contract.

A fixed price contract imposes significant risk when there are uncertain and evolving needs which could result in higher prices to cover performance risk. The predecessor DC3 contracts over 12+ years were cost reimbursement. Based on this understanding, will the government consider the use of a cost reimbursement contract type for this acquisition?

No. The follow-on contract will be FFP and not cost reimbursement; however, we may provide additional CLINs with LOE increase.

Can you please clarify the intended support to the customer organization under this program? Area 3 (Background) indicates 6 directorates, however, area 3.1 (Overview of Planned Task Orders) and in subsequent PWS’ indicates there are 10 Directorates.

The government may issue 5 task orders with a total of 11 directorates; i.e.

OED Support, CFL Support, DCISE, VDP, XT, CS, ER, XE, Security, HR, and JA.

20 Can you share how large (in FTEs) the current program is, by year and by Directorate?

The current contract has 270 FTEs. However, the follow-on contract is a new effort and will be staffed based on the new revised requirements.

21 When can interested vendors expect to be notified about the opportunity for a one on one engagement?

Per RFI, "Discussions would only be held to obtain further clarification of potential capability to meet the requirement" and/or may be scheduled after the anticipated Industry Day in May 2026.

If a vendor is not chosen for a one on one engagement, does that remove the vendor from consideration and make the vendor ineligible to submit a response to the final RFP?

No.

If the customer deems a vendor’s response is insufficient as outlined in the RFI, when will vendors be notified and will that remove the vendor from consideration and make the vendor ineligible to submit a response to the final RFP?

The RFI is solely informative and any company may submit a proposal to the anticipated solicitation.

24 4. Instructions and Response Guidelines

10. Page Limit: Capability Statements are limited to 25 pages in length, single spaced, and 11-point font and accessible by either Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat.

Is the 25-page response limit intended to cover all five Performance Work Statements (PWSs) in a single, consolidated submission that includes all elements of para 4, section two, with the total content for all PWSs not to exceed 25 pages?

A single, consolidated submission is required.

25 4. Instructions and Response Guidelines

10. Page Limit: Capability Statements are limited to 25 pages in length, single spaced, and 11-point font and accessible by either Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat.

Or are you requesting separate responses for each PWS, with each individual PWS allowed up to 25 pages addressing the para 4 elements noted previously?

The 25-page limit is for the entire response; not 25 pages per PWS.

26 4. Instructions and Response Guidelines

10. Page Limit: Capability Statements are limited to 25 pages in length, single spaced, and 11-point font and accessible by either Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat.

Additionally, if a consolidated response is preferred, are there any specific guidelines for how content should be organized or sectioned within the document to address each PWS distinctly?

Regarding how content should be organized, we have the following guidelines:

Part A: IDIQ Management & Corporate Capability We recommend dedicating approximately 5 pages to this section. Here, describes your overall approach to managing the entire TABO IDIQ, your strategy for teaming arrangements, and your feedback on the FFP IDIQ vehicle.

Part B: PWS Technical Capability Summaries In this part, address each of the five Performance Work Statements sequentially (i.e., address PWS 1, then PWS 2, and so on).

You have the flexibility to allocate the remaining pages among the five PWSs as you see fit, based on the complexity of the PWS or the depth of your capability.

27 Section 5 - Questions

Questions regarding this announcement shall be submitted to Ms. Ulrike U. Powell... by Tuesday, 13 January 2026, 2:00 pm ET. Verbal questions will NOT be accepted. Questions may be answered by email if the Government feels that the answer would better inform the potential Offerors; accordingly, questions shall NOT contain proprietary or classified information.

Will there be an opportunity for an industry day or Q&A session? See Answer 7.

28 Section 2 - Objectives Vendors are also encouraged to provide information regarding plans to use joint venturing (V), partnering or consortiums to meet the requirements areas contained herein.

Are there preferred teaming or subcontracting arrangements? The government defers to the company’s teaming or subcontracting proposal.

29 Section 2 - Statements and Questions for the Vendor

The Government is planning to utilize a single IDIQ/Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type for this effort. Do you believe this is the most appropriate contract type for the scope of work described in the PWSs? Please provide a rationale for your response and suggest any alternative contract structures you believe would be more suitable (e.g., FFP Level of Effort, Time and Materials, etc.).

Is the single IDIQ/FFP contract type flexible, or will alternatives be considered? See Answer 2.

