NextGen_Financial_Services_Environment_Solicitation_-_Phase_I_-_Responses_to_Questions.pdf

# Question Response

FSA indicates on page 8 of the RFP that it anticipates multiple awards for Components E and F. Has FSA definitively ruled out multiple awards for the other

Components?

No. The specific period of performance for each award, the number of awards made, the types of awards made, and the contract administration methodologies for each award made will be determined during Phase II.

Section XI. Please provide guidance on page limits for

Volume II Solution Overall in the case where a vendor is only proposing one component.

Regardless of the number of components responded to, vendors may submit up to

7 pages for their Overall Solution, as well as the additional pages for the specific component(s) listed in the table on page 25 of the solicitation. An Overall Solution write-up is required and should be tailored to the specific solution being submitted. If responding to only a single component, then the overall solution for that component should be described.

Can FSA provide the overall procurement timeline for the full procurement including Phases I and II? For example, the dates by which FSA expects to select vendors for Phase I, the expected release of the RFP for Phase II, and expected award date for Phase II vendors.

No.

Within the Price Cost Template, FSA has requested vendors to include, "The best price currently available to a commercial customer for implementation/build." As this is highly confidential to each vendor, will FSA allow vendors to mark this information as confidential in our Phase I proposals? If so, what is the preferred process to follow with submitting confidential documentation?

Yes, you may refer to FAR 52.215-1(e) for guidance on marking responses, but note

EDAR 3452.215-70(a) and Phase I of this solicitation is not subject to Part 15 of

FAR.

Responses to questions submitted that were relevant to responding to the solicitation have been provided below.

NextGen Financial Services Environment Solicitation - Phase I

While different milestones are listed in the RFP, there does not appear to be an overall Period of Performance for the

RFP. What is the period of performance for this effort? Will this be a single or multi award? IDIQ? What will be the approach be to pricing? (e.g., FFP vs. T&M or both) Does

FSA intend to award each of these components as a separate contract or task order?

The specific period of performance for each award, the number of awards made, the types of awards made, and the contract administration methodologies for each award made will be determined during Phase II. For response purposes only, a 10-year period of performance may be assumed.

Please provide a brief description of each current servicer's contract along with its contract expiration date. This information will be beneficial to determining conversion timelines from Legacy Solutions to Solution 2.0.

The ordering period for the TIVAS contracts ends on June 16, 2019. The ordering period for the NFP contracts ends on September 30, 2019. These contracts may be found here: https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/about/data-center/business-info/contracts/loan-servicing

May any of the services performed under this project be done offshore?

See clause FSA 25-1, Prohibition on Contract Performance Outside of the United

States, added to the solicitation via Amendment 03.

May Offerors submit relevant past performance for both prime contractor as well as subcontractors?

Yes.

Can FSA provide additional information pertaining to Phase

II of this procurement? Specifically, will FSA require an additional written response or will FSA be holding oral presentations? Do you expect in Phase II to have requirements for Key Personnel?

Not at this time. The selectees for Phase II will receive additional instructions when the Phase II solicitation is issued. Written and oral presentations are among the various alternatives the Government may use during Phase II.

Will the price submission included in the initial Phase I submittal be consider a final and binding price submission or will the vendor be given a chance to refine the price estimate on Phase II?

No contract will be awarded as a result of the Phase I solicitation. Selected vendors will have the opportunity to submit a revised price during Phase II.

In the pricing spreadsheet, FSA has asked for the costs to build/implement the solution. Should that include software costs, or just the implementation/build cost? Please also define "costs likely" in the following cost requirement statement made by FSA. Are offerors' cost estimates to include all infrastucture/hosting costs?

This should include all costs to provide the solution, which may include:

implementation build, software, hardware, infrastructure, hosting, and ongoing costs.

The second bullet point under "Cost/Price" indicates that

"In addition to the information included in the template and supplemental narratives…vendor shall submit an overall implementation/build cost for all components addressed in the response in a supplemental narrative." How is this overall cost different from the collective costs of each component already provided in the required cost table?

The cost of individual components versus a solution response that includes multiple components could vary due to various factors.

FSA mentions their desire to “exercise broad authority over subcontractors” that would be on a team with the Prime

Contractor. While we understand the desire of the

Government to be deeply involved with the contract and the performance of the contract across the Team, we want to ask if the Government actually intends to overreach into the privity of contract between a Prime and its subcontractors? Or will the Government recognize they have no privity with the subcontractors and agree to work through the Prime contractor for any needed communications with a subcontractor? We just don’t want

FSA to create a situation where they direct a subcontractor and then end up in a situation where the Prime Contractor has an action against the Government.

The Department has no intention of establishing privity of contract with any subcontractor, however the Government does intend to receive detailed information regarding the work performed under this contract, and will exercise its legal authorities (e.g. inspection, audit, etc.) in overseeing performance. In addition, the Government does intend to engage in conversations directly with the entities performing the work, regardless of whether they are a prime or a subcontractor.

Can the Government provide additional perspective on the conditions or scenarios in which it would allow and respect exclusive teaming arrangements? As currently defined, the non-exclusivity seems to conflict with the small business sub-contracting plan and goals of the government.

There are no conflicts with the Small Business Act.

What is the email file size for the proposal responses? See Amendment 03. Responses shall be submitted via hard copy, with a duplicate electronic copy provided on a CD.

Is there any intent to align some/all of the milestone deliverables listed with that of the FSA prepaid RFP?

FSA anticipates all efforts will align at some point in the future.

What contracting vehicle will PCAs who work on the Loan

Consolidation Call Center, or Default Resolution Group be included in?

The Government has not determined how this work will be accomplished under the NextGen Environment. The Government expects vendors to respond with the best solution that meets the goals and objectives of the NextGen Financial Services

Environment, as set forth in this Solicitation.

FSA indicates that an offeror's price submission should include "The best price currently available to a commercial customer for implementation/build and rationale for any differences between the best price currently available to a commercial customer and the Government." Given that requirements can differ greatly from one customer to another, providing the "best price" available to a commercial customer may be difficult. Can FSA provide additional guidance on this requirement for the Price submission?

Vendor pricing should reflect the best price currently available to their commercial client who most closely reflects the requirements contained in this solicitation.

In the event the Government makes multiple awards to different vendors across the various components, how does the Government intend to integrate the operations between the various contractors, all of whom are not on the same team and who likely have different assumptions about the operational environment, technologies used, solutions proposed and SLA’s which may be at odds with each other? We want the Government and the contractors to be able to avoid such situations that seem inevitable under the current structure that may award Components to contractors from various teams (or no team at all) who have competing interests, assumptions and expectations.

All respondents should be prepared to work with vendors with whom they may not currently have a business relationship. Awardees from Phase II would be required to work collaboratively with other awardees, as well as with Legacy service providers.

Is the pricing information to be included in the same volume as the technical response?

No, this must be a separate attachment.

The instructions state "Response shall also include an explanation of potential savings to the Government resulting from your approach."

Is this to reflect savings from the current operational costs of the program or future program savings that could be made with requirement or contractual changes? If it is to reflect savings from the current operational costs, please provide offerors a breakdown of current costs by component to ensure offerors can effectively respond.

Responses should provide details on how innovation in technology, process improvements, etc. will drive efficiency and reduced cost for the Government throughout the period of performance.

Will FSA use a point scale to evaluate each of the four selection factors?

No.

The Page Limitations section indicates that the text portions for the "strategic fit" and past performance sections are to be in 12-point font. Please confirm if the text portions for the "strategic fit" refers to all responses to Components A through I.

Confirmed.

What further information will be provided and activities required in Phase II?

This will be determined in Phase II.

Are there page limitations on the cost-related narrative responses required in the Cost response?

See Amendment 03. The cost-related narrative shall not exceed 10 pages. Vendors are reminded that no technical and past performance information should be included in the cost response as it will not be reviewed.

Will there be an opportunity for the selected vendor(s) to negotiate the Terms and Conditions prior to or upon contract award?

There may be an opportunity for negotiations during Phase II.

Please clarify the meaning of this statement, "The content required in these clauses may be required in Phase II but not as part of Phase I". Does this mean the vendor should only respond to these items in the vendor's Phase II response?

Yes.

Will the QA component be issued as a separate solicitation or a mod to the current RFP?

The Independent Quality Assurance support will be acquired through a separate procurement.

Can Appendices or Attachments be added to the response? Any appendices or attachments must be within the number of pages allowed for that section/component. Any additional pages in excess of the maximum allowed will not be reviewed.

Do you envision commercial firms without a history of priming federal contracts and without prime federal past performance to be able to prime and lead aspects of this effort?

Yes.

If proposing one or a limited number of components that will have dependencies on other components for implementation, what assumptions should the bidder make in order to formulate an "overall implementation/build cost"?

Vendors should identify the assumptions made in building out and implementing their solution as well as their costs.

If the bidder has no commercial pricing or prices for the services offered, how should the pricing template be populated in order to not be considered non-compliant?

If vendors have no commercial pricing available, then they should state so and identify what comparable pricing they do have.