30 Section 2 - Objectives

A second objective is to engage industry to identify risks and opportunities, provide recommendations and other insights as it pertains to the acquisition and the work contemplated in the PWSs.

Will feedback be provided on RFI responses? No.

31 Section 3.1 - Overview of Planned Task Orders

The Contractor shall provide all qualified personnel, supervision, and other items and services as necessary to perform the requirements of each individual task order issued under this IDIQ. The five (5) Draft PWSs for each planned task order is listed in the attachments section of this RFI.

Are there any mandatory certifications or clearances required? All mandatory certifications and clearances will be articulated during solicitation phase.

32 Section 2 - Statements and Questions for the Vendor

The Government may choose to meet with companies who responded to this RFI to hold one-on-one discussions.

Discussions would only be held to obtain further clarification of potential capability to meet the requirement.

Can the Government clarify the process for one-on-one discussions? See Answer 21.

33 Section 4 - Instructions and Response Guidelines

Capability Statements are limited to 25 pages in length, single spaced, and 11-point font and accessible by either Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat. Proprietary information, if any, should be minimized and MUST BE CLEARLY MARKED. To aid the Government, please segregate proprietary information.

Are there any additional formatting or submission requirements not listed? No.

PWS Response Scope - If a consolidated response is expected, would it be acceptable for a respondent to emphasize demonstrated capability in a specific functional area (e.g., PWS 3 – XT/CIO & Cybersecurity), while also addressing the remaining PWSs at an enterprise or teaming level?

See Answer 26.

Past Performance Mapping - Is it the Government’s preference that past performance examples be mapped to specific PWSs, or is it acceptable to present relevant past performance that demonstrates enterprise-level capability applicable across multiple PWS functional areas?

The government would prefer the past performance examples be mapped to each specific PWS. Further guidance to Past Performance summissions will be listed in Section L&M evaluation factors within the RFP.

Future Acquisition Strategy Consideration - As part of market research, is the Government open to considering future task orders or acquisition strategies where specific PWS functional areas may be competed independently, including potential socio-economic set-aside approaches (e.g., 8(a),WOSB), should the Government determine such an approach to be in its best interest?

Please consider your suggestion as a feedback to RFI question #9;

"Industry Feedback Regarding Requirement: While the Government is the final decision regarding the requirement, we would like to solicit industry feedback regarding the requirements description attached requirements documentation and where industry thinks that we could improve the overall quality of the product/service received by updating/clarifying our requirement".

Response Structure - For confirmation, does the Government intend for interested parties to submit one consolidated capability statement that addresses all five (5) Draft PWS Rev 1 documents, rather than separate responses by individual PWS?

See Answer 24, 25, 26.

SAM.gov Description and Struck Text - With respect to the SAM.gov notice, portions of the original description appear as struck text due to updates. For confirmation, should respondents base their capability statements solely on the current, non-struck description, Amendment 1 language, and the Five (5) Draft PWS Rev 1 attachments, and treat the struck content as informational history only?

Respondents should base their capability statements on the most current, active set of documents and instructions. The struck-out text in the SAM.gov notice should be treated as informational history only. SAM.gov Description with Instructions are under History (original) if you need to review RFI submission. Draft PWS Rev 1 were attached with RFI Amendment 1.

39 General Instructions N/A Will the Government confirm the current level of effort per PWS and Task? See Answer 5 & 20.

40 General Instructions N/A Will the Government provide an update on the expected timeline for RFP and award? See Answer 6.1 & 9.

41 PWS 1 OED/CFL

Task 4 - Optional Innovation Integration Support Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Subtask 1 - Innovation Assessment and Integration Planning. 2.4.1.1 The Contractor shall identify and assess scalable opportunities for integrating new technology innovations into DC3. This includes validating other system activities and system engineering requirements to determine potential benefits for DC3 and the broader LE/CI and cyber communities. 2.4.1.2 The Contractor shall conduct thorough evaluations of new technologies, provide detailed assessments of their potential benefits and risks, and develop recommendations for integration into the DC3 environment.

Will the Government include the implementation of new technologies and process efficiencies, specifically those proposed for Task 4, Subtask 1 and other related tasks within the PWS, as formal evaluation criteria in future TABO RFP or RFQ responses? If yes, can the Government clarify how these proposals will be assessed with regard to technical merit, impact on program effectiveness, and potential cost savings?