For Component E & F pricing requirements, would FSA please confirm that it wants the vendor to recommend the pricing methodology (e.g, fixed unit cost per call or per minute; firm fixed price; sharing of cost savings, etc.) for each activity listed and to provide best operational cost for that activity? If FSA has a preference for the pricing unit of measure for each activity listed in Components E & F, could it provide those to bidders?

For pricing purposes only, vendors should utilize the assumptions on the

"Instructions" tab of the price/cost template. Additional pricing approaches may be included.

How many offerors will be down-selected for Phase II of the procurement process?

The Contracting Officer will limit the number of selected vendors to the number of sources that the Contracting Officer determines is appropriate and in the best interests of the Government.

Although detailed pricing is expected to be a part of Phase

II, can you please elaborate on what is expected in the requirement: "Include pricing methodology in a supplemental attachment?" Could ED FSA provide a unified format for this requirement?

The supplemental section provides vendors the flexibility to provide information in a format that best explains their pricing approach. No unified format will be provided by FSA.

The current solicitation provides overall objectives for Next

Gen; however, it does not include specific and detailed requirements to develop a robust cost estimate. We understand FSA is allowing for cost ranges in Phase I;

however, there is still a great degree of subjectivity at this point. Would FSA consider not using price as a Selection

Factor for Phase I?

No. See EDAR 3415.302-70.

Will FSA accept multiple alternative pricing models within a single response?

Yes.

If services are still in the conceptual design, meaning we have applicable services, but those services would need to be custom configured to the Department of Education’s needs, what are your guidelines for a price range instead of specific pricing?

Vendor should price for a world class solution, and a price range should care for this concern.

Will you hold a bidders’ conference in early March, via conference call or in person, to allow additional questions and to review responses to questions asked by prospective bidders?

FSA does not anticipate holding a conference before responses are submitted for

Phase I.

Acknowledging Additional Information - Teaming

Arrangements/Subcontracting: "The Government anticipates that teaming arrangements may be entered into. However, no exclusive teaming arrangements may be made. The Government intends to exercise broad authority in interacting with key subcontractors."

Does FSA have the ability to award contracts to a member of a team but not the full team?

No.

Can new hire training be billed? Vendors have broad discretion in submitting pricing information for the Phase I responses.

What is nesting/OJT training length? Will phone time be billable at production rates?

Vendors have broad discretion in submitting pricing information for the Phase I responses.

Does the Department require the six volumes to be in separate PDF files?

Yes, each volume must be in a separate file.

Who will administer the surveys or will this fall under the separate QA procurement?

This will be determined in Phase II.

Please clarify the requirements for submitting the narrative describing vendor's understanding of the current student aid financial services environment. Are you looking for confirmation of our understanding of the conceptual differences between today's environment and the Next Gen approach or are you only looking for the vendors understanding of the current environment, i.e., to confirm that the vendor understands what it takes to service a student loan?

As stated in the solicitation, vendors must submit a narrative describing vendor’s understanding of the current student aid financial services environment.

Will there be an additional round of questions for Phase II? Yes, offerors selected to participate in Phase II will have the opportunity to ask questions during that phase.

Please confirm that all commercial pricing ROM ranges must comply with Government regulations (e.g. Section

3452.239-72 Department Security Requirements (MAR

2011); US-based labor only).

Confirmed.

The cost template includes the following text in rows 16 &

17:

"In addition to the information included in the template and supplemental narratives for individual component cost, vendor should submit an overall implementation/build and operational cost for all components addressed in the response in a supplemental narrative. Ranges are permitted. Include pricing methodology."

In this scenario, is a vendor to assume we would build and operate all components of the solution vs individual items?

The submitted solution may be for a single component or multiple components.

The costs provided should reflect proposed solution(s).

Since many of the component solutions have a reliance on a product and/or the ability to show innovative tools, would the Government consider allowing respondents to supply a prototype and/or a demonstration of that solution?

While this may be possible in Phase II, we do not anticipate allowing prototypes and demonstrations during Phase I.

Would the Government consider adding an orals presentation to Phase I to allow demonstration of products and tools being offered?

While this may be possible in Phase II, we do not anticipate having oral presentations and demonstrations during Phase I.

What is FSA’s definition of a “commercial solution”? The Government will utilize the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) definition of commercial item.

Will there be one vendor tasked with compliance related functions across all other vendors, or will each vendor individually interpret regulations and requirements?

All vendors will be required to comply with regulations and requirements. The

Department will monitor each contractor to ensure compliance, and may consult with the contractor as necessary.

Will FSA consider awarding all nine components to one vendor if FSA believes the vendor's proposed solution best satisfies the requirements?

If the Contracting Officer determines that one solution for all nine components in a

Phase I submission is the most advantageous to the Government, then the vendor will be selected to participate in Phase II. No contracts will be awarded in Phase I.

The Small Business Utilization section states, "The

Government expects the selected vendor(s) to meet the

Government’s small business subcontracting goals to the maximum extent practicable." Is this small business participation a mandatory requirement ?

The Government anticipates including FAR 52.219-9 in the contract. The

Government may request a small business participation plan in addition to the mandatory small business subcontracting plan in Phase II.

If small business utilization is mandatory for this contract, what is the required percentage of the total contract that is to be set aside for small business participation? Does the percentage change based on the final size/value of the contract?

The small business subcontracting goals for FSA can be found at https://www2.ed.gov/policy/fund/reg/clibrary/sbgoals.html. Size and value of contract is not relevant.

Does FSA have a requirement that development and O&M work be performed at a Department of Education site?

No.

Selection Factor 3 states that "Responses will be reviewed to assess whether cost submitted is a cost likely to be associated with the solution offered."

Please clarify whether that assessment is one that FSA will be making based on the information the vendor provides in their Attachment 06 response (plus applicable supplemental narratives), or if this assessment is a specific requirement that vendors should include in their proposal response.

In other words, is the intent that vendors specifically address whether their price range is associated with the solution offered, or is this assessment a determination that

FSA will make based on consideration of an array of proposal information?

Vendors should address how their price range is associated with the solution offered. The government will make an assessment in accordance with Selection

Factor 3.

Is FSA anticipating that this will be an SCA contract? The specific terms of any award under Phase II will be provided during Phase II.

Please indicate the duration for which the ongoing operational cost is expected (e.g., monthly, yearly)?

See Amendment 03 to the solicitation, specifically attachment 06 - Price Cost

Template v2.

If an organization has services applicable to the federal student aid environment, not identified in Phase I, but may be applicable in Phase II will there be a separate solicitation for those services in Phase II? If not, what are the guidelines for including ourselves in consideration during the Phase I process?

Vendors should not be constrained by FSA's current solutions. Vendor responses should be tied to specific components included in Phase I taking into account the full scope envisioned in the NextGen Financial Services Environment. Only sources selected in Phase I will be eligible to participate in Phase II.

Can the Government further clarify the scope of

Component A and how Component A will interact with

FSA's existing digital solutions?

As stated in the Phase I solicitation, Component A will be FSA’s primary digital presence with a scope of responsibilities that includes the entire aid lifecycle (e.g.

StudentAid.ed.gov, StudentLoans.gov, MyEdDebt.gov, NSLDS.gov, FAFSA.gov, third-party loan servicers, etc.). The Government expects vendors to respond with the best solution that meets the goals and objectives of the NextGen Financial Services

Environment. In doing so, vendors should not be constrained by FSA's current technology solutions. Vendors should also note:

*The scope of work for the digital platform provider (Component A) includes ongoing support and continuous improvement activities (e.g. ongoing user experience strategy, content development, engagement layer design, etc.).

*The digital platform, once fully deployed, will serve all of FSA’s customers including customers on both servicing platforms (Solution 2.0 and Solution 3.0).

*The digital platform should be mobile-first and mobile-complete by which the

Government means that users should be able to complete customer journeys through the mobile device. The digital platform should also be mobile-continuous by which the Government means that FSA should be able to leverage the digital platform to maintain a relationship with its customers throughout the customer lifecycle.

*The Government has conducted user research and customer satisfaction surveys, but has not completed a full customer journey mapping exercise or developed personas. The Component A vendor would be expected to complete this task.

*The Government expects that the Component A vendor will work with FSA and current vendors to gather content from existing digital platforms and deliver it in a content management system.

*Where the Government owns the license to digital content and tools, those could be made available if it is in the best interests of the Government.

Can the Government further clarify the scope of the CRM solution provided by Component B?

Component B vendor(s) will provide the Government with a customer relationship management solution with features including but not limited to customer relationship management, marketing, workflow automation, and business reporting. The CRM will allow all customer-facing staff and vendors across the FSA environment to access a single, unified view of the customer. The CRM will also provide for managing workflows between components and ensuring customer feedback is tracked and receives an appropriate response. The exact number of users for the CRM has not yet been determined but the Government’s objective is to ultimately deploy this single solution across the entire aid lifecycle.

Can the Government further clarify the scope of the contact center platform provided by Component B and explain how it interacts with FSA’s existing contact centers?

*FSA currently operates multiple call centers that serve specific customer populations and functions. The Government intends for customers to engage with

FSA through a single point of entry per contact channel (e.g. a single FSA chat platform, a single FSA phone number). Component B will be responsible for providing the technical systems necessary (e.g. skill-based routing, IVR, etc.) to identify inbound customer needs and effectively and efficiently address those needs through automated and/or AI solutions. Where customer inquiries cannot be addressed through automated solutions or AI solutions, Component B should route customers to the appropriate resource (e.g. Component E or F).