Please see PWS, section 2.4.1.2 "The Contractor shall conduct thorough evaluations of new technologies, provide detailed assessments of their potential benefits and risks, and develop recommendations for integration into the DC3 environment".

Evaluation criteria will be provided with RFP. If you have any additional suggestions, please See Answer 36.

42 PWS 1 OED/CFL

Task 13, SUBTASK 1 - Digital Media Examination and Reporting (2.13.1.2) The Contractor shall, within two-business days of completing the analysis, develop in-depth and reliably sourced Digital Forensic Analysis Reports that clearly articulate findings, methodologies, and supporting evidence in a manner suitable for both technical and non-technical audiences (Section 4, Deliverable 17).

Will the Government establish and communicate clear criteria or processes for how 'completing the analysis' will be defined and tracked, including what documentation or milestones must be met, in order to ensure agencies can consistently comply with the two-business-day reporting requirement for Deliverable 17?

The deliverables are to be met and will be discussed with the awardee during Kick-Off Meeting.

43 PWS 3 XT/CIO/CS

2.2.1.1 The Contractor Shall establish.... including planning, performance tracking, status reporting, and roadmap development

Can the Government please enumerate existing IT Change Boards, Governance Processes (other than standard, statute controlled processes), or management boards that exist today related to this requirement?

No.

44 PWS 3 XT/CIO/CS 2.3.1.1 The contractor shall enable... ICAM, and support the development of legally compliant, data-driven operations

Can the Government describe the existing ICAM technology stack currently in use by DC3 (e.g., Okta, Entra, Ping, SailPoint, Radiant Logic)? Does the Government intend to leverage the DISA EICAM solution, will the Government use DC3 hosted commercial solutions, or a combination of both?

No. Responses to the RFI should detail their approach to satisfy this requirement.

45 PWS 3 XT/CIO/CS SubTask 1 - DEVSECOPS Strategy

Can the Government clarify the language in the requirement to make it clear whether or not they are referring to adherence of a DC3 DevSecOps strategy, or a DOW CIO approved DevSecOps strategy? If the former, will the Government please provide this documentation in a reading room?

DoW CIO approved DvSecOps strategy is a baseline requirement. DC3 may have additional processes that would be given during release of the

RFP.

46 PWS 3 XT/CIO/CS 2.5.1.1 The Contractor shall implement…. Maintain cloud and on-premise infrastructure

Can the Government confirm that there are no on-premise facilities that are OCONUS? Further, can the Government enumerate any points of presence OCONUS that would be typical points of network traffic origination?

The government confirms that there are no on-premise facilities that are OCONUS. No, the Government cannot provide any OCONUS points of presence or typical network traffic origination locations.

47 PWS 3 XT/CIO/CS

2.8.2.1 Support the Government's procurement process by

assisting with the purchasing, receiving, tracking, distributing and accounting of DC3 Hardware and Software

Does the Government anticipate that the integrator would be called upon to provide licensing or hardware in a resell arrangement, or would all hardware and licensing be purchased as GFE and put into custody of the integrator? If the former, can the Government enumerate expected areas for resell?

All hardware and licensing will be purchased as GFE and put into custody of the integrator.

48 PWS 3 XT/CIO/CS Task 10 - Cybersecurity

Can the Government share whether there currently is a Cybersecurity Service Provider (CSSP) assigned to the existing TABO Environment(s)? If so, can the Government specify the responsible

CSSP?

Yes, we do have an enviroment. No, we cannot specify the responsible

CSSP.

49 PWS 5 Security/HR/JA

Task 10, Subtask 1 – LEGAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT. (2.10.1.1) The Contractor shall deliver a fully functional and tested electronic legal information system, populated with a minimum of 500 relevant legal documents and accessible to at least 25 concurrent users.

Can the Government clarify its definition of the term “electronic legal information system”? Does this refer to an eDiscovery analysis and review platform, a legal research database, or another type of system?

Yes, to all. The system should support search and seizure request, legal reviews, general counsel legal reviews, and coordination with internal and external stakeholders.

50 PWS 5 Security/HR/JA

Task 10, Subtask 1 – LEGAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT. (2.10.1.1) The Contractor shall deliver a fully functional and tested electronic legal information system, populated with a minimum of 500 relevant legal documents and accessible to at least 25 concurrent users.

Can the Government provide its definition of “relevant legal documents” in the context of this requirement?