*Additional detail regarding current contact volume has been provided in attachment 11 - Call Center Volumes.

*The Government intends to engage with customers through multiple inbound and outbound channels commensurate with those offered by leading financial services providers.

*The Component B vendor will be responsible for call forecasting and planning.

This vendor will also provide the solutions needed to manage contact queues and additional services outlined in response to question 64.

*The Government will consider a wide range of solutions for improving FSA’s current operating model for customer contacts and transitioning to an environment where FSA manages a single contact center solution for all contacts across the entire aid lifecycle.

Can the Government further clarify the scope of the quality control and knowledge management support provided by

Component B and explain how it differs from the quality control responsibilities outlined under the “overarching constraints” in Section VI of the solicitation?

*Component B is designed to ensure customers have a consistent experience when engaging with FSA in an operating environment where multiple vendors may provide contact center agents. Component B will develop training materials used by Component E and Component F vendors, provide training to those vendors, and conduct quality control reviews of those vendors’ customer interactions.

*Vendors responding to Component B should use accepted industry standards for contact sampling and provide reports on call center activity and vendor performance to the Government.

*Additional detail regarding the scope of Component E and Component F is provided in response to questions 65-68.

Can the Government further clarify how vendors providing

Components E and F will access shared services (e.g. CRM, telephony, etc.) provided by other vendors and where

Components E and F will bear costs associated with accessing those services?

*Components E and F will be provided with licenses for workflow tools (e.g. CRM, agent desktop, etc.) and other shared services necessary to interact with the

NextGen Financial Services Environment.

*Components E and F will be responsible for obtaining technology assets (e.g.

Desktops, Telephones, Network and Security hardware) for their local site(s).

*Vendors selected to provide services under Component E and Component F will be responsible for supplying their own internet connectivity to access shared services. Connectivity standards will depend on the technical solutions deployed.

Can the Government further clarify the contact center responsibilities of Component E and Component F?

Component E and Component F will be responsible for providing the business process resources that engage with customers through multiple channels. Inbound contacts will be routed to these vendors by the solution(s) provided under

Component B. Outbound contact requests will be queued through the same solution.

Can the Government further clarify the loan processing responsibilities of Component E and Component F?

Component E and Component F vendors will be responsible for manual processing functions for Components C and D, respectively, wherever those processes have not been automated. The scope of manual processes will ultimately be determined by the vendors responding to Components C and D. The Component C and

Component D vendors will provide workflow tools, training materials, and desktop support to complete these activities.

Can the Government further clarify how tasks will be distributed amongst Component E and Component F vendors?

*The Government has not determined how work under Components E and F will be allocated among contractors. The Government expects vendors to respond with the best solution that meets the goals and objectives of the NextGen Financial

Services Environment.

Can the Government further clarify how loans will be transitioned from the existing servicing environment into the NextGen environment, which components will be responsible for that transition, and how loans will be allocated between Solution 2.0 and Solution 3.0?

*Existing customers will be migrated from the current loan processing companies onto Solution 2.0 before the end date of the current servicing contracts. As such, vendors responding to Component D should include a strategy for transitioning to the NextGen Environment. The Government expects the vendor(s) to start migrating existing servicing accounts to the new solution as soon as possible after award.

*Component D is responsible for servicing new customers until Component C is deployed. Once Component C is deployed, FSA will determine the best distribution of loans between Solution 2.0 (Component D) and Solution 3.0 (Component C).

*The Government anticipates that all of an individual’s loans will sit on one solution.

*Component D will provide digital access and contact center solutions while

Components A and B are being developed. Component D is not obligated to meet the objectives of Component A and Component B in this transitional phase.

*Decommissioning legacy systems after all accounts have been transitioned is the responsibility of the incumbent vendors as directed by the Government.

*Once all loans have been migrated into the NextGen Environment, resolving data quality issues that arise between components (e.g. between Components C, D, and

G) will be a joint responsibility between vendors in the NextGen Environment.

*Vendors are welcome to respond with alternate approaches for Solution 2.0 and the transition from the current state to NextGen.

Can the Government further clarify which components are responsible for storing inactive and archived records, the volume and format of those records, and the duration for which records must be stored?

The Government expects inactive and archived records to be accessible. The

Government expects vendors to respond with the best solution that meets the goals and objectives of the NextGen Financial Services Environment.

Can the Government further clarify the Continuity of

Operations Plan and Disaster Recovery Plan requirements that should be included in responses?

*Vendors are not responsible for providing a formal Continuity of Operations Plan and Disaster Recovery Plan in Phase I.

*Phase I responses will be reviewed, in part, to assess the degree to which the solution included in the vendor’s response ensures FSA achieves its goals for the

NextGen environment at an acceptable level of risk. Vendors may choose to address or reference a Continuity of Operations Plan and/or a Disaster Recovery

Plan in the context of establishing the risk of a given solution.

Can the Government further clarify how performance standards (SLAs, KPIs, etc.) will be defined, vendor responsibilities regarding quality control, and the government's approach to vendor quality assurance in the

NextGen Financial Services Environment?

The Government expects that vendor responses will include performance standards and operating models that enable FSA to meet the goals and objectives of the NextGen Financial Services Environment. Vendors should also note:

*Quality control is an overarching constraint for all components. As stated in the solicitation, “solutions must include the appropriate quality and internal controls and management oversight to ensure that best-in-class service is being provided.”

(Section VI). As such, the Government expects vendors to respond with quality control solutions for the component(s) for which they are responding.

*The SLAs included in solicitation attachment 50000_Servicing_SLAs_v12 are for illustrative purposes only and may not reflect the final performance indicators, which will be determined at a later date. As stated in the solicitation, "responses should include up to five examples of methods currently utilized in commercial practice to drive superior performance in each component (e.g. Service Level

Agreements, Service Level Standards, incentives, disincentives, etc.)." (Section X).

*Vendor oversight is the responsibility of the Government. The Government expects to partner with other vendors to provide technical advice and other input as part of those activities.

Can the Government provide additional information on

FSA’s current technical systems and operating models, including those of its current vendors?

The Government is not providing additional information during Phase I beyond the information included in the solicitation and information that is publicly available.

Vendors responding to Phase I should not be constrained by FSA's current technology solutions. Additional information will be shared with vendors that are selected to participate in Phase II.

Can the Government further clarify where solutions will be hosted, which vendors are responsible for providing hosting, and whether the Government is open to cloud-base architecture?

Vendors should respond with their best solution to meet the goals and objectives of the NextGen Financial Services Environment while complying with federal security requirements for cloud or non-cloud products and services.

How does the Government quantify and thereby measure whether a design is “world-class”?

The Government envisions “world-class” service as delivering a customer experience similar to that provided by US financial services industry leaders.

Can the Government further clarify the scope of

Component G, how it interacts with existing FSA data systems (e.g. EDWA, NSLDS), and how it will interact with other NextGen systems?

*Component G is comprised of four features that are further outlined in the operating and solution constraints under Component G in the solicitation. Those features are:

--A master data management and governance (MDM) architecture that allows for a master record of a customer’s history across the entire aid lifecycle. In addition to designing and implementing an MDM architecture, this vendor is responsible for establishing and maintaining a data storage solution that will serve as FSA’s system of record.

--Structuring data such that the Government can run advanced analytics on all its customers without impacting operational performance (e.g. data lake, etc.).

--Providing advanced analytical tools and capabilities (e.g. data preparation, visualization, etc.) necessary to derive meaningful, real-time insights into customer behavior. Making the analytical tools available to a limited number of FSA staff and training those individuals to a proficient level of tool/solution capability is within the scope of Component G.

--Establishing a dedicated data analytics practice and operating model that provides insights to FSA staff and other vendors to inform customer engagement and broader organizational strategy. Vendors should respond with a volume/level of effort that they believe is sufficient for FSA to achieve the goals of the NextGen

Financial Services Environment.

*Component G will need to store a large volume of data (including unstructured data) that currently resides on the systems of existing service providers and has not been fully scoped. For purposes of the Phase I solicitation only, vendors may base their response off the current customer data volumes for EDWA and NSLDS.

Those systems include approximately 45 TB of EDWA data, growing at about 12% a year, and 1.3 TB of NSLDS production data, growing at 15% a year. Vendors should anticipate that the final solution will need the capacity to support a larger volume

Can the Government further clarify how the overall

NextGen solution architecture will be coordinated across a multi-vendor environment, whether the Government intends to hire or act as the systems integrator, and how the Government will adjudicate disagreements between vendors?

The Government may act as the integrator or may decide to engage a dedicated systems integrator depending on the operating models submitted by vendors selected for Phase II. FSA expects that vendor(s) selected for the NextGen project will be capable of effectively collaborating under FSA project management to agree on integration standards, map interdependencies, and take other actions necessary to design, build, test, and launch a successful solution. To that end, all

Respondents should be prepared to work with vendors with whom they may not currently have a business relationship. Additionally, component vendors need to accommodate SOC oversight that will be performed by the Government or its agent. Awardees from Phase II will be required to work collaboratively with other awardees, as well as with Legacy service providers. Ultimately, in cases of disagreement, the Government will be responsible for providing direction to vendors.