Relevant legal documents to support search and seizure request, legal reviews, general counsel legal reviews, and coordination with internal and external stakeholders.

51 PWS 5 Security/HR/JA

Task 10, Subtask 1 – LEGAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT. (2.10.1.1) The Contractor shall deliver a fully functional and tested electronic legal information system, populated with a minimum of 500 relevant legal documents and accessible to at least 25 concurrent users.

Can the Government indicate whether there is an existing electronic legal information system currently in use that meets the outlined requirements, or is the intention for the Contractor to design and implement a new system? If an existing system is in place, can the Government provide information on its systemic capabilities, user community, scope of content and ask of the accessibility for the Contractor?

The incumbent contractor does have an existing electronic legal information system that meets the requirements. The contractor should propose their own solution to satisfy this requirement.

52 PWS 5 Security/HR/JA

Task 10, Subtask 2 – EXPERT WITNESS PREPARATION and SUPPORT. (2.10.2.1) The Contractor shall deliver a comprehensive expert witness training program with a minimum of 20 hours of instruction, including mock trial exercises, and demonstrate a minimum average improvement of 20% in participant scores on pre- and post-training assessments measuring knowledge of courtroom procedure, evidence presentation, and effective communication skills.

Can the Government confirm if it intends to incorporate objective and verifiable performance criteria such as participation rates, timeliness, and adherence to training processes, while also recognizing and reasonably accounting for factors outside the Contractor’s control (for e.g., participant knowledge, motivation, absenteeism, or case complexity), and allow for the use of alternative or supplemental performance indicators and documentation of mitigating circumstances in the evaluation of contractor performance related to task 2.10.2.1 and 2.10.2.2?

The government will provide verifiable performance criteria such as participation rates, timeliness, and adherence to training processes.

53 PWS 5 Security/HR/JA

Task 11, Subtask 1 – TRAINING PROGRAM DESIGN (2.11.1.1) The Contractor shall deliver quarterly reports by the last business day of each quarter documenting the monitoring of at least five (5) industry publications, three (3) relevant legal databases, and two (2) cybersecurity conferences, identifying a minimum of three (3) emerging trends or legal changes per quarter, and subsequently provide documented recommendations for updating training programs to address these changes, achieving a 90% acceptance rate of these recommendations by the DC3/JA Attorney Advisor.

Can the Government confirm it intends for the evaluation criteria in

2.11.3.1 and 2.11.3.2, to use additional objective and process-based criteria such as the completeness and quality of deliverables, adherence to curriculum requirements, timely and high-quality delivery, and conformity to established standards? If so, will the Government use these criteria either instead of, or alongside, outcome measures that may not be directly controlled by the Contractor (for example, acceptance rates, participant satisfaction ratings, required percentage improvements in proficiency, or participant response rates), in order to ensure contractor performance is judged fairly?

Yes.

Yes.

54 PWS 5 Security/HR/JA

Task 12, SUBTASK 1 – FRAMEWORK DOCUMENTATION (2.12.1.1) The Contractor shall develop and implement a documented framework for managing the JA Legal Portal and ticketing system, ensuring 99.9% system uptime, resolving 90% of support tickets within two (2) business days, and maintaining a comprehensive user access management system that is audited quarterly, with findings showing no critical security vulnerabilities.

Can the Government clarify whether the JA Legal Portal and ticketing system referenced in Section 2.12.1.1 are the same as the electronic legal information system discussed in Section 2.10.1.1, and can the Government provide additional information about the JA Legal Portal and ticketing system?

Yes, they are the same. No additional information about that system can be provided at this time.

55 PWS 5 Security/HR/JA

Task 12, SUBTASK 2 – CONTENT CURATION and TAILORING (2.12.2.1) The Contractor shall track developments in digital evidence and trial preparation, delivering quarterly reports by the last business day of each quarter summarizing key insights and best practices, and creating at least three (3) actionable guidance documents per quarter that equip legal professionals to successfully navigate complex cases, with at least 80% of DoW legal personnel indicating that the guidance documents are "Highly Useful" or "Useful" in a post-distribution survey.

Can the Government clarify whether the requirement in Section 2.12.2.1 that at least 80% of DoW legal personnel indicate the guidance documents are 'Highly Useful' or 'Useful' in a post-distribution survey refers specifically to 80% of all individuals who respond to the survey?

Yes, this refers to 80% of all individuals who respond to the survey.

Sheet1