Can the Government further clarify whether customer-facing solutions, services, and products needed to be provided in languages other than English?

As to languages, the Government expects vendors to respond with the best solution that meets the goals and objectives of a world-class US-based NextGen

Financial Services Environment.

Can the Government further clarify how the MyMoney mobile application will interact with components deployed under the NextGen solicitation?

The MyMoney mobile application is a potential pilot project, and the Government has not made any final determination regarding how capabilities developed through the pilot might be integrated with the NextGen solution.

Can the Government further define the goals of the

NextGen Environment? For example, have specific targets been set for improving customer outcomes or have specific issues been identified for resolution with regards to system resiliency and stability?

The Government has not set specific targets for which vendors are asked to respond in Phase I. The Government expects vendors to respond with the best solution that meets the goals and objectives of the NextGen Financial Services

Environment. As stated in the solicitation, Strategic Fit is one factor against which responses will be selected to participate in Phase II. Strategic Fit includes, but is not limited to, an assessment of the degree to which vendor responses deliver a world-class customer experience, achieve greater operational flexibility, reduce complexity, and improve customer outcomes.

Can the Government provide further detail on the human resource requirements for NextGen vendors such as licensing requirements, pre-employment screening, site location, and staffing models?

The Government has provided illustrative constraints and links to relevant

Government policies to inform vendor responses. Vendors are encouraged to review the Department of Education's Directive for Contractor Employee

Personnel Security Screenings

[https://www2.ed.gov/fund/contract/about/bsp.html]. Other than the identified terms in the solicitation, the Government does not anticipate specific requirements regarding where resources are situated within the United States, internal vendor staffing structures, or personnel work arrangements (e.g. work from home). Licensing requirements for personnel depend on the solution. The

Government expects vendors to respond with the best solution that meets the goals and objectives of the NextGen Financial Services Environment.

Can the Government further clarify when it expects certain milestones to be completed and what constitutes a minimally viable product to reach a milestone?

The milestones presented in Section V of the solicitation are targets to inform vendor responses. The vendor is expected to respond with the milestones appropriate for the solutions they are offering.

Can the Government provide detailed specifications regarding the print and postal requirements, current print/postal operations, and pricing guidelines for the

NextGen Environment?

*Vendors responding to Component E should respond with a solution that achieves significant economies of scale in processing inbound and outbound physical mail. Vendors responding to Component F should respond with a solution that achieves significant economies of scale in processing outbound physical mail.

The Government reserves the right to select a single vendor to conduct all inbound and outbound print and physical mail across Solutions 2.0 and 3.0.

*Vendors should reference attachment 24001_CommList_v9 and attachment 11 -

Required DL Disclosures for a list of communications that are currently sent to FSA customers via postal mailing and emailing. The Government is open to responses that amend the format of mailings and, where legally permissible, change the set of communications that are sent through postal mail.

*The Government expects vendors to respond with the best solution that meets the goals and objectives of the NextGen Financial Services Environment.

Can the Government further clarify how the NextGen transformation will be managed and the development methodologies that should be utilized?

*The Government’s project management approach will support the operating model selected for the NextGen Financial Services Environment.

*The Government has not stated a preference with regards to the project implementation approach (e.g. Agile, iterative, etc.). The Government expects vendors to respond with the best solution that meets the goals and objectives of the NextGen Financial Services Environment.

Can the Government further clarify the scope of the

NextGen Environment ?

*As shown in Exhibit 4 of the solicitation, certain components [A, B, G, H, I] have scopes of responsibility that span the entire aid lifecycle while certain components

[C, D, E, F] have a scope that is currently focused on, but not limited to, loan servicing. For enterprise-wide components, it remains to be determined whether there will be a full implementation or a phased implementation across the full student aid lifecycle. Vendors should respond with a solution that best meets the goals and objectives of the NextGen Financial Services Environment.

*Components in the NextGen Environment should be flexible enough to service non-defaulted and defaulted Direct Loans, FFEL loans, and Perkins loans as well as other types of financial aid. While Perkins Loan servicing is within the scope of phase one, the actual timing and process for how current Perkins Loan servicing activity will be transitioned to the NextGen solution has yet to be determined.

*Existing customers will be migrated from the current loan servicers onto Solution

2.0 before the end date of the current servicing contracts. The Government anticipates that Component D is the only component that will be responsible for interacting with systems operated by the current loan processing companies

(unless one or more of those companies are selected to operate within the

NextGen Financial Services Environment).

*Vendors will be required to provide all necessary design, implementation, business analysis, internal project management, and solution testing associated with successfully deploying said component in addition to collaborating with government activities including, but not limited to, project management and quality assurance.

Will each vendor be responsible for training its own staff, or will the Government provide common, centralized training?

The source of training materials will in part be determined by the solution selected.

The Government expects the necessary training will be integrated across vendors.

The Government does expect that the scope of Component B will include developing materials and conducting trainings for contact center operations staff provided by Components E and F.

Will there be a common servicing manual available for reference to all contractors, and if so, how will it be developed?

The Government will provide common standards and guidance to ensure consistency between multiple vendors.

Is the Government open to accepting changes to its currently approved Technical Reference Model?

Yes.

Prior to "moderate and high volume" testing, will FSA consider successfully awarded vendors for "beta" site testing of solutions 2.0 (Component F) and 3.0 (Component

E) for business process operations" being used to validate

"core processing, related middleware, and rules engine functions in Components C and D, or other components?

Yes.

Clarify "issuance of securities" as part of the disbursement process referred to in the "As-Is" report. Does this refer to

Master Notes and Disbursement Request documents or to another securities process related to funding?

Yes, this refers to Master Notes and Disbursement Request documents.

Can a vendor submit a response for a single component or multiple components?

Yes.

If the vendor submits a response for multiple components, is it possible the Government will select only some components for Phase II?

Yes.

If a company is a subcontractor on Components A-I, can they be a prime on the Quality Assurance Component?

No vendor that provides services on A-I would be allowed to support the Quality

Assurance component.

FSA indicates that vendors can supply ranges in as part of their price submission. If ranges are provided by multiple offerors, can FSA clarify how they will evaluate price ranges from multiple vendors to determine the best and most reasonable price to the Government?

Cost/price will be reviewed in accordance with the solicitation.

Does FSA require three Past Performances for the entire proposal, regardless of the number of Components bid? Or is the requirement three Past Performances for each individual Component that is bid?

Vendors may submit up to 3 past performance references per component.

Individual past performance references can reference multiple components. The total number of past peformance references included in a vendor response cannot exceed 6 references. See Amendment 03 for specific examples.

Can a vendor sub-contract to a company to support a specific component but also pursue this component as a

Prime Contractor -- given the non-exclusivity clause in the solicitation?

Depending upon the components being responded to, this may be a viable option, so long as any potential conflicts of interest are properly mitigated to the

Government's satisfaction.

Will FSA allow vendors to stay silent on teaming partners during Phase I?

Submission of the Teaming Arrangements/Subcontracting Volume is required during Phase I.

If a vendor wants to bid multiple components or multiple combinations of components, do they submit separate bids? Or does each vendor only submit one bid?

Each vendor should only submit one response.

Is FSA looking for vendors to detail out our small business subcontracting plan by percent in Phase I? If not, what are you looking for in regards to small business participation?

A small business subcontracting plan is not required in Phase I. FSA anticipates requiring this plan during Phase II.

Will costs associated with required technical upgrades be recoverable?

Vendor responses should include all costs to provide the solution, which may include: implementation build, software, hardware, infrastructure, hosting, and ongoing costs. Note, however, that potential savings from technical upgrades should also be accommodated.

For the BPO work defined in Components E and F - will the

Service Contract Act apply to the workers? If so, by job function/activity, what is the currently utilzied SCA occupation title? Can FSA provide a functional job description of each discreet type of agent working on the program?

Vendors should respond with solutions that account for the necessary job functions/activities, which may be subject to the Service Contract Act.

For Cost/Price of the implementation/build and ongoing operational costs, the FSA asks for the "best price currently available to a commercial customer" and the rationale for any difference between that price and the price proposed.

If a contractor currently holds a GSA Schedule and is proposing using prices based off of the GSA Schedule, can the contractor rely upon the GSA Schedule price to demonstrate the "best price currently available to a commercial customer," given that the GSA only permits services and products to be on the GSA schedule after determining that the prices are "fair and reasonable" by examining a contractor's prices provided to commercial customers (i.e., the CSP-1)?

GSA Schedule pricing is not equivalent to what is being requested under this solicitation.

Given that FSA has not included its list of approved products

(often found in an Agency's Technical Reference Model

(TRM)), can FSA affirm its intention to evaluate each product bid with either the intention of issuing a waiver from the approved products list or affirmation that FSA will consider adding bid products to the approved products list?

Vendor responses should not be constrained by FSA's current technology solutions, and the Government will consider adding products to the approved products list.

Is it permissible to use FSA as a reference for the recent projects and experience, for example, Change Request implementations?

Yes.

Can the Government map the…